I know this is WAY OT but I need some clues to get started. I want to
use a digital camera as a security camera. The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
Turning them on takes too long; I want to disable the auto off or find a
simple camera that does not turn itself off. It will be powered from
the AC mains so battery life is a non-issue.

The best I've found so far is a game camera, which turns itself on when
it senses a hot animal and takes a picture. Unfortunately it takes
about 5 seconds to turn on, and 5 seconds seems like eternity in some
situations. I want instant pictures. I also would like to take pictures
from an external trigger signal.

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Any clue where to find such a camera or to find someone who knows how to
modify one?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On Dec 31, 7:22*am, nick hull wrote:
...
It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Black and white film can be developed in a few minutes without a
darkroom. You move it from the camera into the light-tight developing
tank inside a black changing bag, then you can pour the developer,
stop and fixer in and out under normal indoor lighting. 35mm film is
fairly easy to wind onto the reel by feel but I needed some practice
with 16mm.

Maybe you could use an old computer for video capture. My Canon
doesn't power down when connected to USB.

Jim Wilkins

In article
,
Jim Wilkins wrote:

On Dec 31, 7:22*am, nick hull wrote:
...
It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Black and white film can be developed in a few minutes without a
darkroom. You move it from the camera into the light-tight developing
tank inside a black changing bag, then you can pour the developer,
stop and fixer in and out under normal indoor lighting. 35mm film is
fairly easy to wind onto the reel by feel but I needed some practice
with 16mm.

I've loaded and developed a lot of B&W film, and I prefer digital

Maybe you could use an old computer for video capture. My Canon
doesn't power down when connected to USB.

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

nick hull wrote:
In article
,
Jim Wilkins wrote:


On Dec 31, 7:22 am, nick hull wrote:
...

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Black and white film can be developed in a few minutes without a
darkroom. You move it from the camera into the light-tight developing
tank inside a black changing bag, then you can pour the developer,
stop and fixer in and out under normal indoor lighting. 35mm film is
fairly easy to wind onto the reel by feel but I needed some practice
with 16mm.


I've loaded and developed a lot of B&W film, and I prefer digital

Maybe you could use an old computer for video capture. My Canon
doesn't power down when connected to USB.


The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/


Ever thought about using a video camera with one of the old Rabbit
wireless systems? They operate in the 900 Mhz area, if I recall
correctly, and with a pair of small beam antenae might cover the
distance. If you were a ham radio operator you could use an amateur
radio TV setup. That would surely cover the distance. I've gotten
several miles out of the one I had with no trouble at all.

Jim Chandler

In article 0l9ej.6213$4m5.1580@trnddc02, Jim Chandler
wrote:

nick hull wrote:
In article
,
Jim Wilkins wrote:


On Dec 31, 7:22 am, nick hull wrote:
...

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Black and white film can be developed in a few minutes without a
darkroom. You move it from the camera into the light-tight developing
tank inside a black changing bag, then you can pour the developer,
stop and fixer in and out under normal indoor lighting. 35mm film is
fairly easy to wind onto the reel by feel but I needed some practice
with 16mm.


I've loaded and developed a lot of B&W film, and I prefer digital

Maybe you could use an old computer for video capture. My Canon
doesn't power down when connected to USB.


The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/


Ever thought about using a video camera with one of the old Rabbit
wireless systems? They operate in the 900 Mhz area, if I recall
correctly, and with a pair of small beam antenae might cover the
distance. If you were a ham radio operator you could use an amateur
radio TV setup. That would surely cover the distance. I've gotten
several miles out of the one I had with no trouble at all.

Jim Chandler

I'll have to look into that, but I do NOT have a clear line of sight.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

In article ,
nick hull wrote:

In article
,
Jim Wilkins wrote:

On Dec 31, 7:22*am, nick hull wrote:
...
It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Black and white film can be developed in a few minutes without a
darkroom. You move it from the camera into the light-tight developing
tank inside a black changing bag, then you can pour the developer,
stop and fixer in and out under normal indoor lighting. 35mm film is
fairly easy to wind onto the reel by feel but I needed some practice
with 16mm.

I've loaded and developed a lot of B&W film, and I prefer digital

Maybe you could use an old computer for video capture. My Canon
doesn't power down when connected to USB.

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.

The standard solution is optical fiber. Works well, but is expensive.

