Any Cuddeback "small" vs 1MP comparison pictures?

[FredG]

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.

The suction hose of Cuddeback's shop-vac seems to be permanently connected to my bank account, but other than that I have no affiliation with them whatsoever, formal or informal. I've been using Cuddeback cameras for over 10 years and I know them pretty well from a photographic standpoint and when I think I may be able to help someone get better pictures out of their gear I chime in with what I've learned over the years.

 

[Tamarack]

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.

Yeah I didn't say anything as I'm not here to argue(only to complain, ha) about white flash and CWD etc. But my experience too(starting with Cuddeback Capture which I got when it came out..and the 35mm version before that) has been flash doesn't seem to bother them, including white led I guess you'd call it..set to video. Here's an example:

And it seems companies are bringing back white flash/strobe etc, or coming out with their first. Do you know if Cuddeback will come with one you can shoot videos at night with?

 

[Peplin Creek]

The suction hose of Cuddeback's shop-vac seems to be permanently connected to my bank account, but other than that I have no affiliation with them whatsoever, formal or informal. I've been using Cuddeback cameras for over 10 years and I know them pretty well from a photographic standpoint and when I think I may be able to help someone get better pictures out of their gear I chime in with what I've learned over the years.

That’s cool. You know a lot about the technical stuff which has been very helpful. Thanks for answering.

 

[Peplin Creek]

Yeah I didn't say anything as I'm not here to argue(only to complain, ha) about white flash and CWD etc. But my experience too(starting with Cuddeback Capture which I got when it came out..and the 35mm version before that) has been flash doesn't seem to bother them, including white led I guess you'd call it..set to video. Here's an example:

And it seems companies are bringing back white flash/strobe etc, or coming out with their first. Do you know if Cuddeback will come with one you can shoot videos at night with?

This looks to be over a food source, yes? I’m sure that makes a big difference.

 

[Tamarack]

This looks to be over a food source, yes? I’m sure that makes a big difference.

Mineral site. Under an apple tree:

Creek crossing:

 

[john volkman]

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

ill make this brief because there is no need to drag this on and on (as you typically like to) and its obvious you truly believe in your personal testing and love to try and discount everything i say by throwing out marketing or sales verbiage at every chance.
Other than your statement that all deer are individuals.... frankly- i dont agree with you- and my 30 years of working and running cameras, collecting "data" with cameras, constant interaction with others that do, including the everyday whitetail enthusiast, some of the best mature buck killers out there, to wildlife professionals to scientists prove to me otherwise. My beliefs have nothing to do with "marketing". Cuddeback sells true black flash, white flash and "red blob" ir . I could care less which version the end user prefers to use and as long as they are using cudde and they are happy, so am I. We simply produce what the customer asks for. Profit is the same on black flash or IR. Ive patterned and killed my share of mature bucks using all 3 types of flash and know hunters who are much better hunters than myself that do it effectively every year using all 3 types of flash. To my knowledge, you dont own any cuddeback's and have never used any of them in your testing either but you are quick to jump on anyone who contradicts your beliefs.

 

[john volkman]

Yeah I didn't say anything as I'm not here to argue(only to complain, ha) about white flash and CWD etc. But my experience too(starting with Cuddeback Capture which I got when it came out..and the 35mm version before that) has been flash doesn't seem to bother them, including white led I guess you'd call it..set to video. Here's an example:

And it seems companies are bringing back white flash/strobe etc, or coming out with their first. Do you know if Cuddeback will come with one you can shoot videos at night with?

because cuddelink doesnt transmit video i dont think this would be in the works anytime soon. The cuddelink side of the business is such a large percentage all engineering and R&D focus will continue to focus on CL.

 

[Tamarack]

because cuddelink doesnt transmit video i dont think this would be in the works anytime soon. The cuddelink side of the business is such a large percentage all engineering and R&D focus will continue to focus on CL.

Thanks, what about non-cellular though?

Edit : Never mind.. I guess you're saying no to that, too

 

[yoderjac]

ill make this brief because there is no need to drag this on and on (as you typically like to) and its obvious you truly believe in your personal testing and love to try and discount everything i say by throwing out marketing or sales verbiage at every chance.
Other than your statement that all deer are individuals.... frankly- i dont agree with you- and my 30 years of working and running cameras, collecting "data" with cameras, constant interaction with others that do, including the everyday whitetail enthusiast, some of the best mature buck killers out there, to wildlife professionals to scientists prove to me otherwise. My beliefs have nothing to do with "marketing". Cuddeback sells true black flash, white flash and "red blob" ir . I could care less which version the end user prefers to use and as long as they are using cudde and they are happy, so am I. We simply produce what the customer asks for. Profit is the same on black flash or IR. Ive patterned and killed my share of mature bucks using all 3 types of flash and know hunters who are much better hunters than myself that do it effectively every year using all 3 types of flash. To my knowledge, you dont own any cuddeback's and have never used any of them in your testing either but you are quick to jump on anyone who contradicts your beliefs.

