Are shop owners greedy or something? How come a lot of surveillance

>>57981024
>It is not like you need to store year old footage anyway.
Most companies do exactly that. Others for atleast 6 months.
Because if shit goes down, it may well be several months before law enforcement are able to issue you with a request for the footage. It's just good practice to store it for a while.

as for the quality, most business places don't update their CCTV unless they're doing a large refit of a store, otherwise it works just fine, and you can discern with reasonable accuracy who is who, especially with witnesses, so law enforcement don't really make pushes for local business to upgrade either.

The fact that you must ask this question implies that you either A) Don't and never have worked in retail or any sensitive environment...Or B) Are simply retarded.

>>57981066
wow you're mean

It only has to have enough quality to identify people which it usually has. The equipment itself is expensive and isn't replaced often, and storage is definitely a factor because companies do indeed store year old footage. I work for a small company and they have footage from the last years (since the cameras were installed).

Because pulling walls out and rewiring a camera system that's probably already in there just to update to something that does the job about as well as the last one is dumb. And if the cameras are being placed for the first time, the building is most likely being made or the store is being set up, and at that point money is going to décor, lighting, registers, equipment, computers, and leases.
Banks and government buildings are really the only things worth having hi-tech security for

>>57981024
Those are probably 90s webcams. My employer has a massive CCTV system, and while the recorders are brand new, most of the cameras are from 2005.

>>57981024
Because when you need to store a month of footage from 20 cameras, size matters.

I used to do small business security cameras. Most of them ended up recording a few frames per second at 320x240 because that is all folks wanted to pay for. A couple of places had one HD camera (usually on the front gate, to make sure that license plate numbers were clear enough).. Just before I left the company we did do one all HD (full 1080) install. Ended up buying a system from a company that does casino monitoring. Even with that, the full HD video is only stored for 24 hours unless it is tagged. After that it goes gets downscaled to the same 320x240 garbage for 3-year retention.

>>57981088
Hmm I would have responded very similarly. I see nothing wrong hid answer it's pretty accurate. When you have fifty cameras or more and you're in retail which has profit margins of around 3%. Having a good security system is irrelevant as long as your insurance is OK with it.

Businesses, with the exception of Walmart, won't fuck with you for stealing $100 worth if merchandise it's to much trouble why would you think they'd care about their security systems?

And like another anon said the source of the shitty footage may as well be a 1080p camera but that won't matter if you need to store it for s year and all you got is a terabyte.

>>57981024
Work in security. Storage is the least of our worries.

File: angry_pepe.jpg (65KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 900x900px

Your insurance premiums are lower if you have CCTV, but it doesn't matter what kind of CCTV you have, and it's not like anyone plans to watch it anyway, so most places just get the cheapest cameras because why pay more?

t. UK anon whose bike was stolen in full view of several security cameras and none of them actually saw anything

Is there anything stopping them from using cameras with high image quality and low frame rate (like 5 fps)?

>>57984602

low framerate recording is perfectly fine for 99% of applications

>>57984655
I mean, is there law requiring them to hit a minimum framerate? It seems to me extremely low framerate and high image quality would be better for this specific use case and yet all I see is ~24fps with potato image quality.

>>57985212
Replying to myself:
Example of 5fps:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDIfsiZP_sA
It's only 640x480 and still miles ahead of the image in the OP.

>>57985212
i'd be funny if someone just took a photo manually once a day and claimed it was their security system, with a frame rate of ~0.0000116fps (if i did the math correctly)

>>57985212
don't forget modern video codecs with motion-compensation makes it that increased framerate doesn't cause a linear increase in bitrate
that is, a 10fps video isn't necessarily twice the bitrate as a 5fps video of the same content at the same quality

>>57985518

yeah, will only get better with h265 adoption, most old recorders use motion jpeg which has god awful bitrates at higher framrates

>>57981024
Its fucking CCTV not hollywood.
Are you 5 or something?

>>57985891
MJPEG is not what i'd consider a modern video format
it's literally just a bunch of independant jpeg pictures, intra-only, no motion compensation
with mjpeg, a 10fps video would be about twice as big as a 5fps one, as there's no inter-frame coding

>>57985991

720 digital cameras are considered low end these days, most likely taking up less storage than OPs system

>>57986028

they are still around, the recorder for OPs camera sure could still be using it, you couldn't buy one that does these days

>>57986281
>they are still around, the recorder for OPs camera sure could still be using it, you couldn't buy one that does these days
you could modernize one somewhat by taking the mjpeg stream and transcoding it into a modern format before storing it

>>57986431

probably, the effort to do so wouldn't be really worth it tho, new gear isn't that expensive

>>57981024
>Are shop owners greedy or something?
No. Most shop owners offer their stuff to people for free.

>>57981024

the 7-11 around the block from my house has a pretty decent setup. They regularly post pics in the window of people they've caught stealing from them and are 86'ed from the store. The pics show some damned good details to the point where I have to wonder just how much the owner spent on it.

>>57986611

I have iSpy running on a Pentium D 950 machine out in my office with a Logitech 9000 webcam connected to it and hidden from view to keep an eye on everything in my office. At 720p I get upwards of 20+fps while recording with excellent clarity.

There's no excuse for shitty cctv quality in 2016.

File: homertheheretic_10.jpg (22KB, 414x277px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 414x277px

>>57986702
That 7-11 isn't owned by Apu huh
Went to one when i was in the US and the Pajeet memes are true, fuckers are disgusting, greedy and treat their costumers like shit, doubt they'd get anything that isn't a shitty webcam for their security.

>>57987242

actually it *is* owned by a curry. My guess is he figured a decent investment would help stop theft considering the location of the store (shitty hood area with hookers, drug dealers, and drunkards 24/7).

>>57987362
>(shitty hood area with hookers, drug dealers, and drunkards 24/7).
yeah, must've been held up so many times that he finally got tired and made the investment

>>57981024
Even with a 1080p camera, you're trying to blow up a small portion of the picture.
Those cameras are overlooking a large area. It's not like when you take videos and have it zoomed and focused on a specific subject.

>>57987399

I've often heard it was a popular spot for "beer runs" as it sits a block off of a main highway. Plus, the neighborhood is full of section 8/food stamp recipients so theft from the residents is high.

i live a couple of blocks away. Oddly, my neighborhood is full of Mexicans and Filpinos with a small sprinkling of White and Black families who own the houses they live in. They never have any problem out of us; just the people in the apartments that surround it.

>>57985518
>>57985891
Well, I didn't know this. So, the issue with the bad quality CCTV footage is just store owners being cheap like OP said.

File: 1480465883340.jpg (14KB, 234x234px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 234x234px

>>57981024
>Are shop owners greedy or something? How come a lot of surveillance footage looks like it was filmed by a 90s webcam?
>Storage is pretty cheap these day so capacity shouldn't be an issue. It is not like you need to store year old footage anyway.

File: WD-8TB-Red-8.jpg (458KB, 1915x1276px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1915x1276px

>>57987790
Storage is a none issue.

This is not even one of those shitty Archive drives,

>>57988391
https://www.wdc.com/products/business-internal-storage/wd-purple-nv.html#WD6NPURX

A 6TB one made for the purpose of video recording.

Not that expensive really.

File: 1465668606703.gif (2MB, 400x260px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x260px

>>57988391
>Storage is a none issue.
>This is not even one of those shitty Archive drives,

>>57981066
>so law enforcement don't really make pushes for local business
lol they can't do this, this isn't england.

>>57988513
Should a judge, or jury even, turn around and decide that provided evidence is too low quality to act upon, and is scrapped, then that's a strong a message as needs be to upgrade equipment.