[mythtv-users] Hauppauge in trouble with the FCC

[David Brodbeck]

Brian Wood wrote:
>
> How come we can get beautiful pictures of faraway galaxies, the  
> surface of Mars and satellite photos that allow you to check on your  
> cat, yet the banks don't seem to be able to afford anything that will  
> produce a photo that would allow you to recognize an elephant at 6 feet?
>   
The short answer is, they aren't trying very hard.  The long answer:

On digital recording systems, they're often using high compression and
low resolutions to cram in lots of recording time.  1 SIF (352x240) is a
common requirement and a lot of systems are built to it.

On analog recording systems, they're often multiplexing the images and
then recording on time-lapse VCRs that record as much as 40 hours on one
T-160 tape, to minimize the number of tape changes.  They also often
don't replace the tapes often enough, further degrading the images. 
After a few years the VCR heads start to wear noticeably, as well,
causing the video to "soften."

Many of these decisions are guided by industry regulations.  The
tendency is to do the minimum that's required by law and no more.  Doing
more costs money and there's no clear payoff (until you get robbed, anyway.)

Sometimes the person installing the camera never focused it properly, or
the proper lens wasn't used for the lighting conditions. Another common
issue is dirty lenses, especially in buildings where smoking is allowed
-- often no one ever bothers to clean the lens once the camera is
installed.  Outdoor cameras sometimes suffer from condensation if they
aren't equipped with heaters.

The resolution of the actual *camera* is often quite good (by NTSC
standards), especially for black-and-white units.