|
Leperflesh posted:https://www.massdrop.com/buy/blacksys-ch100b-2ch-dash-camera The bit rate is pretty low. there are some that are pushing 14mbps or higher for 1080P recording (mini 0803/5/6. the feature set is otherwise nice.
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
speedtek posted:A dashcam thread! Neat! I looked at the last few pages and didn't see if anyone else is using a smart phone - I have my old Bionic that I never bothered to sell, so I got a mount, installed Caroo and it works like a charm. Is it a problem that I op not to have it record audio? I don't see why it would be necessary... Audio can help. I would definitely enable it. In most cases you would be able to remove it in case you decide after the fact that you don't want to provide the audio to law enforcement, insurance or court. It helps to pick up on the fact that you used your turn signal, didn't accelerate, couldn't possibly hear a siren, conversation after an accident, reading out aloud a plate number in case it is not visible in the video after the fact etc. Is there a reason for not wanting to record audio? I can only come up with privacy in case your videos are confiscated. Mo Hawk fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Aug 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
Mo Hawk posted:In most cases you would be able to remove it in case you decide after the fact that you donÄt want to provide the audio to law enforcement, insurance or court. quote:Is there a reason for not wanting to record audio? I can only come up with privacy in case your videos are confiscated. US Federal law only requires one party consent, which pretty much means you're in the clear to record your own conversations without explicit permission from the other parties. IIRC most states follow this rule, I know for sure Ohio does. Some states have stricter laws though, where all parties being recorded must consent. This is why most national companies will put the "this call may be recorded" message in their phone system. IIRC Illinois is one of the states with the strictest laws. Even if you're in a one party state things can still get grey. If the other people in the car start conversing between themselves where you're not involved, your previously legal recording under one party consent may have just become illegal eavesdropping. Same if someone gets in a cell phone conversation. IANAL, you can figure that out on your own. That said, I keep my audio recording enabled. I drive almost exclusively in a one-party consent state with between zero and one passengers, so the situations where it's potentially illegal are few and far between.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Wow, that's not something I had considered before. While I am in Europe I had not thought to look that up yet. I guess the chances of either the first scenario happening or the second one being enforced by law are tiny, but I am now interested and shall research.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
That's a point that comes up frequently with this, but you need to bear in mind: If you're recording audio, you always have the option of deleting the audio before attempting to submit as evidence. If you're not recording audio, you don't have the option of adding it back. There are certainly conversations you could record that you would need/want to remove, but there are more often conversations (or auditory events) that you would want to capture - yourself reading a license plate number, screeching tires, etc. I cannot imagine a scenario where a cop, however, is going to go "Wait, you're recording audio? DID YOU GET CONSENT?". It's a question that gets asked when something is submitted into evidence in court, not something that traffic officers concern themselves with. wolrah posted:One could imagine an overzealous prosecutor or opposing lawyer finding this out and accusing you of tampering with the evidence, which would be technically correct. Krakkles fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Aug 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
Jesus gently caress, do not delete audio that exists on a video for something that might go to court. Source: being a law talking guy. I don't record audio because CA vehicle code has explict notice requirements if a dashcam is recording audio, and I curse a lot. Edit: don't give the non-audio version to the defense either with a plan to "give the audio one to them if they demand it."
