Do Red-Light cams show the light red as well as license plate photo?
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Congratulations, Paul Milligan
Next: Yamaha batteries
From: k_flynn on 23 Feb 2007 00:47 On Feb 22, 8:21 pm, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000- doll...(a)pobox.com> wrote: > On 22 Feb 2007 07:53:39 -0800, "k_fl...(a)lycos.com" <k_fl...(a)lycos.com> wrote: > > > > > > >On Feb 22, 7:52 am, Ben Kaufman <spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000- > >doll...(a)pobox.com> wrote: > >> On 21 Feb 2007 21:50:18 -0800, "k_fl...(a)lycos.com" <k_fl...(a)lycos.com> wrote: > > >> >On Feb 21, 6:57 pm, Calgary > >> ><actualrider_remove_the_obvio...(a)telus.net> wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:37:16 -0800, "brink" <b...(a)invalid.invalid> > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> >While we're on the subject, I'd like to know how the RLC differentiates > >> >> >between legal movements against a red light (specifically right turns on > >> >> >red) from illegal movements. Anyone? > > >> >> How about the direction of the car. > > >> >To answer both: The second photo. The first one shows the vehicle > >> >behind the intersection line when the light has turned red. The second > >> >is shot after the car has proceeded through sufficiently to show that > >> >it was going straight, not making a ROR. The photos are time-stamped > >> >to show the proper sequence. > > >> Whoa, that would be an awful lot of data to sift through at the end of the day. > > >You're kidding, right? It's not much data at all. There's no sifting > >at the end of the day. It's generated at the time, and it's two > >photos. My $100 digital camera time-stamps everything I shoot too. > > Maybe 400+ cars make a right on red during the day at a busy intersection? So > that's 800+ pictures that need to be analyzed, right? No. There are none. The system is supposed to be triggered by a vehicle going above a certain speed. Virtually no ROR turners would trigger it. On the off-chance that one does, the second photo would show the turn.
From: Calgary on 23 Feb 2007 01:02 On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 19:13:49 -0800, Timberwoof <timberwoof.spam(a)infernosoft.com> wrote: >In article <itist21kodls16rad9li8jmnct9kp3nvaj(a)4ax.com>, > Calgary <actualrider_remove_the_obvious_(a)telus.net> wrote: > >> On 22 Feb 2007 17:45:56 -0800, "k_flynn(a)lycos.com" <k_flynn(a)lycos.com> >> wrote: >> >> >Calgary wrote: >> >> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:34:30 -0800, Timberwoof >> >> <timberwoof.spam(a)infernosoft.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >Do these tickets cost points on your license? That will be even more >> >> >expensive. >> >> >> >> In Alberta we do not have license plates on the front of our vehicles, >> >> and because of that all pictures are taken from the rear with no view >> >> of the driver. Since the driver cannot be identified the financial >> >> responsibility for the ticket defaults to the owner, but since it >> >> can't be proven the owner was the driver there are no points levied to >> >> the license. >> > >> >That sounds strange; the lack of a front license plate doesn't >> >preclude you from taking a picture of the driver. >> >> Without adding a second camera it sure does. To get the plate, the >> car, the light and the driver all in one shot would require the >> picture be taken from the front, if we had front license plates. > >Taking the picture from the front makes it hard to see the traffic light >the car is facing. But it would capture the one going the other way and it wouldn't be difficult to establish they are synchronized, -- 24 hours in a day & 24 beer in a case Coincidence? I think not
From: k_flynn on 23 Feb 2007 01:03 On Feb 22, 7:09 pm, Calgary <actualrider_remove_the_obvio...(a)telus.net> wrote: > On 22 Feb 2007 17:45:56 -0800, "k_fl...(a)lycos.com" <k_fl...(a)lycos.com> > wrote: > > > > > > >Calgary wrote: > >> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:34:30 -0800, Timberwoof > >> <timberwoof.s...(a)infernosoft.com> wrote: > > >> >Do these tickets cost points on your license? That will be even more > >> >expensive. > > >> In Alberta we do not have license plates on the front of our vehicles, > >> and because of that all pictures are taken from the rear with no view > >> of the driver. Since the driver cannot be identified the financial > >> responsibility for the ticket defaults to the owner, but since it > >> can't be proven the owner was the driver there are no points levied to > >> the license. > > >That sounds strange; the lack of a front license plate doesn't > >preclude you from taking a picture of the driver. > > Without adding a second camera it sure does. That's why such systems will usually consist of two cameras on each approach, one to shoot the driver's face from the front, the other to catch the plate from the rear. > To get the plate, the > car, the light and the driver all in one shot would require the > picture be taken from the front, if we had front license plates. As I said, the lack of a front plate doesn't preclude having a camera that takes the driver's picture. It simply requires the second camera, which many such installations do have even in states that do have front plates.
From: k_flynn on 23 Feb 2007 01:04 On Feb 22, 8:13 pm, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...(a)infernosoft.com> wrote: > In article <itist21kodls16rad9li8jmnct9kp3n...(a)4ax.com>, > > > > > > Calgary <actualrider_remove_the_obvio...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > On 22 Feb 2007 17:45:56 -0800, "k_fl...(a)lycos.com" <k_fl...(a)lycos.com> > > wrote: > > > >Calgary wrote: > > >> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:34:30 -0800, Timberwoof > > >> <timberwoof.s...(a)infernosoft.com> wrote: > > > >> >Do these tickets cost points on your license? That will be even more > > >> >expensive. > > > >> In Alberta we do not have license plates on the front of our vehicles, > > >> and because of that all pictures are taken from the rear with no view > > >> of the driver. Since the driver cannot be identified the financial > > >> responsibility for the ticket defaults to the owner, but since it > > >> can't be proven the owner was the driver there are no points levied to > > >> the license. > > > >That sounds strange; the lack of a front license plate doesn't > > >preclude you from taking a picture of the driver. > > > Without adding a second camera it sure does. To get the plate, the > > car, the light and the driver all in one shot would require the > > picture be taken from the front, if we had front license plates. > > Taking the picture from the front makes it hard to see the traffic light > the car is facing. Two cameras are often used, one front and one rear.
From: Calgary on 23 Feb 2007 01:06
On 22 Feb 2007 22:03:17 -0800, "k_flynn(a)lycos.com" <k_flynn(a)lycos.com> wrote: > >As I said, the lack of a front plate doesn't preclude having a camera >that takes the driver's picture. It simply requires the second camera, >which many such installations do have even in states that do have >front plates. I would be interested in knowing which states employ the technology that way. Can you identify a few? -- 24 hours in a day & 24 beer in a case Coincidence? I think not |