You are incorrect on pretty much all counts. First, "constant interaction with others that do, including the everyday whitetail enthusiast, some of the best mature buck killers out there, to wildlife professionals to scientists prove to me otherwise", ie anecdotal testimonials are not the same as scientific studies and hard data collected an analyzed. One great example of this is hunter assessments of game populations. From year to year, hunters believed and proclaimed increases or decreases in deer populations based on there field experiences before the advent of surveys. The weighted those experiences over the early crude survey methods like track counts and spotlight surveys. With the advent of game cameras and the establishment of scientific protocols like the MSU camera survey protocol, the deviation between anecdotal/testimonial experience and reality is quite large.

You say "My beliefs have nothing to do with "marketing"" but in your previous post you back up your opinion on avoidance with "Our sales prove it"

I never argued that your avoidance beliefs were a function of your vested interest. I simply said they are wrong and not based in fact.

Finally, while I don't own a Cuddelink, I've owned many Cuddeback cams over the years. I do have extensive experience with RF transmission in the 900 mhz band as well. What I'm quick to do is not jump on people, but to not let claims go unchallenged. You've provided your opinion and given your basis and I've provided mine along with underlying support. Readers can decide for themselves. And, by the way, there are other threads on this forum that have much more detail on the illumination type experiment, data collection, and analysis techniques used that readers can explore in much more depth if interested.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[john volkman]

You are incorrect on pretty much all counts. First, "constant interaction with others that do, including the everyday whitetail enthusiast, some of the best mature buck killers out there, to wildlife professionals to scientists prove to me otherwise", ie anecdotal testimonials are not the same as scientific studies and hard data collected an analyzed. One great example of this is hunter assessments of game populations. From year to year, hunters believed and proclaimed increases or decreases in deer populations based on there field experiences before the advent of surveys. The weighted those experiences over the early crude survey methods like track counts and spotlight surveys. With the advent of game cameras and the establishment of scientific protocols like the MSU camera survey protocol, the deviation between anecdotal/testimonial experience and reality is quite large.

You say "My beliefs have nothing to do with "marketing"" but in your previous post you back up your opinion on avoidance with "Our sales prove it"

I never argued that your avoidance beliefs were a function of your vested interest. I simply said they are wrong and not based in fact.

Finally, while I don't own a Cuddelink, I've owned many Cuddeback cams over the years. I do have extensive experience with RF transmission in the 900 mhz band as well. What I'm quick to do is not jump on people, but to not let claims go unchallenged. You've provided your opinion and given your basis and I've provided mine along with underlying support. Readers can decide for themselves. And, by the way, there are other threads on this forum that have much more detail on the illumination type experiment, data collection, and analysis techniques used that readers can explore in much more depth if interested.

Thanks,

Jack

Laughable that you feel your observations/testing whatever you prefer to call it is scientific while all others who disagree with you is merely an “assessment “. I won’t point out my background again but let’s just say it’s more than just a camera salesmen.
What sales do prove is that although Red ir cameras far outsell black flash models by a huge margin. Users of black flash do not have higher success patterning and killing mature bucks even though that is typically the goal of all camera users at some level. If black flash was a clear advantage in patterning and killing mature bucks consumers would certainly figure it out and sales percentages would ultimately show the advantage. I always get a chuckle out of your scientific assessments because i remember the image you posted of your camera set up.anyone that remembers that will know why I find it humorous. This thread was started looking for comparisons in image resolution but as usual you find a way to ride your horse into it carrying the anti red blob flag. Enjoy your day!

 

[swat1018]

Laughable that you feel your observations/testing whatever you prefer to call it is scientific while all others who disagree with you is merely an “assessment “. I won’t point out my background again but let’s just say it’s more than just a camera salesmen.
What sales do prove is that although Red ir cameras far outsell black flash models by a huge margin. Users of black flash do not have higher success patterning and killing mature bucks even though that is typically the goal of all camera users at some level. If black flash was a clear advantage in patterning and killing mature bucks consumers would certainly figure it out and sales percentages would ultimately show the advantage. I always get a chuckle out of your scientific assessments because i remember the image you posted of your camera set up.anyone that remembers that will know why I find it humorous. This thread was started looking for comparisons in image resolution but as usual you find a way to ride your horse into it carrying the anti red blob flag. Enjoy your day!

