Slashdot Mirror
LAN Camera Review
xulphlux writes "The guys over at Tom's Hardware have an excellent review of 4 LAN cameras. While not currently commonplace as of yet, they have good potential for relatively low cost security uses. Keep an eye on the kids outside, your sports car out front, or the good looking girl next door... A couple even have built in 802.11b so no need for wires."
lan cameras are ultra fun. you can use them for a variety of applications: security, relief of boredom. we've been using an AXIS 200+ (which unfortunately doesn't do video) to keep an eye on things. if you'd like to check it out it can be accessed here. if anyone knows of any hacks to let the cam do video or upgrade anything, it would be much appreciated.
If it is not clear enough, you should know that Axis supports the community and actually runs embedded Linux with features like NTP, FTP, SMTP and dial-up-when-triggered-by-external-switch and other nifty features.
or the good looking girl next door
:)
Uhh... this treads into "pervert" land. You know, you could just try talking to her, I've heard it works sometimes.
They have embedded web servers?
/.'ed first? Which one bursts into flames first?
Which one will get
The Axis one was $299.. they've really come down in price over the past couple of years.
All I can say is that for over $400 the girl next door better have a great ass!
Following up on our discussion of 802.11b, the kind og bandwidth that one can normally get from 802.11b is not reaally enough for high quality video. So if U are just monitoring ppl, then its fine...but if U really wanna see them( like in the case of the neighbourhood girl), I guess 802.11b wont really work for me :-)
What's under yellowstone?
relatively low cost? what?
These cameras are at least 2-3 times more expensive than a regular camera and the required equipment to do it the regular way.
These lan cameras are the way to install a horribly overpriced security setup not low cost, not by any means.
These cameras are great if you have lots of extra money lying around and in your way, otherwise buy regular security cameras, they are much smaller, better built, and available in water/weather proof designs.
Heck I even have a color/nightvision version in my back yard that is my most expensive camera and it cost $250.00
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
How about rather than pointing a camera like this at the girl next door, you just give her one of the 802.11b units so she can secure her house, and then sit back and pick up the signal through your Pringles tube?
I mean seriously, given it's notorious lack of security, isn't mounting a _security_ camera via 802.11b suicide? Broadcasting who is in the building out over the entire neighborhood seems _slightly_ counterproductive for burgulary protection (not to speak of privacy!) It seems to me that security should be the prime concern for any such purchase, yet I find little or no mention of it in the article (the D-Link unit mentions WEP passing, but we all know how great that is...)
Best of these lan cameras isn't amongst those tested, i've seen an popup ad of a Spy Cam 2 or whatever it's name was atleast dozens of times.
That lan camera is smaller than any of those plus you can remotely turn it to watch some other place, although it's also too big for security usage, i prefer very small, perhaps even poor image quality but if it cannot be seen it's much better because the burglar or someone cannot avoid being caught by it if s/he doesn't see it.
Also you can get from normal/security cameras a video feed to you'r comp also with right kind of hardware.
Just use something like Dazzle or attach it to you'r tv-in's camera port, also if you are skilled in electronics you can make an 'multiplexer' to multiplex many video feeds and attach it to you'r tv-in port and just change 'channel' to see another camera =)
These has something good also in them, cause they are lan cameras they are a way to better way, because they most likely doesn't care what os you use to configure it (by telnet prompt or serial cable, who cares?). I personally wish to see a lot more devices attached to lan, thus making it easier for many people to use simultaneously, no need for drivers etc... etc..
and more negative critic about these: why don't you just use some small normal webcam with very long cable instead of these, cheaper and smaller, i have Quickcam VC and it's a lot smaller than my fist, thus making it easier to hide if needed, although that webcamera is shaped as ball so it's a bit harder to make without ssomething to put it stand on or to attach to point right direction and stay that way, also it has a place where you can but a bolt to attach it...
Also, if you don't care to disassemble it you can make it 50% smaller taking the casing away, if you plan to put it outside you can use some plastic or something to protect it from rain then, you would need to do that anyways cos it hasn't been designed to be water proof....
There is a lot to do before these lan cams are something else than pretty toys...
Pulsed Media Seedboxes
This thing (eCAMit) has IP and built in motion detection which none of the four Toms reviewed had. It doesn't look as nicely designed, but for $139 if it works who cares? Anyone actually seen/used one?
Other info on it.
I bought 3 of these cameras about 18 months ago and ended up returning them. The image quality was very poor (grainy) unless you had ideal lighting and the maximum refresh rate of the camera was a pathetic 10 frames per second. If you just want to take 1 frame every 60 seconds and can live with images that need to be imported into photoshop and ran through a series of lighting adjustment filters before you can distinguish anything, then go for it.
In my opinion these types of cameras are the future... but currently they are little more than useless toys for people who have money to burn. If, like me, you have a real need for security monitoring, these cameras aren't the answer... yet. Hopefully in another 18 months the price will come down and the features and quality will go up. I'd like to see all of these cameras have LAN/WLAN & USB, Tilt/Pan/Zoom, and the big thing is decent image quality under low lighting. ViCAM has figured it out, so if "they" can't figure out how to get good image quality under poor lighting, then juse use ViCAM's chipset and optics. My $100 3Com webcam (which was manufacturered by those guys) is far better, quality wise, than those LAN cams I've tried.
Then I'll get into my button-down shirt, put on my clunky glasses taped together, pull my pants waaaay up high, put a pocket protector on. I'll use a fake beard to hide my face.