Joe Gwinn

nick hull wrote:

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.
Huh? You can send video over miles of coax, if you terminate it
properly. Hmmm, let's see, 1000' at $0.13/ft = $130, you might be able
to do better on eBay. You can probably send the camera power on the
same cable with a little ingenuity, too.

Jon

Jon Elson wrote:



nick hull wrote:

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.
Huh? You can send video over miles of coax, if you terminate it
properly. Hmmm, let's see, 1000' at $0.13/ft = $130, you might be able
to do better on eBay. You can probably send the camera power on the
same cable with a little ingenuity, too.

Jon

Arcnet will do 2000 ft irrc. Wonder if they ever made pci cards for it?

Wes

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:35:41 -0500, Wes wrote:

Jon Elson wrote:



nick hull wrote:

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.
Huh? You can send video over miles of coax, if you terminate it
properly. Hmmm, let's see, 1000' at $0.13/ft = $130, you might be able
to do better on eBay. You can probably send the camera power on the
same cable with a little ingenuity, too.

Jon

Arcnet will do 2000 ft irrc. Wonder if they ever made pci cards for it?

Wes
Nope. Arcnet died before ISA did. There were a few parallep port
arcnets.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article , Jon Elson
wrote:

nick hull wrote:

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.
Huh? You can send video over miles of coax, if you terminate it
properly. Hmmm, let's see, 1000' at $0.13/ft = $130, you might be able
to do better on eBay. You can probably send the camera power on the
same cable with a little ingenuity, too.

OK, the price is reasonable for the co-ax. There would be some problems
routing & burying it but it's definitely possible. (since I would have
to bury it I can also bury other wires in the same trench) Video
cameras are reasonably cheap, the problem then comes in data processing
inside my home. I do NOT want to watch live video and am most
interested in events that occur when I'm gone or sleeping, so I guess I
would need some gismo that would record when x pixel changes occur.
Does that mean a dedicated computer with a huge hard drive? My present
Mac only has 6 gB, I assume I would have to buy another dedicated
computer and software for the application - what is the software called?

nick

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

nick hull wrote:
ome. I do NOT want to watch live video and am most
interested in events that occur when I'm gone or sleeping, so I guess I
would need some gismo that would record when x pixel changes occur.
Does that mean a dedicated computer with a huge hard drive? My present
Mac only has 6 gB, I assume I would have to buy another dedicated
computer and software for the application - what is the software called?



A program called Gotchya! does just that, triggers a few second of
video or snapshots from a web cam, when ever selected areas (you
select them) change by some percent.
http://www.gotchanow.com/
I have used the share ware version.

jk

Jon Elson wrote:

nick hull wrote:

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.
Huh? You can send video over miles of coax, if you terminate it
properly. Hmmm, let's see, 1000' at $0.13/ft = $130, you might be able
to do better on eBay. You can probably send the camera power on the
same cable with a little ingenuity, too.


Have you ever tried to send usable video over miles of coax, without
the proper equalizers? We used a modulator/demodulator to move video a
half mile, over .500 75 Ohm hardline for a live feed at a TV station,
back in the late '80s. You can pick up a lot of 60 HZ hum, due to
ground differentials at a half mile, as well.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:12:44 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

Jon Elson wrote:

nick hull wrote:

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.
Huh? You can send video over miles of coax, if you terminate it
properly. Hmmm, let's see, 1000' at $0.13/ft = $130, you might be able
to do better on eBay. You can probably send the camera power on the
same cable with a little ingenuity, too.


Have you ever tried to send usable video over miles of coax, without
the proper equalizers? We used a modulator/demodulator to move video a
half mile, over .500 75 Ohm hardline for a live feed at a TV station,
back in the late '80s. You can pick up a lot of 60 HZ hum, due to
ground differentials at a half mile, as well.


ONLY ground ONE end.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

nick hull wrote:
In article
,
Jim Wilkins wrote:

On Dec 31, 7:22 am, nick hull wrote:
...
It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.
Black and white film can be developed in a few minutes without a
darkroom. You move it from the camera into the light-tight developing
tank inside a black changing bag, then you can pour the developer,
stop and fixer in and out under normal indoor lighting. 35mm film is
fairly easy to wind onto the reel by feel but I needed some practice
with 16mm.

