Topic: New Port Richey, FL Webcam from 70ft high

[Bluthunder2k]

Hi everyone...

After spending hours reseaching the best options, I finally got my webcam and installed it today.  A big thanks to this forum, comments and suggestions helped guide me to the final product.

http://www.aprsfl.net/cam

The cam is 70ft off the ground on at tower.   Has a beautiful view of Downtown New Port Richey, out to the edge of the Gulf of Mexico.   We're about 25 miles north west of Tampa on Florida's west coast.

The cam itself is a StarDot Netcam XL, and I can't say enough good things about the image quality with the auto iris lens.  Even at night, the image is incredible.

Give the cam a look at, and let me know what you think.

 

**UPDATE 02/09:  Cam now has both Java and Flash live image viewing options, as well as a sky "legend" of what is in the view...

[SlowModem]

Clear, sharp looking picture here on FF and IE 7.  I couldn't get the streaming pictures to work in either browser (just a gray box with a red x in the upper left corner).  The 30-hour timelapse worked well.  I'll try to remember to look at it in the day time tomorrow.

[Bluthunder2k]

Clear, sharp looking picture here on FF and IE 7.  I couldn't get the streaming pictures to work in either browser (just a gray box with a red x in the upper left corner).  The 30-hour timelapse worked well.  I'll try to remember to look at it in the day time tomorrow.

Hmm.  Just a java applet, do you have Java enabled?   

I've tested it on 3 different machines (Windows, CentOS, and a Mac) and it's coming up on all three in both FF and IE...

Let me know if it's some extra security beyond default you have on so I can put a note reminding folks about it.

I guess I could also look at putting up Dr West's shockwave viewer too so the option for Java or Shockwave is available.

Thanks for the input!!!

[SlowModem]

I really couldn't tell you why it's not working.  It's probably on my end.  Don't go changing things until you hear from others.

[Albuquerque Weather]

Congrats

All works fine here

[Sigdigit]

Looks good!  I just tried the time lapse.  About how much for a stardot?  I'm using a Panasonic IP cam I got for 70 something bucks.  I may upgrade down the road, but not if it's gonna be crazy expensive.

[Bluthunder2k]

Ok everyone, based on the thought I try to write the entire website so it will work on all browsers....

I've added Dr Tim West's CamFlash as a option to view the camera too.  So now you can view a static image, the stream via Java -or- Flash, and the timelapse.   Both also in 640X480 or 320X240 sizes.   So for those with older Java installs, or higher security options in their browser that prevent the script from running, now there are other options.

[Bluthunder2k]

Congrats

Thanks!  Appreciate the feedback.

[SlowModem]

   OK, I've  got moving pictures now (those cars really zip past there!) 

[gwwilk]

Now THAT'S a webcam!  The tower is a super location.  You've spiced it up with nice viewing options, too.

Great job.

[Bluthunder2k]

Looks good!  I just tried the time lapse.  About how much for a stardot?  I'm using a Panasonic IP cam I got for 70 something bucks.  I may upgrade down the road, but not if it's gonna be crazy expensive.

Thanks!

The StarDot is not that bad price wise for what you get compared to the other brands I've looked at.... It's not a cheap cam, but it's also not crazy expensive like some i've seen.  

I've installed Panasonic, Toshiba, Axis and other brands on jobsites for clients when I was installing their wireless networking gear, so I had a pretty good idea what some of these looked like, but most were just way too much for what I wanted on a hobby website.

After looking at StarDot's example image page, it was just a no brainer for me ( http://www.stardot.com/netcamxl/samples.html ).  Take a look, these images are just breathtaking.

I got the entry level XL version, the XL640.   Knowing I wanted a 640X480 image, it worked out well.     This model was $599.  

But to get the better image quality at night and with varying light conditions, you need a camera with a automatic (not software) iris lens, so I got the 3.5-8mm AutoIris lens for another $129, but if you order it -with- the camera, they take $30 off the price of the camera since you're not using the stock lens, so really, it's only $99 for the lens.

The housing was another $129 bucks, but this camera is up 70ft off the ground on a Rohn25 guyed tower, so I didn't want to take any chances.

