I mean, wouldn’t be easier to identify someone (following a theft) when they aren’t a mess of blurred pixels? How much more could it possibly cost if the footage is constantly going to hard drive anyway?
- How to get the lcd tv logo off a samsung tv?
- “Custom” Semi Truck Sleeper Interior
- McFly RadioActive Tour HD – The Last Song
- is the samsung projection television sp42q2hl1 hd ready?
- Hak5 – Homebrew Multitouch
- How could I rotate an HD video without degrading the quality?
- Gül?en – Sözde Ayr?l?k – (HD)
- Cobra 29 LX LE 50th Anniversary Edition Review by CBRadioMagazine
- Ekstasis Kaf – Besame ( Official Video HD)
- | CODUL LUI ORESTE | 11.IUN.2011 | ANTENA 2 HD | LIVE
It’s true that it’s too costly, maintenance-wise, to do that now, in retail. But national security agencies already use HiDef. It’s just a matter of transmission, compression, and, to some extent, probably auto-analysis (why store a picture of an empty street?). Eventually it will be cheap enough for retail. Note how Walmart is just this week announcing that it is putting RFIDs in all clothing. RFID has been around for a decade.
do you have any idea how much hard drive space it would take up to store 24 hours a day / 7 days a week of hi def video?
most store owners arn’t idiots, they would rather have 30 days of decent video then 6 hours of high-def video.
1 hour of high def video is > 5gigs of hard drive space.
High def. would cost more, and take more memory to keep all the video/photos, leading to a lesser amount of time saved. Most stores save their data for 3 months, usually long enough, and in good enough quality, to get a decent picture of any criminals.