I've loaded and developed a lot of B&W film, and I prefer digital
Maybe you could use an old computer for video capture. My Canon
doesn't power down when connected to USB.

The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

1000 feet isn't that far really. Co-ax could handle it with a signal amp
on the feed end. Then you could connect up a cheap camera and have a
live feed.

--
Steve W.
Near Cooperstown, New York

Life is not like a box of chocolates
it's more like a jar of jalapenos-
what you do today could burn your ass tomorrow!

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:22:32 -0600, nick hull wrote:


The site is too far from any possible computer site, at least 1000'.
That's why I don't use a video camera, too far for co-ax.

Cat5 is cheap, and I've sent video 1500' over it using an $8 pair of
baluns http://tinyurl.com/333str. Twist 3 wires together for each
power leg, and use a higher voltage supply to account for the voltage
drop.

If you're willing to reconsider the still image solution, this game
camera controller board
http://www.pixcontroller.com/Products/PixU_PIR.htm signals a camera
pretty quickly. First picture delay depends on how long it takes the
camera to boot up, perhaps 4 seconds total on mine. Subsequent shots
are nearly instantaneous since the camera is already on. I'm using 6
AAs to power the board, and swapping those out once a month. 2 Ds for
the camera, replaced every couple weeks since it takes as many as 400
shots a day, lots of them with flash. Doesn't have to be fancy, photo
of mine here http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/gamecam/camera2.jpg. Game
cam shots (mostly) here http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/gamecam.htm and
here http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/gamecam2.htm.

Wayne

Jim Wilkins wrote:
On Dec 31, 7:22 am, nick hull wrote:
...
It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Black and white film can be developed in a few minutes without a
darkroom. You move it from the camera into the light-tight developing
tank inside a black changing bag, then you can pour the developer,
stop and fixer in and out under normal indoor lighting. 35mm film is
fairly easy to wind onto the reel by feel but I needed some practice
with 16mm.

The only caveat is that it is much safer to have to the developer in the
tank and then dunk the reels into it; the risk being air bubbles forming
in contact with the film, leaving undeveloped spots. Good agitation
usually works, but I cannot recall having trouble after somebody taught
me that trick. For the OP's purpose, a single reel tank would do, and
it is probably not a big deal - at one time, I found a 8-reel tank to be
a little wimpy.

If you go the film route, I recommend good plastic reels over stainless
steel. The metal ones can be very tricky to load, and can sometimes
allow the emulsion side of the film to contact its neighbor, again
leaving spots that are not properly developed. I never had a plastic
reel do that to me.

As far as a camera, I would consider a web cam built for the purpose.
Of course, the idea is probably to use an existing camera vs. spending
money on a new camera??

Good luck!

Bill

In article ,
Bill Schwab wrote:

As far as a camera, I would consider a web cam built for the purpose.
Of course, the idea is probably to use an existing camera vs. spending
money on a new camera??

Cheap existing is nice but I'll buy something else if required. Doesn't
a web cam need a web? No internet connection nearby and my only
internet connection is slow dialup - pictures take a lot of time. Or
were you thinking of an on-site 'internet'? How does that work?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:14:10 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
Bill Schwab wrote:

As far as a camera, I would consider a web cam built for the purpose.
Of course, the idea is probably to use an existing camera vs. spending
money on a new camera??

Cheap existing is nice but I'll buy something else if required. Doesn't
a web cam need a web? No internet connection nearby and my only
internet connection is slow dialup - pictures take a lot of time. Or
were you thinking of an on-site 'internet'? How does that work?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/


Use wireless tcp/ip cammera talking to your wireless router connected
to your PC. With directional antenna you can reach close to a mile..
No need to connect to the world wide web. Just your local network or
"intranet"

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article ,
clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:14:10 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
Bill Schwab wrote:

As far as a camera, I would consider a web cam built for the purpose.
Of course, the idea is probably to use an existing camera vs. spending
money on a new camera??

