Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



Laser Pointer Store

Wattage required to destroy a cctv camera?

Status
Not open for further replies.

sc_bond

New member
Joined
Oct 27, 2006
Messages
149
Points
0
Shining a laser into the lens of a camera just damages that part of the lens. I shone my green laser into a webcam close up and it left a small spot. You'd need to be able to cover the entire lens. To take out the entire lens completely you'd need a very bright laser (green) with a poor divergence and as a result an extremely high wattage. Then there's time, distance and the surrounding light to consider.
 

MilchstrabeStern

New member
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
9
Points
0
Krtuz, you can get very similar results in your images as a result of dust on your CCD. I've had to take my Digital Rebel into cleaning because of this problem. The fuzzy dark spots, as in Aseras's images, would always show up when shooting high f-stop photo (ie. decreasing the aperture diameter) with a bright background (sky).

I highly doubt light from the sun would damage your CCD, otherwise we'd all be screwed when we point our cameras directly at the sun for sunset and sunrise pictures.

Most camera stores now offer CCD cleaning services, but it depends on the camera. Maybe they only offer it for Digital SLR's, I don't know. There are websites that show how to clean the CCD's, but because of their fragility, I highly recommend you have it done professionally (30 bucks, maybe less).
 

Benm

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
8,112
Points
113
I highly doubt light from the sun would damage your CCD, otherwise we'd all be screwed when we point our cameras directly at the sun for sunset and sunrise pictures.
Looking at the pictures, the CCD itself is okay. There is still image and detail within the slightly darkened spot. If you burn out elements on a ccd with a laser, the result is usually completely destoryed subpixels. From a green laser, these result in dark purple spots/strokes in the image.

I think what has happened here is dat the color filter covering the ccd's sensors has been somewhat degraded by exposure to excess (laser or solar) light. This sort of 'damage' is normal, but usually happens evenly over the whole sensor as you use the camera over the years - you'd never notice.

Also, most manufacturers recommend against pointing the camera at the sun directly. Taking sunset pictures is usually safe because the intensity of the sun is much lower than in daylight.
 

a_pyro_is

New member
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
790
Points
0
I don't have any images from the video cameras I damaged, but this simulated image is close to what it looked like.
 

Attachments

Krutz

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
1,733
Points
0
aah, i never even thought about dust, thank you MilchstrabeStern!
well, all three theories make sense to me, (mine) that intense light could degrade the ccd but still leave some details in the darker spot, the dust-theory, and the -only-filter-degraded.. but then, no matter if its the ccd itself or the filter in front of every pixel, it would be irreversible. and for dust, well.. "no" problem for a SLR, but with a tiny compact digital one, opening it would very easily kill it. anyway i wont (easily) open or "repair" a notebook soon.. hehe

but then.. if one day i degrade my cam to be the second-born only (wait, it *still* would be the older one!) and remove its IR-filter, i shall see if the spots are removable.

"nice" picture, a_pyro_is, away with that whiny "you will only destroy individual pixels/areas"! enough power, and the cam is pretty dead! well, even before glass-melt-treshold! ;-)
..what happened, anyway, to that (simulated) camera?

manuel
 

Dave

New member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
48
Points
0
sporg said:
Again I already said I wasnt planning on building anything but several people jump to the conclusion that Im planning some kind of crime (guilty conscience much?).
This is a search for information on a subject that apparently many here are to closed minded to consider.

Your personal opinions on the matter are irrelevant chris and I will continue my research despite any negative things you have to say about it.
It's not so much as questioning your motives, it's more about questioning your choice of posting this kind of shit. If you think that activity on internet forums is anonymous, private, and liability-free, you are mistaken.

Don't take my word for it, ask the administrator of this very site.

Our conclusions about your motives are completely beside the point, so don't be pouting about them. The conclusions of other interested parties...now that could be something worth fretting over.
 

