Here's a vid showing two problems, the noise on the savv at night, and the nitemax getting drowned out by overcast daylight
Here's a pic of the nitemax out the front with no headlights at night, no IR, nothing. Pretty amazing it can get that good of a pic, there aren't even streetlights there (except at the intersection ahead)
The problem is this. (taken at the intersection you see in the distance in the first pic)
Just too sensitive. I tried an auto-iris camera, but still not good enough. Some better lenses (or at least one I have) have an option (a screw) that allows you to adjust it for center weighted illumination or to be sensitive to point sources (like headlights), haven't come across a small or cheap one though. One of these days, going to try some polarizing film to see if it helps, or maybe trying to jury rig a sensor to detect it and drive the Iris myself.
The brightness problem might not be a big deal for you as if you have a car behind you, you know there's a car there, even if you can only see the lights.
correct me if I'm wrong, but surely it's better to use your rear view and wing mirrors, than it would be to mount a rear view camera inside the cabin.
I can't speak first hand as I haven't put one in yet, but I imagine the camera on the rearmost part of the car would be better as you get to see what you otherwise can't.
Has anyone tried both ways? How do they compare in real life?
This pic gives you an idea of camera vs rear, the side mirrors aren't in this pic but you get the idea.
The dark represents the blind spots and why the cam is positioned the way it is.
It's like having someone sitting looking out the back window. That is a help. I have a vid that demonstrates it quite well. I'll try and find it. I'm backing out of my angled spot and there is a truck next to me. I can't see anything, as I'm backing out, a car comes barreling through the lot perpindicular to I am (from the side the truck is parked on).
Because of the cam, I saw him coming after moving a foot, without it, I would have had at least 5 or 6 ft of my *** hanging out before it would have been possible to see him and probably would have gotten smacked.
update Also, the cam is closer to the rear glass in reality then in this pic. The location pictured was where I planned on having it initally.
the best soltuion avaialble, as far as I know, is to have a ccd that has a high dynamic range (HDR). That is, when hit with a load of light, it can still differeniate dynamics within that region, rather than just show a white/yellow blob. that way, adjustments can be made to local regions and you would end up with a very rich and clear image. of course, these ccd's dont' come cheap!
Then, using some software to do some localaised histogram-based adjustemnts, a very clear image can be obtained.
For sure I think that having a cam is a good idea. What I'm questioning is its placement within the cabin s outside in the bootlid/bumper.
from your explanation, I can see a good case for having inside the rear most of the cabin, so that you can see objects approaching the sides. A camera mounted in the bumper would not be able to see that, since it would be at more than 90 degrees to the view of the camera
as for the brightness, a HDR camera would still help, a lot
well I've been doing some research and I've found some very interesting thigns out. CMOS cameras are much better at dealing with glare than CCD cameras as one guy told me from a decent company.
the website speaks for itself!
ok, they're very pricey, at 800 euros for the most basic 8bit monochrome model, it's quite a hit
Okay i found it today. Saw this at costco. Cant find on there site but found it here. It screws to your license plate.
Hope this helps.
Um, I guess this is where you put something witty.WITTY
My Web site, in the design stage. http://home.comcast.net/~cstrachn
Modified RRSkinEditor http://www.mp3car.com/vbulletin/rr-skins/65723-rrskineditor-bugs-fixes-comments-current-progress-outdated.html