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
I had a cop pull my camera, go through it and delete it during a roadside dui check (where they set it up, they didn't pull just me over)
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
jonathan posted:I had a cop pull my camera, go through it and delete it during a roadside dui check (where they set it up, they didn't pull just me over) This would be illegal in the US. Dunno about Canadia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
nm posted:This would be illegal in the US. Dunno about Canadia. It's illegal here also. Cops don't care about laws.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
That's why I got the A118. It's nearly invisible behind the blue sun shade line during the day. At night, it's like it's not even there. Never tell ANYONE you have a camera.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
nm posted:I don't record audio because CA vehicle code has explict notice requirements if a dashcam is recording audio, and I curse a lot. Same, except "talk back to podcasts and sing along tunelessly to The Smiths"
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
nm posted:Jesus gently caress, do not delete audio that exists on a video for something that might go to court. It would be nice if dashcams would have the option to record the audio and video concurrently but to separate files. That way, you're not tampering with anything if you submit just the video file as evidence, but you can provide both files if it would help your case. Or is this not how it works?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
ChickenOfTomorrow posted:"sing along tunelessly to The Smiths"
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
Raluek posted:It would be nice if dashcams would have the option to record the audio and video concurrently but to separate files. That way, you're not tampering with anything if you submit just the video file as evidence, but you can provide both files if it would help your case. If you intentionally misrepresent there being no audio, you're going to be in a world of hurt. I would interpret submitting a video only in that situation as doing that. In formal discovery, they're going to ask for all audio and video anyhow, so if you don't provide the audio, you've hidden evidence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Raluek posted:Or is this not how it works? I am not a lawyer, but: in pretty much every case, when a layperson attempts to narrowly interpret the letter of the law in their favor in order to get away with something, they wind up gravely disappointed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 07:40
|
|
|
Excuse me, I am not a layperson because a person is bound by your government's laws. I am an individual and I did not consent to your government therefore I am not guilty. Case dismissed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
nm posted:If you intentionally misrepresent there being no audio, you're going to be in a world of hurt. I would interpret submitting a video only in that situation as doing that. I'm not going to remove any audio (and I didn't, when I gave video evidence to my insurance company last year), but I usually listen to music in the car, so it's extremely limited how much outside audio the mic is going to pick up anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:I'm not going to remove any audio (and I didn't, when I gave video evidence to my insurance company last year), but I usually listen to music in the car, so it's extremely limited how much outside audio the mic is going to pick up anyway. Audio does have the potential to change the context of the accident, like that guy yelling DO IT to that truck that was merging on the highway. omitting the audio makes it much less obvious that he is fully aware of the truck and what is potentially going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 11:51
|
|
|
Laserface posted:Audio does have the potential to change the context of the accident, like that guy yelling DO IT to that truck that was merging on the highway. omitting the audio makes it much less obvious that he is fully aware of the truck and what is potentially going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:Easy answer: Don't do dumb poo poo like that. In California, I would actually worry about the admissibility of video with audio without the posted notices required by the vehicle code. My gut (having not done any real research) says it would probably get in, with the audio stripped but why take a chance? California has very strict wiretapping laws, which I would argue are even stronger re: dashcams, and both criminal prosecution (which won't happen unless a passenger complains) and suppression are remedies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
Just have every passenger sign a waiver upon vehicle entry. This isn't difficult, guys.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
I'm thinking of starting up a dashcam Facebook page for my city, because it's small enough that blasting someone on FB here has real life consequences, and the drivers here aren't bad, they just don't care about the laws.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
nm posted:In California, I would actually worry about the admissibility of video with audio without the posted notices required by the vehicle code. My gut (having not done any real research) says it would probably get in, with the audio stripped but why take a chance? California has very strict wiretapping laws, which I would argue are even stronger re: dashcams, and both criminal prosecution (which won't happen unless a passenger complains) and suppression are remedies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
jonathan posted:I had a cop pull my camera, go through it and delete it during a roadside dui check (where they set it up, they didn't pull just me over) NOTE: After someone "deletes" files of your dashcam, camera, whatever, leave the device off and do not record video or take new pictures with it. Best case scenario you have a second microsd card and stick that one in instead. Upon returning home you google "undelete sd card" and you will find all your files intact. This will work in absolutely most cases. Did it many times after accidentally deleting the wrong directory or having friends do the same. Even works if they select "delete all" or "format" the card in-camera. There are the excellent PhotoRec and TestDisk for example. Many alternatives out there as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Just have every passenger sign a waiver upon vehicle entry. This isn't difficult, guys. I still doubt whether any court would reject video evidence because of a missing waiver. In addition to that I really wonder how many different ways of incriminating yourself via audio there are. Talking on the phone? Loudly daring other drivers to provoke you? I just cannot come up with a scenario which might make audio recording so risky. Not that I care whether one does or does not record, just stating that I prefer to do. What I would potentially be more worried about is that if my dashcam/sdcard was taken from the car by e.g. the police after an accident, that someone might use other footage also present on that sdcard to try to pick an instance where I might have gone 10kmph over or something similar to try and establish that I was somehow not driving safe that day. Not exactly worried at this point though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Again I am not a