Cheap existing is nice but I'll buy something else if required. Doesn't
a web cam need a web? No internet connection nearby and my only
internet connection is slow dialup - pictures take a lot of time. Or
were you thinking of an on-site 'internet'? How does that work?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/


Use wireless tcp/ip cammera talking to your wireless router connected
to your PC. With directional antenna you can reach close to a mile..
No need to connect to the world wide web. Just your local network or
"intranet"

There is a hill between the camera site and my wireless router, will a
wireless tcp/ip camera work at 1000' with a hill in between? What kind
of transmitter is on the camera? I've never used that kind before.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On Dec 31, 4:22 am, nick hull wrote:
.... The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
,,,,


Only the cheap ones. The Nikon DSLR types have an on-off switch that
is mechanical. They also sell an application which allows you to
control the camera remote from a Windoz PC. My D40 has an
intervalometer mode allowing the camera to take pictures at preset
intervals.

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:10:14 -0800 (PST), with neither quill nor
qualm, quickly quoth:

On Dec 31, 4:22 am, nick hull wrote:
.... The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
,,,,


Only the cheap ones. The Nikon DSLR types have an on-off switch that
is mechanical. They also sell an application which allows you to
control the camera remote from a Windoz PC. My D40 has an
intervalometer mode allowing the camera to take pictures at preset
intervals.

How do you like the D40? I'm considering upgrading to that from an old
Coolpix 995 which is still serving me well. I want an instant-click
digital. My 995 takes several seconds to boot and focus before I can
snap a shot, and lots of times that's too long to wait.

---
Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing.
This is the ultimate.
--Chuang-tzu (369 BC - 286 BC)

On 2007-12-31, Larry Jaques novalidaddress@di wrote:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:10:14 -0800 (PST), with neither quill nor
qualm, quickly quoth:

On Dec 31, 4:22 am, nick hull wrote:
.... The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
,,,,


Only the cheap ones. The Nikon DSLR types have an on-off switch that
is mechanical.

They *do* go to sleep -- but wake up instantly with a half-press
of the shutter release.

They also sell an application which allows you to
control the camera remote from a Windoz PC. My D40 has an
intervalometer mode allowing the camera to take pictures at preset
intervals.

How do you like the D40? I'm considering upgrading to that from an old
Coolpix 995 which is still serving me well. I want an instant-click
digital. My 995 takes several seconds to boot and focus before I can
snap a shot, and lots of times that's too long to wait.

The D40 (or any of the Nikon Digital SLRs) are very close to
instant on. If I switch my D70 on as I'm raising to my eye, it will be
ready to take a picture by the time it gets there. And if the light is
not terrible, the autofocus will be quick enough to be no problem.

Otherwise -- you can turn off autofocus -- and if you know how
far away your subject will be, you can prefocus to eliminate even the
little autofocus time.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

In article
,
wrote:

On Dec 31, 4:22 am, nick hull wrote:
.... The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
,,,,


Only the cheap ones.

Cheap is good, it will be out in the weather and is subject to vandalism
and theft.

The Nikon DSLR types have an on-off switch that
is mechanical. They also sell an application which allows you to
control the camera remote from a Windoz PC. My D40 has an
intervalometer mode allowing the camera to take pictures at preset
intervals.

I suspect it wouldn't work so well with a 1000' remote; besides I use a
Mac.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

In article
,
wrote:

On Dec 31, 4:22 am, nick hull wrote:
.... The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
,,,,


Only the cheap ones. The Nikon DSLR types have an on-off switch that
is mechanical. They also sell an application which allows you to
control the camera remote from a Windoz PC. My D40 has an
intervalometer mode allowing the camera to take pictures at preset
intervals.

I guess I need to find a semi-cheap one with a mechanical on-off switch.
I found one on ebay but it has no provision for remote operation.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

Maybe I am confused about what you want, but aside from the
night/infrared issues, what you need is called a webcam. You can make
it take snapshots as often as you want and keep a nice rolling archive
of them, etc.

i

nick hull wrote:
I know this is WAY OT but I need some clues to get started. I want to
use a digital camera as a security camera. The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
Turning them on takes too long; I want to disable the auto off or find a
simple camera that does not turn itself off. It will be powered from
the AC mains so battery life is a non-issue.

The best I've found so far is a game camera, which turns itself on when
it senses a hot animal and takes a picture. Unfortunately it takes
about 5 seconds to turn on, and 5 seconds seems like eternity in some
situations. I want instant pictures. I also would like to take pictures
from an external trigger signal.

