SF Security Cameras kind of suck...

So everyone who has been to the Mission District in San Francisco has probably seen the SF Police Department "Security Cameras" ... They're not exactly hidden, as they are seemingly conventional-looking, full sized cameras in weatherproof housings with bright blue strobe lights announcing their presence to everyone who isn't blind.

I always thought that the cameras were hooked up in the usual fashion, same as most department stores or ATM's, with a DVR keeping data for a set amount of time, a reasonable resolution, and a reasonable (for a security camera) refresh rate. Normal video is just slightly lower than 30 frames per second in the US - this is what we watch on TV and is generally regarded as a good rate for convincing the human eye of true motion. Security cameras generally run at a slower rate, so that they may be recorded without using up too much storage space on whatever recording device they may be using. Most of the security set up's that I have seen run around 5-10 frames per second. Although the video looks choppy, you can still see all that's going on at any given point in time. The SFPD system has been known to run at less than ONE frame for every TWO seconds! I could run across the intersection between the refresh rate on that system! So the question must be asked: As a taxpayer (although I am not registered to pay income tax here, I still pay a higher sales tax rate than the rest of the Bay Area) what exactly are my dollars going towards? One arrest in 19 months of operation in the busiest crime intersection in the city?!?

Not good enough I say - it's time for San Francisco to step up, admit their mistakes, and fix them.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/28/MN37TKH6O.DTL

~Greg Mullin