Will IR Illuminator work with any CCD Camera?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by wdoe999@yahoo.com, Dec 31, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I want to setup some night surveillance cameras. I notice that some
    CCD night cameras have the IR LEDS right on the camera. Do these
    cameras have anything special about them that makes them work well with
    IR illumination (do they have circuitry to switch to B/W etc). The
    reason I ask is that I would prefer to use standard CCD cameras and a
    separate IR illuminator, and am wondering if they will work together
    properly. Thanks.
    , Dec 31, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Skywise Guest

    wrote in news:1167535711.108842.63610
    @n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

    > I want to setup some night surveillance cameras. I notice that some
    > CCD night cameras have the IR LEDS right on the camera. Do these
    > cameras have anything special about them that makes them work well with
    > IR illumination (do they have circuitry to switch to B/W etc). The
    > reason I ask is that I would prefer to use standard CCD cameras and a
    > separate IR illuminator, and am wondering if they will work together
    > properly. Thanks.


    You need to make sure the cameras do not have an IR cutoff filter.
    Being color, they most likely do. But check to be sure. If they
    don't have one, then they will work. If they do have the filter,
    you will need a LOT more IR to make it work.

    Brian
    --
    http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
    Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
    Skywise, Dec 31, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Unless you have a real need for obscurity, there's a much simpler (and usually less expensive) approach to covert CCTV. Speco makes
    a standard motion detector light with two flood lamps that come on for a couple of minutes any time someone walks by after dark.
    Most people are so accustomed to seeing these lights that they don't give them a second thought.

    What the subject won't know is that there's a camera mounted inside the motion detector. One advantage of this approach is that
    you'll get a much better, more detailed image with white (well, close to white) light than with IR. Another advantage is that when
    most people trigger those lights the first thing they do is look up directly at them. This will give you an excellent chance at
    recording the person's face.

    I might be a little biased in favor of Speco since I sell it online. However, I've used their cameras with good results on several
    of my own installations.

    --

    Regards,
    Robert L Bass

    =============================>
    Bass Home Electronics
    941-866-1100
    4883 Fallcrest Circle
    Sarasota · Florida · 34233
    http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
    =============================>


    > You need to make sure the cameras do not have an IR cutoff filter.
    > Being color, they most likely do. But check to be sure. If they
    > don't have one, then they will work. If they do have the filter,
    > you will need a LOT more IR to make it work.
    >
    > Brian
    Robert L Bass, Dec 31, 2006
    #3
  4. ray Guest

    On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 19:28:31 -0800, wdoe999 wrote:

    > I want to setup some night surveillance cameras. I notice that some
    > CCD night cameras have the IR LEDS right on the camera. Do these
    > cameras have anything special about them that makes them work well with
    > IR illumination (do they have circuitry to switch to B/W etc). The
    > reason I ask is that I would prefer to use standard CCD cameras and a
    > separate IR illuminator, and am wondering if they will work together
    > properly. Thanks.


    Simplest way to find out if a particular camera is IR sensitve: look at
    the lcd or evf while someone holds a TV remote and punches a few buttons
    for you - see if you can see the signal.
    ray, Dec 31, 2006
    #4
  5. Guest

    Thanks for the answers, that was quick. Looks like a had better not
    assume the camera will work with the illuminator, and had better check
    it.

    Just to elaborate...I'm trying to keep a sleek look on the house with
    no wall mounted lamps etc. I don't even want a small IR dome camera
    sitting under the soffit. I'd like to use bullit cameras and just have
    the tip sticking through a small hole in the soffit. Otherwise I'd use
    wall mounted motion lamps, or purpose-built IR daynight dome cameras
    mounted under the soffit.
    , Dec 31, 2006
    #5
  6. > I'd like to use bullit cameras and just have
    > the tip sticking through a small hole in the
    > soffit...


    You may find it difficult to aim the camera preciselt where you want it unless the hole is over sized. The other issue will be the
    illuminator. Anything powerful enough to give good video from more than a few feet away will require a fiarly large IR array. One
    of our vendors, Extreme CCTV, has a very informative website. They make a wide assortment of cameras and IR illuminators. Their
    hardware is about as good as it gets in this industry. Prices are not cheap. Here's their URL. I think you'll find it an
    interesting browse. There are sections of the site dedicated to IR illuminators, cameras and combination camera/illuminators.
    Being mostly a commercial / industrial CCTV maker, many of their products will your aesthetic requirements. If the range is
    satisfactory, you might want to consider their WZ series day/night cameras.

    http://www.extremecctv.com/products.php?producttype_id=10&whichpage=1

    I mentioned Speco in an earlier post. In addition to "covert" cameras, they make a number of bullet style cameras. One which you
    might find interesting is the HT-INTB2. This is an "intensifier" type of camera, designed for extremely low light operation. URL
    follows:

    http://www.specotech.com/cart/products/productDetails.asp?prodID=881

    These are just a couple of examples. There are lots to look at. Let me know if I can be of assistance.