The mad scientist has spoken! Silence!

 

[yoderjac]

Laughable that you feel your observations/testing whatever you prefer to call it is scientific while all others who disagree with you is merely an “assessment “. I won’t point out my background again but let’s just say it’s more than just a camera salesmen.
What sales do prove is that although Red ir cameras far outsell black flash models by a huge margin. Users of black flash do not have higher success patterning and killing mature bucks even though that is typically the goal of all camera users at some level. If black flash was a clear advantage in patterning and killing mature bucks consumers would certainly figure it out and sales percentages would ultimately show the advantage. I always get a chuckle out of your scientific assessments because i remember the image you posted of your camera set up.anyone that remembers that will know why I find it humorous. This thread was started looking for comparisons in image resolution but as usual you find a way to ride your horse into it carrying the anti red blob flag. Enjoy your day!

Bizarre! You are the one who told us your basis for what you now call an "assessment". I provided the basis for mine. As I recall, while the thread started out looking for thumbnail to larger image comparison, you were the one to tracked the thread into deer reaction to illumination. I simply responded with an opposing view with a solid basis. You have a good day too John. Regardless of our differences in some specific subjects, you continue to make positive contributions to the forum and I'm glad you are here!

Thanks,

Jack

 

[J B]

We ran all white flash years ago and it was extremely rare to have deer including fully mature bucks be camera shy. They were used to it since they were fawns. Then, the cuddeback captures started to fail and the replacement camera’s picture quality and averge life were even worse, so we moved to browning infered cameras. When we did get a buck picture on them, it was usually blurry or too far away to tell any detail. Now, we’re slowly moving back to cuddeback white strobe. The older deer have showed some signs of being camera shy this year. I’m guessing as the fawns get older it will be normal again. You can’t beat a good white flash picture!

 

[swat1018]

We ran all white flash years ago and it was extremely rare to have deer including fully mature bucks be camera shy. They were used to it since they were fawns. Then, the cuddeback captures started to fail and the replacement camera’s picture quality and averge life were even worse, so we moved to browning infered cameras. When we did get a buck picture on them, it was usually blurry or too far away to tell any detail. Now, we’re slowly moving back to cuddeback white strobe. The older deer have showed some signs of being camera shy this year. I’m guessing as the fawns get older it will be normal again. You can’t beat a good white flash picture!

Sounds very unscientific, but I agree.

 

[yoderjac]

We ran all white flash years ago and it was extremely rare to have deer including fully mature bucks be camera shy. They were used to it since they were fawns. Then, the cuddeback captures started to fail and the replacement camera’s picture quality and averge life were even worse, so we moved to browning infered cameras. When we did get a buck picture on them, it was usually blurry or too far away to tell any detail. Now, we’re slowly moving back to cuddeback white strobe. The older deer have showed some signs of being camera shy this year. I’m guessing as the fawns get older it will be normal again. You can’t beat a good white flash picture!

It is true that deer can acclimate to many things. It is amazing what I've seen deer in the suburbs do. My comparison was Red Blob to black flash. When I did that study, there was some normalization over time and some individual bucks did not avoid the red blob flash. That shows how individual deer can be and when we talk about classes of deer we are talking about the middle of a bell curve. Even over time, there was an age and sex bias in the data between the black flash cameras and the red blob cameras. Again, many applications are not sensitive to data bias.

Another consideration is illumination distance. Holding all else equal, red blob gives somewhat longer flash range than black flash. But the difference was not enough to compensate for the avoidance in the data. That may not be true if compared to whiteflash.

Camera design is a delicate balance between the image sensor, the flash, the shutter, the battery and timing. In the old days, white flash was very fast, did not use LEDs but was very power consumptive. LEDs with red blob allowed for lower power consumption. Most low end cameras were poorly timed. LEDs slowly ramp up the shutter opens and closes than then they ramp down. Red blob did not produce as much light as the old white flash and many cameras left the shutter open longer to allow more photons to impact the CCD. This is often a cause of those blurry pictures you can get with low-end Red Blob cameras.

It would be interesting to look at how deer wold react to white flash. It would require a camera without a mechanical filter so noise is not a factor in avoidance. The camera would need to be well times with a short duration flash. It would make an interesting study.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[swat1018]

It is true that deer can acclimate to many things. It is amazing what I've seen deer in the suburbs do. My comparison was Red Blob to black flash. When I did that study, there was some normalization over time and some individual bucks did not avoid the red blob flash. That shows how individual deer can be and when we talk about classes of deer we are talking about the middle of a bell curve. Even over time, there was an age and sex bias in the data between the black flash cameras and the red blob cameras. Again, many applications are not sensitive to data bias.

