charlie6

Take a look at www.security-camera-warehouse.com.

No you didn't !!

No

Is there a best domestic cctv ? as in the best.

In thirty or more years my current readings have been in that region, not always, but more often than not. The reason for mentioning this is to ensure that the reading for the OP is not abnormally low.

Might be worth checking the battery charging current, nominally 500mA or thereabouts. Also a current limiting resistor gone high value, look for burn marks around resistors in that area.

Peter, thankyou for your valuable comments. I totally agree with everything you have said, and for that matter the observations of every contributor(too numerous to recall their names)should be applauded. If the implication is such that CCTV operators are not allowed to record audio according to the 'regulations' imposed upon that 'field' then you have reassured myself in some respects. However, it would be appreciated were you to accept that I have no intention of 'back-tracking'. My view is such that 'yobbos' congregating at the rear of the property (originating post)should, emphasis on should, be recorded complete with audio ... voice recognition is a favourable tool in the police armoury. Throughout these posts I have included actual and hypothetical situations where it is perceived that litigation is unlikely, and never has, arisen in the circumstances highlighted by myself. I am sure you are aware, however,that the industry manufactures cameras complete with audio facilities costing hundreds of pounds, and in so doing they recognise this 'need' in certain environments. As a member pointed out, this is not a forum for legal advice but perhaps it is worth adding that there are 'loopholes' within the legal environment which may be 'persuasive' although the audio may not be accepted as evidence inside the actual courtroom. I am not allowed to discuss the latter comment further.

Hello Admin2, Thankyou for your reply.

Had to look back through quite a few recordings for this one.... and make a few enquiries into the bargain.. During a shoot of a school sports day I have a few private conversations (in part) recorded... The camera does not dwell on individuals 'chatting' when there are other scenes which need capturing..Two people having thier 'private conversation' in public is not, unfortunately, private..they are in a public place in the full knowledge that others may overhear them talking. These 'chats' are captured unintentionally and may or may not be used for 'cut in' to the next scene or else 'cut aways'... lasting all of three to five seconds. The remainder of that conversation is of no use and ends up 'on the cutting room floor'. Consider a situation where an argument is taking place between a parking warden and an irate motorist, this may be regarded as a private conversation between two people, nonetheless they are in a public place and being filmed. The parking warden tells me to stop filming, I refuse and he attempts to 'grab' my camera... He is committing an offence..I am not. The subsequent film may be produced in evidence or may be uploaded etc... see Stone's 'Unseen History of America' dvd set. However, if I intentionally film a personal conversation carried on by perfectly innocent people with the prospect of uploading, using in a derogatory manner, for personal gain, and so on then it may be construed as an offence..For action to be taken on this wise.. the resultant film content of two apparently innocent members of the public must be of a duration where there can be no doubt that my actions have infringed their rights viz; data protection, human rights etc. In conclusion, where I choose to film a public place from a position within the boundary of my property whilst any persons present therein are not aware of my actions, as a general rule of thumb no offence is seen to take place...so go ahead and use audio... Finally, 'secret filming' (of say a person's bedroom) is a criminal offence.

Hi Admin2, Thanks for your comments (and everyone else's for that matter). You raise an interesting point regarding 'privacy of conversation' and I am not sure that I can a case on the matter for the moment. In principle therefore, I tend to agree with you..but my jury is still out..need time to think about it. Charlie6

Hello, Just glancing at a few older posts, came across this one. I appreciate that this is not a forum for legal matters, but cctv installers are, or at least should be, aware of the issues. I have been a videographer for years filming in high streets, events, major theme parks etc. both here and in America. Since the 'paedophile' issue emerged some years ago I was reluctanct for a while to video just about anything, not even a sparrow. Frustrated, I telephoned the police to ask for their views...and this is the current status unless there are updates to the law. You can film anywhere in a public place, and since my cameras obviously have inbuilt sound recording there is no obligation to Mute. Therefore video is complete with sound...obvious really, or else what is the point of a video camera. The area beyond the garden is, in this case, a public place so go ahead and video..complete with sound. You may not film the property of your neighbour without their consent, However, if you are experiencing problems, such as damage to your own fence or garden you may point a camera at your fence...if by some accident it happens to be sited such that perpetrators are observed offending...it is purely accidental that the camera happened to be wrongly positioned and filmed the offence being commited. Councils, Housing associations and the police are interested in footage of this nature. Take Care.