Any Cuddeback "small" vs 1MP comparison pictures?
- Thread starter Tamarack
- Start date
john volkman
5 year old buck +
this is small and 5mp comparison 
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
Keep in mind what you need for comparison is a buck at distance on the fringe of the flash. With the full size images, you can zoom in on the deer and use photoshop to clean it up and can derive a lot of antler configuration information from it, often identifying the individual buck. With a decimated thumbnail, you can't do this at all and may not even be able to tell it is a buck for sure.
If you can see all the features you care about in a thumbnail, there is never a need for a full size pic. It is the pictures where features are hard to distinguish or perhaps you can't see them at all on a thumbnail where full size images are needed.
If you can see all the features you care about in a thumbnail, there is never a need for a full size pic. It is the pictures where features are hard to distinguish or perhaps you can't see them at all on a thumbnail where full size images are needed.
Peplin Creek
5 year old buck +
Here are some pictures from the cams that show distance image issues with thumbnails at times. The buck in the snow is just a little guy but really hard to even make out it’s a buck.
Peplin Creek
5 year old buck +
Now I will say, most deer close to medium distance away are of the quality shown above the pictures I posted.
I usually have the cams I use to take pictures set up so the critters will be quite close, and with this set up(and if I add to it) will definitely set them up that way. Sounds like the additional cams added to it will all be "small picture" anyway..? Most of my other cams I have set for video which allow you to see more than just a glimpse if far away.
But yeah, here's an example of what you're talking about. Further back I'd really be screwed:
Of all the pictures that I had this past year, there was 2 pics that I had the small thumbnails that I couldn't tell what buck it was until I emptied the camera card and then on blown up I could tell which buck it was. I could tell that both of those bucks were shooters though from the small thumbnails. I don't have any need to get higher resolution in my emails as I don't think it is worth the extra cost. If I kill a buck and want to get a nice print of a trail cam pic I had of him then I will simply pull the card. I believe that my remote cameras only take 5MP.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
Yes, the importance of resolution really depends on your application. For example if one is doing a camera survey according the the MSU established protocol using bait, the bait can overwhelm the flash avoidance issues and low resolutions is more than enough for individual buck identification. We are finding more and more risks with point source attractants like bait piles, especially with the growing CWD issues. I went to unbaited surveys and found flash avoidance introduced sex/age bias into the data. Moving to black flash solved that issue, but identifying individual bucks can be problematic without resolution. Decimated thumbnails just won't cut it for that application.
I actually done the exercise in the past. I've taken higher resolution pictures and downsampled them to thumbnail resolution. I've then blown them back up to full size using interpolation algorithms like the camera do. You end up with 2 identical pictures, one is low resolution and the other high resolution. If you then zoom in on a distant feature on each picture, the difference is dramatic.
Thanks,
Jack
john volkman
5 year old buck +
We have more and more camera users each year going back to white strobe flash because they realize that avoidance isnt the issue its made out to be. Our sales prove it and the consumers using them continually send us images with their endorsements.This is especially true when you are able to deploy cameras and not visit the camera site leaving scent and bumping deer in the process. I have numerous images of deer of all age classes unaffected by white flash and IR without bait as a neutralizer. In our opinion ,The number one factor in camera avoidance is the camera being "new" to a particular location and the presence of human scent in the area. We talk cameras daily with everyone from the average whitetail hunter to wildlife research professionals using cameras for populations surveys of all types of animals such as bengal tigers, jaguars and ungulates of all types(including whitetail deer). There are multiple factors in camera avoidance and to label it completely on one factor such as flash type simply isnt true.
From personal experience, Visible IR illumination when using video mode can cause some avoidance but set to take images only has not caused avoidance to any degree. White flash his proving to help even more when low res images are transmitted and avoidance has not been an issue. White flash sales are growing rapidly to the point where we are having a hard time forecasting.
Like CSPOT stated I average 2-3 images a year where i end up pulling off the card for multiple reasons. The benefits of low res image transmission far outweigh the disadvantages.
From personal experience, Visible IR illumination when using video mode can cause some avoidance but set to take images only has not caused avoidance to any degree. White flash his proving to help even more when low res images are transmitted and avoidance has not been an issue. White flash sales are growing rapidly to the point where we are having a hard time forecasting.
Like CSPOT stated I average 2-3 images a year where i end up pulling off the card for multiple reasons. The benefits of low res image transmission far outweigh the disadvantages.
davidhelmly
5 year old buck +
John, any chance of seeing a whiteflash J camera anytime soon?
john volkman
5 year old buck +
not in 2020, possibly when the new generation of cameras come out in the future a few years down the road this is possibility if the trend stays as is.
