Re: Video surveillance options
From: Rick Taylor (ricktaylor_at_speakeasy.net)
Date: 01/22/05
- Previous message: Scotty Fitzgerald: "Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q.""
- In reply to: Paul Johnson: "Re: Video surveillance options"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:20:12 -0600
On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 01:18 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Friday 21 January 2005 04:54 am, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 04:06 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > On Thursday 20 January 2005 09:40 pm, Curtis Vaughan wrote:
> > >
> > > > What role can a linux server play in this?
> > >
> > > Speaking as someone who has had to use security footage on a daily
> basis
> > > before, none whatsoever. Digital video is useless to law
> enforcement
> > > as it cannot be enhanced later.
> >
> > Doesn't it all depend on the format and the compression rate?
>
> Not really. Digital pictures suffer from pixelation at a distance.
That may apply to a digital zoom. I sincerely doubt it applies to
digital video. You can get resolutions as high as film... you can
certainly get resolutions as high as standard video. You can certainly
get higher resolutions than you do with the surveillance stuff I've
worked with.
-- http://www.RTaylor-Design.Com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
- Previous message: Scotty Fitzgerald: "Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q.""
- In reply to: Paul Johnson: "Re: Video surveillance options"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