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Any clue where to find such a camera or to find someone who knows how to
modify one?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

One of the neighbors has a complete security system with at least 10
cameras, all of them get channeled to a computer with a couple of large
hard drives. It grabs a picture from each camera every 3 seconds. If he
needs a set of images he just pulls them from the file. If he doesn't
the system just overwrites the data on a 24 hour clock. Camera wise he
has used a few different ones. His current batch are all USB cameras
with night vision. He tried wireless units but didn't like the problem
of interference from other signals.

--
Steve W.
Near Cooperstown, New York

Life is not like a box of chocolates
it's more like a jar of jalapenos-
what you do today could burn your ass tomorrow!

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:22:26 -0600, nick hull wrote:

I know this is WAY OT but I need some clues to get started. I want to
use a digital camera as a security camera. The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
Turning them on takes too long; I want to disable the auto off or find a
simple camera that does not turn itself off. It will be powered from
the AC mains so battery life is a non-issue.

The best I've found so far is a game camera, which turns itself on when
it senses a hot animal and takes a picture. Unfortunately it takes
about 5 seconds to turn on, and 5 seconds seems like eternity in some
situations. I want instant pictures. I also would like to take pictures
from an external trigger signal.

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Any clue where to find such a camera or to find someone who knows how to
modify one?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

Digital cameras, at least some of them, only turn themselves off
after a period of no activity. Many or most digital cameras have a
"focus" or "lock exposure" function when you half-press the shutter
button. Just do that periodically, and the camera will stay on, while
taking photos only when the button is fully depressed.

Many also have some means of remote actuation. The Olympus I rigged
up for a guy to take wildlife photos remotely (by radio control) had a
connector on it. The remote had two resistors and a two-position
button. The camera would focus and read exposure with one resistance,
operate the shutter with a lower resistance. I just replicated the
remote with a radio. He never mentioned having problems with the
camera shutting off, so it may be that it would stay on when the
remote was connected.

My old Oly C2500 has infrared remote control, which would be even
easier -- no connector.

In article ,
Don Foreman wrote:


Digital cameras, at least some of them, only turn themselves off
after a period of no activity. Many or most digital cameras have a
"focus" or "lock exposure" function when you half-press the shutter
button. Just do that periodically, and the camera will stay on, while
taking photos only when the button is fully depressed.

An idea worth trying Would prefer to do it electrically instead of
mechanically to avoid camera shake.

Many also have some means of remote actuation. The Olympus I rigged
up for a guy to take wildlife photos remotely (by radio control) had a
connector on it. The remote had two resistors and a two-position
button. The camera would focus and read exposure with one resistance,
operate the shutter with a lower resistance. I just replicated the
remote with a radio. He never mentioned having problems with the
camera shutting off, so it may be that it would stay on when the
remote was connected.

My old Oly C2500 has infrared remote control, which would be even
easier -- no connector.

I'm trying to do it with a Olympus 300 which has an IR remote if I can
keep the camera on. If it goes off I have to manually push buttons to
get it back to remote operation. Would love to attach wires to do it as
long as I can keep the camera on.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:08:39 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
Don Foreman wrote:


Digital cameras, at least some of them, only turn themselves off
after a period of no activity. Many or most digital cameras have a
"focus" or "lock exposure" function when you half-press the shutter
button. Just do that periodically, and the camera will stay on, while
taking photos only when the button is fully depressed.

An idea worth trying Would prefer to do it electrically instead of
mechanically to avoid camera shake.

Many also have some means of remote actuation. The Olympus I rigged
up for a guy to take wildlife photos remotely (by radio control) had a
connector on it. The remote had two resistors and a two-position
button. The camera would focus and read exposure with one resistance,
operate the shutter with a lower resistance. I just replicated the
remote with a radio. He never mentioned having problems with the
camera shutting off, so it may be that it would stay on when the
remote was connected.

My old Oly C2500 has infrared remote control, which would be even
easier -- no connector.

I'm trying to do it with a Olympus 300 which has an IR remote if I can
keep the camera on. If it goes off I have to manually push buttons to
get it back to remote operation. Would love to attach wires to do it as
long as I can keep the camera on.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

Check your camera menu -- or (shudder) manual if you still have it. My
Oly C2500 of similar vintage can be set to not turn itself off. Also,
with the shutoff time set at one minute, I found that doing something
with the IR remote (which I think is the same as used on the D300)
periodically keeps the camera on. I just hit the W and Z zoom
buttons.

