Do we really need 60P on a dash cam?

Do you want a 60P Dash Cam?


  • Total voters
    54

BobDiaz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
409
Reaction score
307
Location
California, LA
Country
United States
Do we really need 60P on a dash cam?

Please vote BEFORE reading this post, thanks. :)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

civic,


I hope you won't mind my taking your question into a poll, but it's something that I've been thinking about. I'm hard pressed to justify why 60P would be any better than 30P in proving that the other guy is at fault. However, I'm willing to see what others think.


Sincerely,

Bob Diaz
 
I don't think for me it's proving the other guy is at fault, for that I think we could probably use 15fps or maybe even 10fps. However it's the desire to capture plates and at oncoming speeds that seems to be a problem at 30fps. Maybe I'm wrong and its a resolution issue instead but I seem to have issues missing the plate or getting a bit of what appears to be motion blur, therefore I can only assume 60fps would help. But again, I could be wrong. :)
 
do you mean 60f (fps) ?
1080p60fps will be the best for me.
most screens are 720p or 1080p and not 2K and up, so you most likely to use standard TV or PC monitor to view your recording.
1080p TV's and PC monitors are widely spread. so why viewing 2K on 30fps or 4K on 30fps video files with TV that capable to reach up to 1080p.
i prefer more data on the same second from the video, so for me 1080p60fps is better than 2k on 30fps.
 
I never could understand the interest/obsession of capturing the plate number of an oncoming vehicle. :confused: Never in my life has that bit of information ever been of use to me.
 
Things can fly off the back of skip trucks and hit your car. Oncoming car could be on your side of the road and force you into a ditch or worse. Could be handy for these. I'm sure there's other scenarios also.
 
Last edited:
Would rather have manual control of shutter speed.
Isn't the main benefit of 60fps that exposure time of each frame is 1/60s or less?
Forcing fast shutter speeds would cost nothing to implement and would not (in itself) double the memory used.
 
Things can fly off the back of skip trucks and hit your car. Oncoming car could be on your side of the road and force you into a ditch or worse. Could be handy for these. I'm sure there's other scenarios. To
But in neither case would the plate number be of any use to me. The video itself would be sufficient to show that I was 100% not at fault - with or without a plate number.
 
Would rather have manual control of shutter speed.
Isn't the main benefit of 60fps that exposure time of each frame is 1/60s or less?
Forcing fast shutter speeds would cost nothing to implement and would not (in itself) double the memory used.
I'm sure that even at 30fps the 'shutter speed' (quoted because there is not shutter in a dash cam) is under most daylight conditions much faster than 1/30th of a second.

60fps by definition will double the number of frames captured in a given time period which will double the amount of storage required.
 
I'm sure that even at 30fps the 'shutter speed' (quoted because there is not shutter in a dash cam) is under most daylight conditions much faster than 1/30th of a second.

60fps by definition will double the number of frames captured in a given time period which will double the amount of storage required.

What he's saying is that if we can control the shutter speed without changing the fps then it won't t effect the storage capacity and still give us the option to have more of a chance of capturing plates etc. I think the lean towards 60fps is that it forces the shutter speed to be no less than 1/60, but I would prefer Rajagra's option. Although there isn't a shutter in a dashcam and it's to do with how long light is allowed to build up electronically in the chip, it's easier for us just to reference it as shutter speed as that's what most of us will be familiar with.



But in neither case would the plate number be of any use to me. The video itself would be sufficient to show that I was 100% not at fault - with or without a plate number.

If it's an unmarked truck or a car, then how are you going to persue them for any damage caused to your car if you cannot read the plate?
 
Last edited:
What he's saying is that if we can control the shutter speed without changing the fps then it won't t effect the storage capacity and still give us the option to have more of a chance of capturing plates etc. I think the lean towards 60fps is that it forces the shutter speed to be no less than 1/60, but I would prefer Rajagra's option. Although there isn't a shutter in a dashcam and it's to do with how long light is allowed to build up electronically in the chip, it's easier for us just to reference it as shutter speed as that's what most of us will be familiar with....
I understand what he was saying. What I said was essentially addressing 2 different issues.

1. Given that dash cams are fixed aperture the only capability they have for controlling exposure is via shutter speed. 30fps does not mean that shutter speed is 1/30 second.

Under most well lit conditions shutter speeds may well be 1/500 second or faster but only 30 frames are captured per second. F/W algorithms determine the shutter speed necessary for given lighting levels. I'm sure there are more knowledgeable members here who are privy to the fastest shutter speeds various cameras a capable of.