    --

    Regards,
    Robert L Bass

    =============================>
    Bass Home Electronics
    941-866-1100
    4883 Fallcrest Circle
    Sarasota · Florida · 34233
    http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
    =============================>

















    Otherwise I'd use
    > wall mounted motion lamps, or purpose-built IR daynight dome cameras
    > mounted under the soffit.
    >
    Robert L Bass, Dec 31, 2006
    #6
  7. Shuckey Guest

    What hath ray wrought:


    > Simplest way to find out if a particular camera is IR sensitve: look at
    > the lcd or evf while someone holds a TV remote and punches a few buttons
    > for you - see if you can see the signal.


    How is the remote's infrared light changed (modulated?) into visible light?

    [FuT sci.electronics.basics]

    Hrvoje Bratanic AKA Shuckey AKA Crtowat AKA No-Fun

    --
    Casting his shadow, weaving his spell
    Funny clothes, tinkling bell.
    Shuckey, Dec 31, 2006
    #7
  8. ray wrote:
    > On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 19:28:31 -0800, wdoe999 wrote:
    >
    > Simplest way to find out if a particular camera is IR sensitve: look at
    > the lcd or evf while someone holds a TV remote and punches a few buttons
    > for you - see if you can see the signal.


    This is not a good test. The IR from a remote control is very bright.
    It can be seen by cameras with an IR filter installed.

    Just check with the camera manufacturer that there us no IR filter
    present.

    Please visit my web site at www.richardfisher.com
    Helpful person, Dec 31, 2006
    #8
  9. Tom Matigan Guest

    On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 19:28:31 -0800, wdoe999 wrote:

    > I want to setup some night surveillance cameras. I notice that some CCD
    > night cameras have the IR LEDS right on the camera. Do these cameras
    > have anything special about them that makes them work well with IR
    > illumination (do they have circuitry to switch to B/W etc). The reason
    > I ask is that I would prefer to use standard CCD cameras and a separate
    > IR illuminator, and am wondering if they will work together properly.
    > Thanks.




    B+W surveillance cameras generally see very well with infrared. I use
    Sony SSC M383's and am pretty impressed with their IR performance.

    The one thing you will find is that many people who sell IR illuminators
    tend to flat-out lie about their performance (think used car salesmen).
    For example, they will tell you that illuminator X has a range of 50 feet.
    When you plug it in, you find the useable range is less than 15 feet.

    Before buying, get *written* performance info so that you are on the same
    page as the salesman. If they say the range is 50 feet, force them to
    tell you exactly what the exact performance is at that range.

    My best performer is a forced air-cooled 500 watt flood with an opaque IR
    filter.
    Tom Matigan, Dec 31, 2006
    #9
  10. > The one thing you will find is that many
    > people who sell IR illuminators tend to
    > flat-out lie about their performance
    > (think used car salesmen).


    One source of confusion is that the camera manufacturers' literature often cites as range the maximum distance for "usable video."
    The problem with this is usable video equates to "you can see something happening out there." If your only purpose is to know that
    something is happening but you don't care what it is or whjo is doing it, that would be ok.

    > My best performer is a forced air-cooled
    > 500 watt flood with an opaque IR filter.


    Sunlight also works well. :^)

    --

    Regards,
    Robert L Bass

    =============================>
    Bass Home Electronics
    941-866-1100
    4883 Fallcrest Circle
    Sarasota · Florida · 34233
    http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
    =============================>
    Robert L Bass, Dec 31, 2006
    #10
  11. redbelly Guest

    Helpful person wrote:
    > ray wrote:
    > > On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 19:28:31 -0800, wdoe999 wrote:
    > >
    > > Simplest way to find out if a particular camera is IR sensitve: look at
    > > the lcd or evf while someone holds a TV remote and punches a few buttons
    > > for you - see if you can see the signal.

    >
    > This is not a good test. The IR from a remote control is very bright.
    > It can be seen by cameras with an IR filter installed.


    If so, one could aim the remote at the wall or a sheet of paper,
    instead of directly at the camera. If the camera sees a bright spot on
    the wall, then it can see IR.

