[From Red-light camera loses backer :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Transportation]
Schaumburg is getting rid of its cameras because they do not prevent accidents. Schaumburg is bypassing easy revenue, but doing the right thing by evaluating cameras on the basis of safety and not revenue. Read the full article, but here are some snippets:
Last fall, Schaumburg installed red-light cameras at the busy corner of Woodfield and Meacham, near Woodfield Mall. The camera system quickly recorded 10,000 violations, each resulting in a $100 ticket. But 98 percent of the violations were by motorists who didn’t stop before turning right on a red light, according to Schaumburg Police Chief Brian Howerton.
. . .
Meanwhile, Schaumburg police studied the 10 intersections with the most accidents and found that only about 15 out of 800 collisions were caused by traffic signal violations. The majority were caused by failure to reduce speed, Howerton said.
rshah Chicago, Red Light Cameras
[From colorblind | blogOV]
Bob Cuttings on over on blogOV has a bit of a rant on color detection in smart camera systems. I can’t judge the merit of his comments, but I think it is well worth repeating (It was so good, I copied most of his post):
The next time I attend a conference where that same company gives the same presentation showing how video analytics with color detection could have been used to search for vehicles and prevent events such as the Washington DC sniper killings, I’ll call them out. Using video analytics for color detection is viable in certain applications. But the way this “solution” is presented is just plain careless.
With any video analytic solution, it’s never just about the analytics. It’s about camera coverage…AND the manner in which cameras adjust to light changes…AND the lack of lighting for nighttime applications…AND the blue cast that seems to overlay many objects under certain lighting conditions…AND the sheer fact that customers underestimate the challenge of separating the white/grey/silver/light blue cars that make up 75% of cars on the road! Who has actually sold this and made it work?
This type of non-consultative, haphazard positioning of a solution does a great disservice to our market. Why do vendors continue to compromise our huge collective investment in R&D by making claims based on concept? Would you set up your company for such a customer support nightmare just to win a deal?
rshah Applications
[From Navy Pier triples number of surveillance cameras :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: City Hall]
Chicago has added 200 more cameras at Navy Pier, the result of a $4.2 million grant from Homeland Security. 40 of the cameras monitor the inside area, while 160 are outdoor cameras. The cameras replace 60 black & white cameras that were fixed. The new cameras can rotate and “pick out a face in a crowd six blocks away.” There is even a camera with analytics that focuses on the inlet between Navy Pier and the Jardine Water Filtration Plant. If the camera detects a boat entering the inlet, it will send an audible message, “Leave this area immediately. You’re subject to a $5,000 fine by the U.S. Coast Guard“. If the boat continues, a marine unit is sent to intercept the intruding boat.
The cameras have been operational since February. Thus far, the cameras “have already been used to catch at least one pick-pocket and nab someone who was damaging a store that had closed for the night.” This is far from impressive to me. It looks like the city is not pushing the cameras as a deterrence to crime, but as a way to later investigate crime. I assume they are pushing this angle, because they realize the limited deterrence impact of the cameras.
The article also notes facial recognition, but doesn’t give much detail. I am not sure if they are running software or just that the cameras have the capability to zoom in on facial details.
More cameras are also coming to “McCormick Place, Soldier Field and the Museum Campus, thanks to a $6.8 million Homeland Security grant awarded in 2007. Seventeen cameras — 11 of them infra-red — will cover the area from Oak Street Beach all the way to 3900 South. That’s because on flat land, there’s a visibility of one mile at night and two miles during the day, Gavin said.”
As for privacy, the city doesn’t acknowledge any concern. Their view is “Walt Disney [World] has probably been doing this for years,” said Ray Orozco, executive director of the city’s Office of Emergency Management and Communications. While there are differences between Walt Disney World & Chicago, they both are equally secretive as to how they utilize their cameras.
rshah Chicago
A few weeks ago, I was contacted by a representative of William Kelly, who is the host of a Chicago TV show, Sportsaholic. Bill was mugged and beaten to the ground in front of his Gold Coast/Streeterville residence. He noticed some blue light cameras and was hoping they could help identify his attackers. After almost two weeks, Bill was finally able to review the tape. The camera was too far away and not at the correct angle to capture his attackers. This led Bill Kelly to characterize the camera system as wasteful. After all, from what he saw, the camera system was was not terribly useful.
As a scholar on cameras, I try to take a big picture view. This leads me to wonder how many others have had similar or disimilar experiences as Bill. How many crimes are solved by cameras? We don’t have this kind of data, because most police departments don’t collect it. Jeff Roush over at Fighting Crime From Above argues that we need more data on cameras. This leads him to recommend more data in the following four areas:
- Real time apprehensions
- Apprehensions based upon video or images
- Prosecutions based on camera evidence
- Effectiveness of camera operators
I agree with Jeff and I would urge everyone to try to push for the collection of this data. It is the only way we can move from anecdotes to a more through scientific understanding of how cameras affect crime.
rshah Chicago, Crime, Policy
Recent Comments