Benm

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
8,112
Points
113
Krutz said:
but then, no matter if its the ccd itself or the filter in front of every pixel, it would be irreversible. and for dust, well.. "no" problem for a SLR, but with a tiny compact digital one, opening it would very easily kill it.
True, i guess you'll be stuck with the degraded spot no matter what caused it exactly. The color filter is an integral part of the sensor really, and cannot be replaced. The camera is still pretty usefull i guess, perhaps you would need to retouch the spot digitally in photos where it bothers you, but that's it.

Pyro's example drawing is what happens when you shine a laser into the camera directly, though it does vary how bad the damage is. I've seen cameras with similar damage but on a smaller area of the picture. Still makes them worthless.

As for vandalizing speed camera's: It doesn't sound promising at all. The old fashioned ones work with plain old film and cannot be damaged unless you use insane amounts of power (setting it on fire would be easier). If you'd try this on a ccd (video) camera, it's quite likely you'll be on tape blasting the laser at it... blowing up the ccd won't erase the tape ;)
 

a_pyro_is

New member
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
790
Points
0
Krutz said:
"nice" picture, a_pyro_is, away with that whiny "you will only destroy individual pixels/areas"! enough power, and the cam is pretty dead! well, even before glass-melt-treshold! ;-)
..what happened, anyway, to that (simulated) camera?

manuel
One of my DIY reds happened to it, and just for a few minutes. The B&W cam was even worse! Just a few pixels left in one corner. :eek:
 

amkdeath

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
2,631
Points
0
actually, I dont think of this as shit, and if anyone is retarded enough to get thier mpression of lasers from a person who ha posted like 4 times, F--UCK them!!!!


I was thinking taking like a 100Watt IR laser, from tose diode arrays, setting it up in the motel across from the 7-11, blasing the cameras and their IR filters, causing distraction to get the owner of the store outa there, and then walking in and stealing a slurpie!!!

or u cud pay $3 fo rone
 

mliptack

New member
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
90
Points
0
Ummm.... sc_bond... sorry man but first you dont damage the lens with the laser. In fact if that were the case, how would we use lenses on our lasers if any laser light would damage them.

Laser light CAN damage a lens IF you have enough power behind the laser and I doubt that anyone here has a laser that can do that (I am talking on the scale of multiple watts)

Shining a laser into a webcam is generally not a good idea, first of all the CCD is crap to begin with and tiny. Which means any light coming into the camera aperture is focused down to a small point. If you have a larger CCD in a camera the camera optics will not have to focus light as much resulting in less Power Density.

Covering the entire lens wouldn't matter, except against your own theory. Now you are covering the whole lens and resulting in covering the whole CCD, again power density shows its face here again too.

Regarding the poor divergence... this is the part of your post that really doesn't make any sense... maybe I am misinterpreting it...

Ok yes I agree, you would need a laser with a High power. Poor divergence... well you would want really GOOD/LOW divergence (maybe by poor you meant LOW?). If you had a high divergence the power density that would result would be minimal compared to the density that could result from a low divergence.

Not sure how time plays in here either... But distance... well yeah... you want to be as close as possible to achieve the maximum Power Density... Surrounding light. Depends on the camera. If you camera has a mechanical aperature then yeah it does play in, but in the case of most webcams and other cheap cameras the 'aperture' is really a digital process that just increases or decreases the relative brightness.

Well with that said... clarify your post... :-?

sc_bond said:
Shining a laser into the lens of a camera just damages that part of the lens. I shone my green laser into a webcam close up and it left a small spot. You'd need to be able to cover the entire lens. To take out the entire lens completely you'd need a very bright laser (green) with a poor divergence and as a result an extremely high wattage. Then there's time, distance and the surrounding light to consider.
 

Hemlock_Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
6,275
Points
83
I have a lens here with chips blown out of both faces !!
Little ssp-1 NdYag did that !!

Mike
 

mliptack

New member
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
90
Points
0
Hemlock Mike, yeah but in the case of destroying cameras, the CCD is going to go WAY before the lens will... I guess that was the point I was trying to make ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.




Top