lawyer, but note: The laws in the US about recording without permission relate to recording conversations "in private"; e.g., they apply to things said by you and your passengers inside your car, and potentially to things you say to someone as you discuss them while you're in your car. For example, if someone were to approach your car and have a conversation with you while you were stopped, but they were unaware you were recording what they said. But there is a general assumption that things said and done "in public" have no presumption of privacy - so, you can take photos of people as they walk down a public street, without their explicit consent, and you can publish those photos. Likewise with sound. Those laws have no effect on, say, you recording an accident including audio. Especially if the audio records the sound of their tires screeching as they slam on the brakes just out of frame, or record the sound of a siren as an ambulance approaches an intersection from out of frame, or record the sound of you declaring loudly "poo poo my brakes aren't working oh god the brakes aren't working the brakes aren't working" just before you hit something at near full speed. There are plenty of possibilities where the audio would be helpful (or harmful) to your case, or just to help reconstruct an accident. The sounds that aren't someone having a conversation with you are totally legit to record. And, a court is not (or even the most likely) way your dashcam video might be used. I think the most likely scenario is using your dashcam video to support your case with your own or another party's insurance company. For example, you could present your dashcam video to another party's insurance that is refusing to pay a claim for your damages. Often if another driver is lying about what happened, having video including intact audio could potentially convince the driver's representative that you're the one telling the truth. If you're in a one-party consent state, as long as you're part of the conversation, you should be 100% fine recording audio. If you're in a two-party consent state, I think you should still record audio, but get permission audibly when your passengers are in the vehicle - you don't need them to sign a form if you just tell them "hey my dashcam is recording audio, is that OK?" and record that. Obviously if they say no, then you have to mute. So the only area where I think you're possibly in trouble is if you're in a two-party consent state and you're recording audio and then you unexpectedly have a conversation with someone without the opportunity to inform them that you're recording. Say, a road rage incident? But I bet if they're screaming obscenities at you and pummeling your car with a tire iron, their behavior is sufficiently public that it doesn't qualify as a "private conversation" and you'd be OK. Regardless, I'd rather run the very remote risk of being sued for nonconsentual conversation-recording, then just always have my audio recording turned off, and have it miss some important noises during an incident.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
http://deals.kinja.com/todays-best-deals-anker-earbuds-belkin-surgeplus-cor-1785938586 Deal of the day has a Vantrue N1 Mini for $60 with promo code BH2F9URO. Worth it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Any recommendations for a good bolt on back-up camera, preferably one that is android compatible?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
I'm planning on buying a dashcam myself, and have mostly narrowed down the options to the Rexing V1 or A119 w/ GPS. I like the idea of having the GPS built-in, but the other one seems to have better reviews. (Some of the A119's seem to be tainted by people who didn't get the GPS one, though?) Are there any particular pitfalls to watch out for? I'd have to figure out how to wire them up too, since having a USB cable dangling down from the mirror would probably be obnoxious.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:You're right, but the law also says it can only record 30seconds before and after a triggering event, so having any video that doesn't meet that definition at all could be arguable. Which would be most dashcams - ones that meet this definition are certainly available, but most of the cams people in this thread are using don't. That part of the dashcam law is less troubling because only only wiretapping leads to supression. With an explict notice provision, there is an arguemnt that not following that is wiretappiong. You don't have the same arguement with recording too long because video without audio is not wiretapping. You might get it in, you might not. I'd rather have no audio at all than risk an admissability fight. You're welcome to do what you want but as a private person who happens to have a bar card, that's the choice I've made.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
nm posted:That part of the dashcam law is less troubling because only only wiretapping leads to supression. With an explict notice provision, there is an arguemnt that not following that is wiretappiong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
Crossposting from the schadenfreude thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fd8nX8-Gbk
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Handiklap posted:Crossposting from the schadenfreude thread: I don't even see what I'm supposed to be looking at.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Kazy posted:I don't even see what I'm supposed to be looking at. A truck runs a red light and gets immediately lit up by a cop.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
Black pickup in oncoming traffic blows a red light, car behind him was an undercover cop. efb
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
Neither am I. He kept driving on past the camera's field of view. Edit: Shere posted:Black pickup in oncoming traffic blows a red light, car behind him was an undercover cop. Oh, I thought it was the white car pulling left on red.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
Sorry if it wasn't clear. Driver in the white car was waiting to clear the intersection and would have been t-boned had they not noticed the truck blowing the red.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
Funny, I caught nearly the exact same thing this past winter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhD3eOLAgHk
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
From a couple years back, http://i.imgur.com/ZXdZbrv.mp4 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2663787/Horror-moment-crazed-Jeep-driver-crashes-parked-truck-walks-away-alive.html
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
speedtek posted:Funny, I caught nearly the exact same thing this past winter: I wish I could show this to a coworker of mine who just left two months ago. He doesn't believe me that Ohio drivers are bad. For context, I live in Taiwan, which is the furthest I've been able to remove myself from the hell that is NE Ohio. My ex-coworker thinks Taiwanese drivers are the worst in the world. He absolutely refused to believe me when I said that Ohio drivers probably have Taiwan beat. He even said "I drove through Ohio, all of their drivers are great!" This, after I told them I had actually lived there, and my poor car was involved in 4 accidents in as many years (one even being my own grandparents backing into my car)! I've never had an accident anywhere else! Even here in Taiwan!
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2016 16:36
|
|