Peplin Creek
5 year old buck +
From personal experience, I’ve watched a mature buck experience a white flash walking by a camera and do a complete barrel roll and run away. There is still avoidance that can happen with white flash. IMO whiteflash images look better through cuddelinks thumbnails and that’s probably driving sales more than anything.
I’m not sold on IR either to be honest. Between a click of a camera filter and then a red blob. That’s 2 strikes against it there. Black flash seems to be the best for repeated buck sightings. Not everyone can control when a buck shows up to a property for the first time. Making every attempt that the surroundings are perfectly normal is paramount for repeat visits and very important if you run cameras at stand sites.
I’m not sold on IR either to be honest. Between a click of a camera filter and then a red blob. That’s 2 strikes against it there. Black flash seems to be the best for repeated buck sightings. Not everyone can control when a buck shows up to a property for the first time. Making every attempt that the surroundings are perfectly normal is paramount for repeat visits and very important if you run cameras at stand sites.
Peplin Creek
5 year old buck +
when it comes to avoidance, any data on flash intervals?
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
Avoidance is a HUGE issue for some applications and inconsequential for others. Well over 30% of the thousands of images I use every year would be useless at thumbnail resolutions for my application. The ONLY benefit to low resolution is the reduction in data rate for systems that don't have the capacity to handle higher data rates or to reduce cost of data transmission in cell systems that use the paid public networks.
There is also a BIG difference between camera avoidance and flash avoidance. There are lots of factors that cause camera avoidance including the mechanical filters used in low end cameras that make noise verses dual lens designs that are silent. Flash avoidance is different. Different species have different vision and tolerance levels and can't be compared. Visible IR, commonly called "Red Blob" cause significant avoidance problems that are statistically measureable. Young deer have low avoidance and curiosity and trigger the camera with abandon. Mature bucks (as a whole), when no point source attractant is used, are very quick to avoid the Red blob. It is not uncommon to get one picture of a mature buck close to the camera and never have him trigger the camera again. That does not mean he has left the area. Quite often you will get pictures triggered by young deer with the mature buck on the very fringe of the flash. They simply keep younger deer between them and the "Red Blob" that they are not quite sure of. The result is sex and age skewed survey data. Everyone should keep in mind that when I say "Mature bucks (as a whole)" or talk about any other class, we are talking about the middle of a bell shaped curve. Deer are individuals and have individual responses, so one can always find testimonials with countering examples of individual deer. I've run Red Blob against black flash 24/78/365 and looked at the statistical difference when it comes to age and sex bias in avoidance. The hard data shows the real picture.
Does any of this matter to the hunter? It depends on what you are trying to do. Folks just trying to see what is in the area may not care. Folks trying to pattern individual bucks will care.
What sales folks see in sales data only prove one thing: How effective marketing is!
You would fair much better discussing the characteristics of your cameras and helping folks navigate the long threads off issues they are having and let them decide if those characteristics fit their application rather than trying to tell them you have a one size fits all system.
From reading your threads, it is very clear that the Cudde system is a low-cost, great fit, system for some applications and a complete non-starter for others.
The last thing I want to do is tell folks which camera will best fit their application. I've been impressed to see how many different and creative ways folks employ game cameras to accomplish their needs. I can certainly tell folks how deer respond to illumination characteristics but only they can tell if it matters to them.
Thanks,
jack
FredG
5 year old buck +
Adam Schiff would be so proud of your utter mischaracterization of John's selfless dedication to helping any and all Cuddelink users!
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
That is a complete mischaracterization of my post. I simply said that the Cudde sales rep (not selfless by definition) would be better off, as you put it "helping users" rather than making outrageous claims about how sales data "prove" some aspect of how deer respond to illumination.
I don't at all denigrate, and have even lauded, the positive contribution John has made to many forum users here. The nice thing about an independent forum like this is that claims don't go unchallenged. I haven't challenged John on the advice he gives users to try to make their Culldelink systems work. However, when it comes to deer responses to cameras, sales data demonstrates nothing and years of hard statistical data form the field does.
Thanks,
Jack
Peplin Creek
5 year old buck +
So I have to ask... what’s your deal? You’re always posting on the cudde forums of how great everything is. Helping troubleshoot a lot. Do you work for cuddeback? Are you a pro staffer? Seriously just wondering about it.
davidhelmly
5 year old buck +
I know he is very helpful.