The camera would need an external power supply of course, or the
batteries will be consumed in a couple of hours. The IR remote could
be simulated with an IR LED and appropriate drive elex.

In article ,
Don Foreman wrote:

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:08:39 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
Don Foreman wrote:


Digital cameras, at least some of them, only turn themselves off
after a period of no activity. Many or most digital cameras have a
"focus" or "lock exposure" function when you half-press the shutter
button. Just do that periodically, and the camera will stay on, while
taking photos only when the button is fully depressed.

An idea worth trying Would prefer to do it electrically instead of
mechanically to avoid camera shake.

Many also have some means of remote actuation. The Olympus I rigged
up for a guy to take wildlife photos remotely (by radio control) had a
connector on it. The remote had two resistors and a two-position
button. The camera would focus and read exposure with one resistance,
operate the shutter with a lower resistance. I just replicated the
remote with a radio. He never mentioned having problems with the
camera shutting off, so it may be that it would stay on when the
remote was connected.

My old Oly C2500 has infrared remote control, which would be even
easier -- no connector.

I'm trying to do it with a Olympus 300 which has an IR remote if I can
keep the camera on. If it goes off I have to manually push buttons to
get it back to remote operation. Would love to attach wires to do it as
long as I can keep the camera on.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

Check your camera menu -- or (shudder) manual if you still have it. My
Oly C2500 of similar vintage can be set to not turn itself off. Also,

Could not find such an option in menu or manual ;(

with the shutoff time set at one minute, I found that doing something
with the IR remote (which I think is the same as used on the D300)
periodically keeps the camera on. I just hit the W and Z zoom
buttons.

My remote only has ONE button, to take the picture ;(

The camera would need an external power supply of course, or the
batteries will be consumed in a couple of hours. The IR remote could
be simulated with an IR LED and appropriate drive elex.

I have an external power supply, but the camera goes to sleep and
retracts the lens in a couple of minutes anyway.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On 2008-01-02, nick hull wrote:
In article ,
Don Foreman wrote:

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:08:39 -0600, nick hull wrote:

In article ,
Don Foreman wrote:


Digital cameras, at least some of them, only turn themselves off
after a period of no activity. Many or most digital cameras have a
"focus" or "lock exposure" function when you half-press the shutter
button. Just do that periodically, and the camera will stay on, while
taking photos only when the button is fully depressed.

An idea worth trying Would prefer to do it electrically instead of
mechanically to avoid camera shake.

The wired remotes on the Nikon DSLRs which have such have a
two-stage button. Push it half way and the camera wakes up and
autofocuses. Push it fully and the camera takes the picture.

My original D70 only has IR wireless remote -- with the sensor
facing out towards the subject -- the idea being that you'll use it to
put yourself in the picture. :-) The D70s (also now obsolete, and thus
fairly cheap) has provisions for a wired remote as well.

[ ... ]

I'm trying to do it with a Olympus 300 which has an IR remote if I can
keep the camera on. If it goes off I have to manually push buttons to
get it back to remote operation. Would love to attach wires to do it as
long as I can keep the camera on.

For the length of wires which you are talking about, the odds
are that it will zap the electronics of the camera. For that --
actually -- the best bet would be the IR remote for the Nikons. Just
route a pair of wires out to operate an IR LED mounted facing the front
of the camera. No wiring into the camera's body. But -- there is the
problem that the camera will only stay in a mode receptive to the IR
remote for a short time, I believe. Yep -- diving into the menus shows
that 15 minutes of readiness is all that is available for the wireless
(IR) remote. But you could wire up an optically isolated set of remote
contacts to a wired remote socket for a long wire routing to protect
against voltages which could zap the camera's electronics.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

Check your camera menu -- or (shudder) manual if you still have it. My
Oly C2500 of similar vintage can be set to not turn itself off. Also,

Could not find such an option in menu or manual ;(

with the shutoff time set at one minute, I found that doing something
with the IR remote (which I think is the same as used on the D300)
periodically keeps the camera on. I just hit the W and Z zoom
buttons.

My remote only has ONE button, to take the picture ;(

Does it have a half-pressed state to wake up and focus the
camera before reaching full actuation to actually take the picture?

The camera would need an external power supply of course, or the
batteries will be consumed in a couple of hours. The IR remote could
be simulated with an IR LED and appropriate drive elex.