Now, they have a promotion going on right now i'm gonna sign up for, if you put a little icon linking to their website near the image, they'll give you a $100 rebate, so when you add it all up, it's not bad for the money.


Now on the installation, I ended up spending more than I wanted to, but it was the only way the camera would survive the environment I was putting it in.   It's on almost 250ft of double shielded CAT5 cable, as it's almost 130ft from the building, 70ft up the tower itself, plus cabling in the building to the 48volt power-over-ethernet injector.   I'm using Polyphaser lightning protectors in the camera's enclosure and on the ground where the CAT5 enters the building, as well as grounding the shield on the cat5 every 100ft.  That combo on WiFi bridges I install for a living has worked great, and I have gear that survives strike after strike without even blinking  (Motorola R56 grounding standard for the and engineers or amateur radio operators here).   I then use Ethernet to Fiber converters to physically separate the Ethernet link from my network switch (again, at 70ft in the air, this tower gets hit 2-3 times a year, we are in the lightning capital of the US in West Central Florida, I am not taking any chances   ).

So while it's ultimately probably more than I wanted to spend when all the extras were added, the end result was worth it, IMHO.  

Take a look at the cam at night -and- during the day, it's image quality is just incredible.

[Bluthunder2k]

Now THAT'S a webcam!  The tower is a super location.  You've spiced it up with nice viewing options, too.

Great job.

Thanks for the comments!   I tried to think of as much as I could when designing it. 

I have to say though, the brain trust in this forum helped me with allot of research while I was developing this.   Anyone else wanting to put a cam up I strongly recommend reading through the archive of messages about webcam development, the insight saved me time and probably money.

Again, thanks for the comments....

[blackjack52]

Very nice.  Beautiful cam position.

I'm an LD250 user too.  It will be interesting to compare AL/FL/GA area strike range calibration accuracy this season.  I bookmarked you.

[Bluthunder2k]

Very nice.  Beautiful cam position.

I'm an LD250 user too.  It will be interesting to compare AL/FL/GA area strike range calibration accuracy this season.  I bookmarked you.

Thanks!

That LD250 has been tweaked with ranging ALOT thru the years, it's pretty decent, which was VERY difficult to do with water on both sides of the state.    I still compare to other resources regularly to see if it's lined up as a standalone detector, i'll look at yours when we get some fronts coming thru.

[blackjack52]

Sounds good.  I have problem spots too; the Gulf [getting pretty accurate] and at 270deg.  As a matter of fact, I'm picking up the strikes [800mi away] from the front moving thru W TX.  Still trying to get that area segmented.

[Axelvold]

What a view, really impressed

[ocala]

Hey Dave
The picture seems kind of dark. Maybe it's the Winter sun angle? I checked other members cams and darkness wasn't an issue. I do keep the brightness on my monitor at 50% and  increasing it did help but it's still seems darker then normal.
Love the view though. Will be nice watching the storms roll in this summer.
Dave.

[Bluthunder2k]

Hey Dave
The picture seems kind of dark. Maybe it's the Winter sun angle? I checked other members cams and darkness wasn't an issue. I do keep the brightness on my monitor at 50% and  increasing it did help but it's still seems darker then normal.
Love the view though. Will be nice watching the storms roll in this summer.
Dave.

I'm working on putting another cam up on a broadcast tower at 800ft right now  (from the same place http://www.ni4ce.org/album/main.php?g2_itemId=521 is at for you amateur radio guys).    The test shots we taken from that location looking due north with a totally different brand cam (with auto iris) also looked the same brightness wise.

Ultimately, when I called, the company that makes the camera at 70ft is telling me that the auto iris lens closes during peak sun of the day to a pinhole to keep the sky visible so the clouds have contrast during 12pm-till night.  Set the iris to manual and you can see why.

I can brighten it up in -software-, but then the sky becomes over saturated, and you loose any detail with the clouds.