    Just tried this with my own camera, which I'm pretty sure has an IR
    filter. It sees a bright flash when a remote is pointed directly at
    it, but nothing shows up when both the camera and remote are pointed at
    a sheet of paper.

    > Just check with the camera manufacturer that there us no IR filter
    > present.


    That also works, unless you get some sales yahoo that doesn't know
    anything that's not listed in the general camera specs.

    Shuckey wrote:

    > How is the remote's infrared light changed (modulated?) into visible light?


    It isn't. The camera either can or cannot detect the IR from the
    remote. If it can, a person will know it by looking at the camera's
    LCD monitor.

    Mark
    redbelly, Dec 31, 2006
    #11
  12. Don Guest

    "redbelly" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > That also works, unless you get some sales yahoo that doesn't know
    > anything that's not listed in the general camera specs.


    you've read posts from rlb too?
    Don, Dec 31, 2006
    #12
  13. On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 13:11:41 -0500, Robert L Bass wrote:

    >> The one thing you will find is that many
    >> people who sell IR illuminators tend to
    >> flat-out lie about their performance
    >> (think used car salesmen).

    >
    > One source of confusion is that the camera manufacturers' literature often cites as range the maximum distance for "usable video."
    > The problem with this is usable video equates to "you can see something happening out there." If your only purpose is to know that
    > something is happening but you don't care what it is or whjo is doing it, that would be ok.
    >
    >> My best performer is a forced air-cooled
    >> 500 watt flood with an opaque IR filter.

    >
    > Sunlight also works well. :^)


    As I understand it, the reason for including an IR filter is that the
    focal planes for IR and visible light are different enough that there's
    a noticeable blur in the image if both sources are present, as in
    sunlight.

    I don't know to what extent this can be corrected by an achromatic
    lens as is used to correct for chromatic aberation on quality visible
    light cameras.
    Charles Sullivan, Jan 1, 2007
    #13
  14. Charles Sullivan wrote:

    > As I understand it, the reason for including an IR filter is that the
    > focal planes for IR and visible light are different enough that there's
    > a noticeable blur in the image if both sources are present, as in
    > sunlight.
    >
    > I don't know to what extent this can be corrected by an achromatic
    > lens as is used to correct for chromatic aberation on quality visible
    > light cameras.


    There is another basic reason to filter out IR. What color
    do you assign to its signal? It represents illumination
    you can't see, so no matter what you do with it, it distorts
    the visible representation of the scene. The more
    expensive the camera (assuming it is designed to capture
    visible images), the more likely that it will include a
    short pass filter to block light that silicon can see that
    you cannot. Cheap cameras that have none usually show the
    IR as green, for some reason. Possibly an artifact of the
    non-ideal bandpass characteristic of the narrow band green
    filter.
    John Popelish, Jan 1, 2007
    #14
  15. On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 21:05:29 -0500, John Popelish wrote:

    > Charles Sullivan wrote:
    >
    >> As I understand it, the reason for including an IR filter is that the
    >> focal planes for IR and visible light are different enough that there's
    >> a noticeable blur in the image if both sources are present, as in
    >> sunlight.
    >>
    >> I don't know to what extent this can be corrected by an achromatic
    >> lens as is used to correct for chromatic aberation on quality visible
    >> light cameras.

    >
    > There is another basic reason to filter out IR. What color
    > do you assign to its signal? It represents illumination
    > you can't see, so no matter what you do with it, it distorts
    > the visible representation of the scene. The more
    > expensive the camera (assuming it is designed to capture
    > visible images), the more likely that it will include a
    > short pass filter to block light that silicon can see that
    > you cannot. Cheap cameras that have none usually show the
    > IR as green, for some reason. Possibly an artifact of the
    > non-ideal bandpass characteristic of the narrow band green
    > filter.


    Good point!!!
    Charles Sullivan, Jan 1, 2007
    #15
  16. J. Clarke Guest

    On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 20:33:51 -0500, Charles Sullivan wrote:

    > On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 13:11:41 -0500, Robert L Bass wrote:
    >
    >>> The one thing you will find is that many
    >>> people who sell IR illuminators tend to
    >>> flat-out lie about their performance
    >>> (think used car salesmen).

    >>
    >> One source of confusion is that the camera manufacturers' literature often cites as range the maximum distance for "usable video."
    >> The problem with this is usable video equates to "you can see something happening out there." If your only purpose is to know that
    >> something is happening but you don't care what it is or whjo is doing it, that would be ok.
    >>
    >>> My best performer is a forced air-cooled
    >>> 500 watt flood with an opaque IR filter.

