From: pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net   
      
   On 09/26/2014 03:43 PM, RichD wrote:   
   > On September 19, Phil Hobbs wrote:   
   >>>> a few outdoor >> surveillance cameras, primarily   
   >>>> intended for night security. The problem is, the   
   >>>> lighting is quite dim, such that no human witness could   
   >>>> reliably testify to an intruder's identity. Are there   
   >>>> cameras that operate better than the human eye, in such   
   >>>> circumstances?   
   >>   
   >>> CCD's "see" down to ~1um. But that doesn't help all   
   >>> that much if there is no light to reflect off something.   
   >>   
   >> There are low light CCD cameras intended for amateur   
   >> astronomy. Watec makes good ones for not much dough.   
   >> You do trade off some response speed, of course.   
   >   
   > For security, you need some reasonable sample   
   > time.  Let's say you record an inage every 2   
   > seconds, integrating.  The light is too dim   
   > for reliable human identification.  Are there   
   > cameras more sensitive, providing more detail,   
   > than the human eye?   
   >   
   > It's a simple question.   
   >   
   > --   
   > Rich   
   >   
   >   
   Sure.   
      
   Cheers   
      
   Phil Hobbs   
      
   --   
   Dr Philip C D Hobbs   
   Principal Consultant   
   ElectroOptical Innovations LLC   
   Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics   
      
   160 North State Road #203   
   Briarcliff Manor NY 10510   
      
   hobbs at electrooptical dot net   
   http://electrooptical.net   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)