I ultimately am not looking to the detail to see the ground, I want the sky, so it works out OK anyway at it's current brightness (which is actually at 100 on a scale of 100).    Actually at sunrise and set, the trees are brighter, odd, but then again, I'm a broadcast engineer, not a photographer 

Also, with a cam that can go down to .05 lux,  at night if I brighten it up in software image noise is visible, where right now it is not  (watch the time lapse).

Finally I have a circular polarized filter in front of the lens, which only passes I think about 97% of the light, but gets rid of a ton of lens flair and glare that a studio engineer I work with suggested (and wow, it does make a difference).

On my 24" LCD at my office (that is ISF calibrated for color/brightness), it looks great.

If you go to weatherbonk and look up 34653, you'll see 3 other sky cams in the greater Tampa area, and brightness wise, mine is right there matching theirs....

[ocala]

That makes sense. You would want the sky to be more visible then the ground.
I'll be looking for that new cam. At 800ft that will be a sweet view.

[Bluthunder2k]

That makes sense. You would want the sky to be more visible then the ground.
I'll be looking for that new cam. At 800ft that will be a sweet view.

Indeed it will be, and even more so with a 3MP camera  .   More on that in the next few weeks as the enclosure arrives for that camera.    That's not my site personally, it's the amateur radio group I am a member of, as well as the tower's owner that are collaborating to get that 800ft cam up. 


On my site..   One of the engineers at Stardot told me today if I was aiming due south, I'd get better views of the ground this time of year.   The evening "glare" for 2-3 hours at sunset causes the camera's exposure to drop, and he thinks as we get out of winter sun angles this will improve as light will be more directly overhead on the trees too, and will cause less of that glare, and light up the trees better too.

He explained the trees being dark as taking a picture of a person with the light behind them.  Of course they are dark (the trees in my case are lit on the opposite side of what we see during the afternoon with the camera on the opposite side of where light hits them).  Also explains why in the morning with the light on the other side of the trees (facing the cam) it looks different.

But I wanted to catch part of the Gulf for storms coming in and the downtown skyline, so it is what it is.  Plus, at 70ft, due south there is a guy wire that would be in the image 

If I put another cam on this location - which I'm thinking about doing if I get the itch to save for it, I'll aim it due north, as there is no guy in that direction and it should always have the sun behind it.

The little things you don't think of until you hang a camera 

[blackjack52]

Is there special insulation/hardening of the cams being at those heights, given your location?

[Bluthunder2k]

Is there special insulation/hardening of the cams being at those heights, given your location?

You have to use a heavier duty enclosure, one typically with a blower and heater to keep it cool during the day and warmer when it's cold.    Most of the heavier duty enclosures have sun shields too, that keep the direct heat of the sun off the top of the enclosure.     The enclosure the group is getting for the 800ft high cam will hold up to a 40 lb camera (yeah, 40 lbs) and survive 130mph winds, to give you an example.   For almost 500 bucks for a metal box and a powder coat painted 1 1/2" extender arm, it better at least 

My cam at 70ft has a medium duty enclosure that should be fine (it's visible on the cam page now http://www.aprsfl.net/cam ) to protect the camera.   The StarDot cameras are a bit unique in that they need no extra cooling or heating, they are good to -40F to +120F, so at least I didn't need all that for my camera.

[ocala]

I thought the sun angle might have something to do with it. Just look at a visible HR sat loop of Florida this time of year.
http://weather.msfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/get-goes?satellite=GOES-E%20CONUS&lat=28&lon=-82.5&map=county&info=vis&quality=100&type=Animation&numframes=30%3EAnimation%20sequence%3C/A%3E
Early and late in the day the peninsula is much darker then in the summer months at the same time.

[Bluthunder2k]

I thought the sun angle might have something to do with it. Just look at a visible HR sat loop of Florida this time of year.
http://weather.msfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/get-goes?satellite=GOES-E%20CONUS&lat=28&lon=-82.5&map=county&info=vis&quality=100&type=Animation&numframes=30%3EAnimation%20sequence%3C/A%3E
Early and late in the day the peninsula is much darker then in the summer months at the same time.

Ya know, I hadn't looked at it like that, but I have some samples of visible images throughout the year, and you're indeed right.

Learn something new every day in this hobby