I have an external power supply, but the camera goes to sleep and
retracts the lens in a couple of minutes anyway.

Now -- *that* is something which you won't experience in a DSLR.
The lenses are (usually) the same as used on the film cameras, and
*can't* retract into the camera body. There is no room in there. ;-)
But -- it also means that you can select a non Autofocus lens with no
zoom but the right focal length to give the coverage you want, and that
is two things which won't reset on you. :-) Of course, some of the
cameras (like the D70) won't do auto exposure unless there is a chip in
the lens. But you could pick up an old 50mm lens with AF and no zoom.
(Note that on most DSLRs you will want a slightly wider lens than you
would on film -- because the sensor is smaller than the full frame 35mm
film, so a given lens focal length has less coverage -- but more
"reach". So -- bear this in mind when selecting the right lens.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

nick hull wrote:
I know this is WAY OT but I need some clues to get started. I want to
use a digital camera as a security camera. The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
Turning them on takes too long; I want to disable the auto off or find a
simple camera that does not turn itself off. It will be powered from
the AC mains so battery life is a non-issue.

My Kodak 7590 (I think that's the model #) will not turn off if the USB
cable is hooked up. I haven't tried it, but I'll bet there is a command
available from the camera menu to take a picture. If you hook up a
wall-wart power supply, it should run forever.

How about a web cam?

Jon

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:22:26 -0600, nick hull wrote:

I know this is WAY OT but I need some clues to get started. I want to
use a digital camera as a security camera. The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
Turning them on takes too long; I want to disable the auto off or find a
simple camera that does not turn itself off. It will be powered from
the AC mains so battery life is a non-issue.

The best I've found so far is a game camera, which turns itself on when
it senses a hot animal and takes a picture. Unfortunately it takes
about 5 seconds to turn on, and 5 seconds seems like eternity in some
situations. I want instant pictures. I also would like to take pictures
from an external trigger signal.

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Any clue where to find such a camera or to find someone who knows how to
modify one?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

Use a web cam on a cheap computer. Use motion sensing software (if
more than so many pixels per second change, it says something moved
and captures either still or motion.

Check into X10.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:22:26 -0600, nick hull wrote:


Check into X10.


Boo----Hisss----
Those jackasses are NOT worth dealing with.
jk

On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 11:55:22 -0800, jk wrote:

clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:22:26 -0600, nick hull wrote:


Check into X10.


Boo----Hisss----
Those jackasses are NOT worth dealing with.
jk
Perhaps, but there are other companies that sell the SAME stuff for
more money. ANd their software works pretty good.
And their software works with other cameras too.

Good software is also available with a lot of webcams. As well as some
REALLY high priced junk sold by many security CCTV distributors.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

nick hull writes:

I want instant pictures. I also would like to take pictures
from an external trigger signal.

All the Canon DSLRs wake up from sleep and shoot from the shutter remote,
which is nothing but simple switch contacts. Standard 2.5mm 3-conductor
plug on the 300D/350D/400D, or the proprietary N3 connector used on the
more expensive models can be cannibalized from a $10 import remote.

The R/C hobby industry has many wireless video modules for onboard
video. Cheap. Range over 1k ft. You could run it real-time to the
receiver and to a loop or frame program in a computer with a video card.
JR
Dweller in the cellar


nick hull wrote:
I know this is WAY OT but I need some clues to get started. I want to
use a digital camera as a security camera. The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
Turning them on takes too long; I want to disable the auto off or find a
simple camera that does not turn itself off. It will be powered from
the AC mains so battery life is a non-issue.

The best I've found so far is a game camera, which turns itself on when
it senses a hot animal and takes a picture. Unfortunately it takes
about 5 seconds to turn on, and 5 seconds seems like eternity in some
situations. I want instant pictures. I also would like to take pictures
from an external trigger signal.

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Any clue where to find such a camera or to find someone who knows how to
modify one?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes
Doubt yourself, and the real world will eat you alive
The world doesn't revolve around you, it revolves around me
No skeletons in the closet; just decomposing corpses
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dependence is Vulnerability:
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Open the Pod Bay Doors please, Hal"
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.."

Why not the USB cameras ?
Might be able to wireless some.