I'll get into my car with the bumper sticker LISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSP that stretches all the way across it. I'll then go to wherever I rob, demand all their money . On my way out, I'll have my sidekick "Script-Kiddie" tag "w3 0wn j0000" along the door of the institution.
We'll spend the money on machine and bandwidth. We're ultimately saving enough money to afford a rig that can proverbally "Slashdot" the site Slashdot.
Maybe I'll impress Malda. Maybe he'll make me the official "Filterer of stories already submitted." Maybe not. F*sk that. My site will have geek news... and porn! Enough porn to destr--- err, take over a website.
I tried getting an English tutor for "Script Kiddie", but he's already started working his way into the system.
Shit.
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
``A couple even have built in 802.11b so no need for wires''
I read ``A couple even has cameras with built-in 802.11b'' and expected an URL where their activities could be watched...a dirty mind is a joy forever!
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Hang on.... here we are on Slashdot, where every mention of possibly privacy-invading technology provokes an intense discussion involving civil liberties... and this phrase gets posted in a headline story?
Just a little sexual politics for y'all - pointing hidden cameras at girls (or anyone else for that matter) is not nice. It's offensive. It's rude. It's an invasion of privacy.
Anna B
As long as they are not X.10. It would be a shame to refuse one those because we decided to boycott them because of those fuckingly annoying pop-up ads...
I would love the wireless cam from Dlink. No money right now. What I do have is an old laptop with a wireless card. I have purchased 3 or 4 "webcams", and have yet to find one that works on Linux. (Webcams are weird in the fact that the same exact brand may use 4 or 5 different chips during a production run -- and usually only one or two of them have Linux support, so it really is a crapshoot). Does anyone know of a drop dead 100% chance of working cam for Linux that I could use. (without having to go to a museum and steal it from an antique exibit.)
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
So would have I...
But as it turns out, these things are a bargain.
A few months ago, I was in Akihabara and grabbed a Connectix QuickCam on impulse - I got the cheapest one, assuming that it was the most likely to have Linux drivers. After all, I had the original B&W Quickcam the week it was released years ago and it had Linux drivers after something like 25 minutes.
Guess what? The new QuickCam has the most Linux-Unfriendly thing you could imagine. It's Windows-only and the only way to upload pictures to an FTP site is to use some POS service that's free for the first 30 days and only works with some half-dead proprietary service.
All I wanted was to be able to take a picture from a command line and save it to a file - I'll take care of the rest.
So that was $70 wasted.
At my office we just got one of the ones that Tom's reviews that does Pan and Tilt (the Panasonic?) and the thing is GREAT. $400 or so and it comes with a web server (Nmap tells me it's Linux) and does everything that a Linux-friendly webcam connected to a normal web server would do, *if* I could find such a camera. Plus, the pan and tilt and refresh rate are excellent. Such a thing would have cost 4 times the price a year ago.
I've got enough computers running in my apartment that power consumption is a real consideration too - another real appeal of this thing.
I went to try to find one of these today at lunch (before reading the article,) but the store didn't have them yet, or I'd have one tonight.
I'd buy one just to not waste a weekend or two fscking around with unsupported hardware and drivers and he worry of facing a Windows box to the Internet.
I guess I'd say to you, Just wait a few months - this is the direction that this sort of equipment is going - embedded Linux and network transparency - plus,it will be half the price by February.
Cheers,
Jim
PS - I think any CCD camera has night vision capabilities if you crack it open and take out the filter - at least i heard that somewhere...
-- My Weblog.
The axis one runs linux. Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of those?
From their specs:
Transmission Speed:
High Resolution (320x240): maximum 2.15 frames/second
No wonder Tom didn't review it..
The software/web servers included with these cameras are, by and large, useless for security purposes unless you plan on watching the video stream 24x7. I use motion, an incredibly simple but useful Linux motion detection program with my Axis 2100, and then periodically review the .mpeg files it generates. I don't know if any other net cameras are supported.
In three months, I have already used motion and my Axis 2100 to capture images of TWO people attempting to burgle my office during my business's regular operating hours. Although capturing images of these people is mostly useless (as the police don't really care), it has helped me to reevaluate the threat and change our security policies.
A wired LAN camera (with built in web server) is only really needed if you are doing something where you have a nearby network connection and don't want to run a long run of coax or other cable for video (though CAT5 should handle video fine), same for the wireless (though it is better if you need such a camera in an area where you can't get wires to AT ALL). I can see using these cameras for a quick setup/takedown for a "fly-by-night" live-webcam porno operation, or in a warehouse, or on a remote ranch - but not much else. Maybe I am short-sighted - where else would these be justified for the expense that a cheaper system wouldn't be worth it?
At home? You have to be kidding. This winter I plan on installing security cams in my house - I am going to use cheap b/w (maybe a single color cam for the front door) cams, most "single-board", which supply 1 Vpp composite video, and need a 12VDC hookup, all of which can be run over CAT5. I will terminate the cameras back at a central location where I plan to hook them up to a custom parallel port driven relay (or IC) based switcher, and into a video capture card for recording. I plan on running the wires in the attic - no big deal. I figure the total cost of this thing will be in the realm of $200 total - the computer is free (junk from work), the video capture card I have lying around, the cameras cost about $25.00 - $50.00 each - why should I buy a LAN camera?
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
They would pop up ads in your browser when you look at the video stream.
---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
There are 'Where to Buy' links right there on the page you linked to. Sure, it's not a web form, but calling a sales wheezle on the phone isn't _that_ bad.
Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/