Another consideration is illumination distance. Holding all else equal, red blob gives somewhat longer flash range than black flash. But the difference was not enough to compensate for the avoidance in the data. That may not be true if compared to whiteflash.

Camera design is a delicate balance between the image sensor, the flash, the shutter, the battery and timing. In the old days, white flash was very fast, did not use LEDs but was very power consumptive. LEDs with red blob allowed for lower power consumption. Most low end cameras were poorly timed. LEDs slowly ramp up the shutter opens and closes than then they ramp down. Red blob did not produce as much light as the old white flash and many cameras left the shutter open longer to allow more photons to impact the CCD. This is often a cause of those blurry pictures you can get with low-end Red Blob cameras.

It would be interesting to look at how deer wold react to white flash. It would require a camera without a mechanical filter so noise is not a factor in avoidance. The camera would need to be well times with a short duration flash. It would make an interesting study.

Thanks,

Jack

How did you quantify the "age and sex" bias? Did they tell you their age? What is your "scientific" method for determining the age of a whitetail deer in a photograph in your highly-scientific study?

 

[yoderjac]

How did you quantify the "age and sex" bias? Did they tell you their age? What is your "scientific" method for determining the age of a whitetail deer in a photograph in your highly-scientific study?

Age classes were estimated by antler size. Fawns, 1 1/2, and 2 1/2 plus. Fawn, young, adult. Does were classed as fawns/does based on body size and markings. The bias was determined by delta between survey results selecting red blob only and black flash only from the database. Camera survey results were also compared to night time FLIR/spotlight survey. Sex/age class ratio of black flash corresponded to traditional surveys. Red blob survey under-counted mature bucks. Several years worth of data were used and slices individually and collectively yielded same results. The under-count was statistically significant. As a result of the under-count, the buck/doe ratio was also off. This was a non-baited survey. The use of point source attractants can overcome the avoidance with baited surveys. Did this years ago when black flash was first emerging. There are other threads with more detail if you are interested. I can't recall if I brought any of those over from the old QDMA forum or not. I may have.

While the cameras used were identical except the flash, in order to confirm a causal relationship, we put one red bob camera on one end of a small 1/4 ac field and black flash on the other. The black flash got substantially more pictures of mature bucks that were close enough to the camera to identify. It had multiple triggers on the same mature bucks over time. The red blob camera had very few repeat triggers by the same mature buck. There were a few mature bucks that did not avoid either camera. Goes to show how deer are individuals and there are always some deer that go against the norm. Camera positions were switched part way through the experiment to ensure one end of the field was not the issue. Neither Red Blob or black flash caused mature bucks to leave the area. They simply avoided trigger the red blob camera and were often seen in the background on the fringe of the flash when triggered by young bucks or does.

Picture

Thanks,

 

[FredG]

Another consideration is illumination distance. Holding all else equal, red blob gives somewhat longer flash range than black flash. But the difference was not enough to compensate for the avoidance in the data. That may not be true if compared to whiteflash.

Thanks,

Jack

The typical CMOS sensor has only 1/3rd as much sensitivity to 940nm black flash as compared to 850nm red flash. Holding all else equal, red flash has nearly twice as much range as black flash.

 

[yoderjac]

Yes which is why black flash camera design is not as simple as slapping a filter over the illumination and good black flash designs don't hold all else equal. It is important to match the image sensor with the illumination as well as other aspects of the camera design. Wavelength is not the only factor in visibility, duration and intensity also come into play. Many designs increase the number of photons by leaving the shutter open longer resulting in blurry images when motion is present. These may or may not be usable depending on the application. The cameras used in the study were well balanced but black flash still took a hit on flash range over the red blob cameras. It was about a 20% reduction in flash range. Even with the reduced flash range, the black flash recorded statistically significant increases in repeat visits from mature bucks.

Another interesting approach I played with years ago was a remote flash. Light energy diminishes with the distance squared, so separating the flash from the camera allows the flash to be closer to the subject. This can be done with black flash or red blob and offers some interesting lighting options. While it was not part of the study, overhead red blob seems to elicit less avoidance and flash avoidance no longer necessarily equates to camera avoidance. So, depending on the positioning of the remote flash, deer avoiding it may not be avoiding the camera itself. There were some attempts to market remote flash but I don't think the economics existed to make enough market penetration. Some designs attempted to optically detect the black flash of the camera and there were some that messed with RF triggers. I will say it was a fun technology to mess with.

Thanks,

Jack

 

[BC18]

20 MP and email thumbnail. I haven't had any issues identifying bucks on the 1mp thumbnails