    >>
    >> Sunlight also works well. :^)

    >
    > As I understand it, the reason for including an IR filter is that the
    > focal planes for IR and visible light are different enough that there's
    > a noticeable blur in the image if both sources are present, as in
    > sunlight.
    >
    > I don't know to what extent this can be corrected by an achromatic
    > lens as is used to correct for chromatic aberation on quality visible
    > light cameras.


    In the days when manual focus was the norm, any decent lens had markings
    on it for IR focus as well as visible light. There wasn't a huge
    difference usually but it was there. At the time the filter wasn't an
    issue--most film didn't have much IR sensitivity--if you wanted IR you had
    to use IR film. With digital cameras it's not that simple because you
    can't change the sensor--the manufacturer either has to put in the IR
    filter and remove most of the IR capability from the camera or he has to
    leave it off and field the complaints from the people who don't understand
    that using an IR blocking filter on their lenses is the price they have to
    pay for an IR-capable camera.

    I don't know the best solution to that problem or even if there is one--a
    built-in filter that can be easily field-removed would be one option but
    that has its own issues.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
    J. Clarke, Jan 1, 2007
    #16
  17. redbelly Guest

    Don wrote:
    > "redbelly" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > That also works, unless you get some sales yahoo that doesn't know
    > > anything that's not listed in the general camera specs.

    >
    > you've read posts from rlb too?


    Don't know which group "rlb" refers to. No, it's just my general
    experience that if you want technical details that aren't listed in a
    product's published spec sheet, they often aren't known by either the
    first person (receptionist) or second person (sales or other "customer
    interface" person) whom you talk to on the phone.

    Maybe I'm wrong in this case, and decent sales people know which of
    their cameras have IR filters and which don't.

    Mark
    redbelly, Jan 1, 2007
    #17
  18. Brian Guest

    Charles Sullivan wrote:
    ....
    >
    > As I understand it, the reason for including an IR filter is that the
    > focal planes for IR and visible light are different enough that there's
    > a noticeable blur in the image if both sources are present, as in
    > sunlight.


    There is a more serious problem, and that is the fact that silicon is
    transmissive in the near infrared (it is opaque in the visible). That
    means that the NIR radiation falling on one pixel will travel through
    the detector material and light up adjacent pixels, degrading the MTF.
    There is nothing a lens can do to fix that, you just have to filter it
    out.

    Brian
    Ancient and Modern Optics
    Brian, Jan 1, 2007
    #18
  19. > I don't know to what extent this can be corrected by an achromatic
    > lens as is used to correct for chromatic aberation on quality visible
    > light cameras.


    Probably not al all.

    --

    Regards,
    Robert L Bass

    =============================>
    Bass Home Electronics
    941-866-1100
    4883 Fallcrest Circle
    Sarasota · Florida · 34233
    http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
    =============================>
    Robert L Bass, Jan 2, 2007
    #19
  20. Louis Boyd Guest

    Robert L Bass wrote:
    >>I don't know to what extent this can be corrected by an achromatic
    >>lens as is used to correct for chromatic aberation on quality visible
    >>light cameras.


    Telephoto assemblies made of mirrors only such as Cassegrain designs
    have no color aberrations and work well with silicon CCDs over their
    full wavelength range for long focal lengths. Schmidt Cassegrain,
    Maksutov, and Ritchie Chretien designs have with weak corrector lenses
    little chromatic aberrations. Very fast (F/1.0) catadioptric designs
    exist with wide spectral range and flat fields are used for night vision
    devices. There are also fast zoom lenses (non mirror) specifically
    designed to have good correction from 400 to 950 nm for night
    surveillance cameras.
    Louis Boyd, Jan 2, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bob Sanderson

    Minolta 5600 HS - Should I see the AF Illuminator?

    Bob Sanderson, Aug 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    394
    borge
    Aug 18, 2003
  2. Puneet Tanwar
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    388
  3. Hans Geurtsen

    Minolta DiMAGE Z1 and AF illuminator on Program Flash 3600

    Hans Geurtsen, Oct 5, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    581
    Hans Geurtsen
    Oct 27, 2003
  4. Miguel Gonzalez

    Tech Ques: About 1-ccd, 3-ccd, sensor filters, etc

    Miguel Gonzalez, Jun 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,252
    Dave Haynie
    Jun 6, 2004
  5. Networking Student
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,297
    vreyesii
    Nov 16, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page