|
 |
|
04-13-2005, 01:15 AM
|
#31
|
|
My Village Called
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 10,763
|
Quote: Originally Posted by shizzle
Hope it wasnt in FL, cause that is DEFINITELY immoral. His license should be revoked. But at least he wasnt with a youngin!
|
|
|
|
Sponsored links
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 01:20 AM
|
#32
|
|
Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NW Oklahoma
Posts: 46
|
Quote: Originally Posted by shizzle
This is where a rear window led marque would come in handy. Have it scroll
"For my own safety, I must insist that a clearly marked police car pull me over. I will proceed to the nearest police station untill my safety concerns are met." 
Then go go gadget spikes!
 Go go gadget spikes. this caught me funny for some reason. lolol
On another note: What's up with Scouse Monkey's post count being 100,172 ... Is that even humanly possible?
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 01:25 AM
|
#33
|
|
my nizzle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 817
|
It's been changed by admin or whatever. I think its actually around 5000 though! Look at Bgoodman, he has posted over 2,000,000 a day. Unless Im confusing him with someone else...
__________________
Carputer status: [-*---------]
Im thinking laptop...
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 01:26 AM
|
#34
|
|
My Village Called
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 10,763
|
Quote: Originally Posted by shizzle
It's been changed by admin or whatever. I think its actually around 5000 though! Look at Bgoodman, he has posted over 2,000,000 a day. Unless Im confusing him with someone else...
Mine's around 5000
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 01:39 AM
|
#35
|
|
Low Bitrate
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Alabama
Posts: 82
|
**cough** 63 **cough**
__________________
I had a perfect quote to go here,
but hell only knows what I did with it....
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 01:54 AM
|
#36
|
|
Variable Bitrate
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 331
|
Pretty sure this is aimed at the army etc. But I already have a jammer for this device.
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 01:56 AM
|
#37
|
|
my nizzle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 817
|
Quote: Originally Posted by 0l33l
Mine's around 5000
And legit, too.
__________________
Carputer status: [-*---------]
Im thinking laptop...
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 02:02 AM
|
#38
|
|
My Village Called
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 10,763
|
Quote: Originally Posted by shizzle
And legit, too.
Yep! 5000th post!
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 04:48 AM
|
#39
|
|
my nizzle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 817
|
0l33l : whats up with your avatar....
I just saw a post where you put a
and it was in perfect time with the one on your avatar, and being the first time id seen that, thought the correlation was set. Whoa...
__________________
Carputer status: [-*---------]
Im thinking laptop...
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 05:24 AM
|
#40
|
|
Raw Wave
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,799
|
I believe that outside of military, most cameras are cmos (due to cost) and very sensitive to bright lights bleeding into adjacent pixels. If something like this did become pervasive, you could just mount some strobing IR lights in your grill. They wouldn't be visible to people, but the camera would pick them up fine which would probably goof up the algorithims enough.
Still don't see how you measure speed unless your perpendicular to the target. Otherwise, I don't see how you could account for perspective shortening. I mean, I suppose the software could look for light poles or other objects at fixed intervals to figure the dimensions (I mean they are extremely common on roads), but I would think you'd get a lot of false results with a method like that. Say two poles (or trees) are at different heights and the camera assumes they are the same height, the results would be totally off.
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 02:25 PM
|
#41
|
|
Raw Wave
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,799
|
Quote: Originally Posted by jtp
This little thing called geometry.
Plus a hint of trig.
But if it's a single image camera and it's not perpendicular, you've got to be using some guess work in projecting a 2d image to 3d.
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 02:54 PM
|
#42
|
|
Raw Wave
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,799
|
Quote: Originally Posted by jtp
All the officer would have to do is turn a vertical fin and make that perpendicular to the road. Then the computer knows what angle it is looking at.
Still need to estimate the distance to the road to triangulate. Regardless, I don't see it as a fool proof system. Will be interesting to see how people fight those tickets if it comes to pass.
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 03:20 PM
|
#43
|
|
Raw Wave
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,799
|
Quote: Originally Posted by jtp
Name one system that is fool proof. Cameras can determine distance. It is called Auto Focus....
Not saying it needs to be fool proof. I' m saying that I'm guessing that it's not going to work very well at all and be easily thrown off in my opinion. Yeah cameras range but not like that. IR or ultrasonic pulse doesn't tell you the tree on the left is 500 feet away while the house on the right is 200 ft. It just gives an approximate of what's directly in front of the camera. Try using auofocus through a screen. Not saying they couldn't work these problemsl eventually. There's a ton of money to be made. I also don't see why this is better than a two camera system. Cameras are dirt cheap.
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 04:03 PM
|
#44
|
|
Raw Wave
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,799
|
Quote: Originally Posted by jtp
Remember, it has a computer. The computer can grid the screen and determine distance in every square by auto focus and distinct pixel scan.
You can't really scan at a level anywhere near as fine as a pixel unless your using lasers or similar. If you ever watch them scan in a 3d object, it's like a big CNC machine and it takes ages. I have a feeling they're not trying it either as it's supposed to be made with cheap off the shelf parts.
Quote: Originally Posted by jtp
What is kind of neat are how radar jammers are illegal in certain places but it is hard to tell which car has it in a large group. If you have a car running down the highway and it starts sending out IR strobes or whatever, the cop can tell exactly what car it is coming from with the cam and pull them over.
Good point there.
|
|
|
|
|
04-13-2005, 05:17 PM
|
#45
|
|
Maximum Bitrate
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cali
Posts: 664
|
Quote: Originally Posted by shotgunefx
I believe that outside of military, most cameras are cmos (due to cost) and very sensitive to bright lights bleeding into adjacent pixels. If something like this did become pervasive, you could just mount some strobing IR lights in your grill. They wouldn't be visible to people, but the camera would pick them up fine which would probably goof up the algorithims enough.
Still don't see how you measure speed unless your perpendicular to the target. Otherwise, I don't see how you could account for perspective shortening. I mean, I suppose the software could look for light poles or other objects at fixed intervals to figure the dimensions (I mean they are extremely common on roads), but I would think you'd get a lot of false results with a method like that. Say two poles (or trees) are at different heights and the camera assumes they are the same height, the results would be totally off.
Many cameras use CCD, higher quality although CMOS is catching up.
And the camera in this case does not figure the speed from one picture, but rather from a short video, which basically makes it a "visual" radar.
__________________
I have found you an argument; I am not obliged to find you an understanding.
|
|
|
|
|
Sponsored links
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:52 PM.
| |