If there were an option to force the shutter to be no slower than 1/60 second then under lower light conditions the result would be underexposed videos.

2. The second point I was making was that doubling the frame rate will double the storage required.

...If it's an unmarked truck or a car, then how are you going to persue them for any damage caused to your car if you cannot read the plate?

If I'm not at fault I don't need to. My insurance will cover all damages with no deductible/excess.
 
Things can fly off the back of skip trucks and hit your car. Oncoming car could be on your side of the road and force you into a ditch or worse. Could be handy for these. I'm sure there's other scenarios also.

Yeah, what he said. I'm a truck driver and my FIRST need is to read license plates from upcoming traffic, you have no idea how many stupid car drivers I come across that overtake and "don't see the upcoming truck" a.k.a. me.....

And then there are the guys in convertibles with the top of, throwing out half empty beverage cans, almost hitting my truck's windscreen.

Believe me, it's one of the prime needs for a serious dashcam!
 
But in neither case would the plate number be of any use to me. The video itself would be sufficient to show that I was 100% not at fault - with or without a plate number.

Yeah, but don't you want the bad guy to pay for the repair of your damaged car, or worse, the hospital bills, your new leg, your loved ones...... Well you know?

What use if you can say it's not your fault but still pay for the damage done to you??
 
Given that dash cams are fixed aperture the only capability they have for controlling exposure is via shutter speed.
They also have the option of adjusting the effective ISO rating. I'm not sure if this just boosts the contrast of a dimmer image or electronically ups the sensitivity of the sensor. But the option is there.
30fps does not mean that shutter speed is 1/30 second.
But it means it can be, and that may be undesirable.
If there were an option to force the shutter to be no slower than 1/60 second then under lower light conditions the result would be underexposed videos.
Same result as imposed by 60fps there!
There are often trade-offs in photography. If you know what you are aiming for, then having manual options available lets you choose what to prioritise.
Underexposed images are often usable and correctable.
Blurry images are more problematic.

I'm just saying I'd like the choice of controlling (electronic) shutter speed. For me it gives most of the advantage of 60fps without the disadvantage of halving recording time per card.
And you don't need twice the processing speed - or memory card speed - to do it.

P.S. In the UK if you are hit by an uninsured vehicle there is a scheme where insurance companies have to take responsibility and pay for damage. But you need to prove it's an uninsured vehicle. So you'd need the reg number. Otherwise you have to claim off your own insurance (if you have comprehensive cover) and pay the excess, lose your no-claims bonus, etc.
 
Last edited:
This is more what we are aiming at, lower light conditions. Everything has pretty much been said now in the last few posts :)
 
But in neither case would the plate number be of any use to me. The video itself would be sufficient to show that I was 100% not at fault - with or without a plate number.
Yeah, but don't you want the bad guy to pay for the repair of your damaged car, or worse, the hospital bills, your new leg, your loved ones...... Well you know?

What use if you can say it's not your fault but still pay for the damage done to you??

Couldn't have said it better!

Yeah it's nice to show it's not your fault but unless you can tell your insurance company who's fault it was, you are still going to end up paying for it. BUT, if you have the video and a plate number then your chances of having it covered without cost to you goes way up.
 
...
Yeah it's nice to show it's not your fault but unless you can tell your insurance company who's fault it was, you are still going to end up paying for....
Not true. My insurance only requires that I'm not at fault. There is no obligation for me to show who is.

Edit: Plus in Michigan there are no front plates so all I would be getting video of would be the grill and front bumper of the approaching vehicle. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I can't believe that any insurance company anywhere in the world won't recover their losses through a policy holder for claims made against their policy, regardless of what they say. But you never know I guess!
 
Not true. My insurance only requires that I'm not at fault. There is no obligation for me to show who is.

Edit: Plus in Michigan there are no front plates so all I would be getting video of would be the grill and front bumper of the approaching vehicle. :rolleyes:

Hell my insurance would actually cover it either way, my fault or not. However if I want it covered without the cost of a deductible coming out of my pocket, the insurance would need to know who's fault it is.
I've been there and done that already. Even with information for the at fault driver, it took multiple calls and 11.8 months of waiting to get my deductible refunded when I was hit in my previous car. Basically until they (State Farm) got their money, I was not about to get my deductible refunded and that's even when I was not at fault and DID provide the at fault driver's info. Basically, if they don't know who to chase for their money, you'll be out a deductible for sure.
 
Back
Top