Look at Sams and Costco and like stores for security systems. For ideas.
Martin

Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Life; NRA LOH & Patron Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


nick hull wrote:
I know this is WAY OT but I need some clues to get started. I want to
use a digital camera as a security camera. The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
Turning them on takes too long; I want to disable the auto off or find a
simple camera that does not turn itself off. It will be powered from
the AC mains so battery life is a non-issue.

The best I've found so far is a game camera, which turns itself on when
it senses a hot animal and takes a picture. Unfortunately it takes
about 5 seconds to turn on, and 5 seconds seems like eternity in some
situations. I want instant pictures. I also would like to take pictures
from an external trigger signal.

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Any clue where to find such a camera or to find someone who knows how to
modify one?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On 2007-12-31, nick hull wrote:
I know this is WAY OT but I need some clues to get started. I want to
use a digital camera as a security camera. The problem is that all
digital cameras that I know about turn themselves off automatically.
Turning them on takes too long; I want to disable the auto off or find a
simple camera that does not turn itself off. It will be powered from
the AC mains so battery life is a non-issue.

Hmm ... note that the thing which seems to slow down the
power-up cycle of most digital cameras is involved with the autofocus
and the "live view" display.

In contrast, a *good* digital SLR (interchangeable lenses with
the older film cameras for the most part) can power up much more
quickly. An example is my Nikon D70 -- which (assuming that I've left
the lens cap off) I can switch it on as I'm lifting it to my eye, and by
the time it is there, it is ready to take pictures.

But the longest that it can be set to stay powered up is 30
minutes, IIRC. Note that just a touch on the shutter release button (to
half-depressed) will wake it up as quickly.

The Digital SLRs happen to be the most expensive digital cameras
in general, so are probably not what you want.

However -- what I would suggest is that you look at some of the
digital video cameras. You'll need a video capture card on your
computer to grab what it sends, of course, but it will stay on full
time. These cameras can be obtained for very little (IIRC, I got one --
uncased but with lens -- for about $25.00 at a hamfest last summer.
These are *made* to be security cameras.

Try looking at eBay auction #170182244508 for an example of a
packaged one.

The best I've found so far is a game camera, which turns itself on when
it senses a hot animal and takes a picture. Unfortunately it takes
about 5 seconds to turn on, and 5 seconds seems like eternity in some
situations. I want instant pictures. I also would like to take pictures
from an external trigger signal.

If you can involve a computer, and you simply watch and then hit
a button to tell it to save a picture -- this should do.

It would be a lot easier in a film camera, but the hassle and time
delays (and cost) of developing film makes film impractical.

Any clue where to find such a camera or to find someone who knows how to
modify one?

Look at a used Digital SLR. Anything which does not try to use
its display as a viewfinder should be pretty quick to turn on. And
maybe you can find one inexpensive enough. Do you want to put it in a
weatherproof housing -- or just bring it in when the weather threatens?

Good Luck,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

In article ,
"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

Hmm ... note that the thing which seems to slow down the
power-up cycle of most digital cameras is involved with the autofocus
and the "live view" display.

I don't need autofocus, I know the distance to a good enough approx.,
and I would not use the live view display. How do I look look a camera
that LACKS these common features?

But the longest that it can be set to stay powered up is 30
minutes, IIRC. Note that just a touch on the shutter release button (to
half-depressed) will wake it up as quickly.

A nuisance to be sure for remote opeation

The Digital SLRs happen to be the most expensive digital cameras
in general, so are probably not what you want.

True, the camera will be at risk from weather and vandals.

However -- what I would suggest is that you look at some of the
digital video cameras. You'll need a video capture card on your
computer to grab what it sends, of course, but it will stay on full
time. These cameras can be obtained for very little (IIRC, I got one --
uncased but with lens -- for about $25.00 at a hamfest last summer.
These are *made* to be security cameras.

Finding a video camera is easy, getting the signal 1000' and recording
it is tougher. I cannot simply capture the entire feed, often 24 hrs
goes by without a significant 'event'.

If you can involve a computer, and you simply watch and then hit
a button to tell it to save a picture -- this should do.

I want it principally when I CANNOT watch, when I'm sleeping or gone.

Look at a used Digital SLR. Anything which does not try to use
its display as a viewfinder should be pretty quick to turn on. And
maybe you can find one inexpensive enough. Do you want to put it in a
weatherproof housing -- or just bring it in when the weather threatens?

It will stay in the weather 24/365, I'll make a housing to protect it.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/