Ideas for where to hide outdoor cameras on or near a garage

[madmartian]

I need to hide cameras, preferably wired cameras, outdoors on or near a garage - one on the right pointing left and one on the left pointing right. I am having a hard time being creative and coming up with covert locations. In a porch light would be ideal, but most porch lights don't have the room and I am also concerned with the extra heat. What kind of decorations do people stick on a garage that I might hide a camera in? All wires need to lead to the garage, drilling a hole in the wall behind the decor being one way to do it.

[CameraMan]

My reccomendation: don't hide them at all. Get a small bullet camera instead. By the time anyone spots them, it'll be too late- they'll already be on camera.

[bjohs]

Can you see the garage from the house? You could always have a camera pointing out a window towards the garage if it is in view. Otherwise, I would agree with CameraMan. Unless it is absolutely necessary to "catch" someone in the act of doing something, it is much better to deter anything from happening in the first place with a visable camera.

[SIW Editor]

Since you're an installer, I'm guessing this is probably specified by a client... so suggestions of visible bullet cameras probably are out of the question. I would think you could do something with decorative trim or a large hollow finial hanging down from each corner of the garage eaves.


Maybe a non-solid finial (these stair finials - http://www.architecturaldepot.com/c/stair-finials/ - are similar to what I'm picturing. These don't seem to be hollow, but, I'm sure there are hollow plastic ones that can be purchased -- maybe check at Lowe's, or at a decorator's store). Or you could do some sort of weird hollow statuette if it's some sort of over-the-top European-style McMansion. Hiding cameras on a garage seems like it would be much easier on an ornate home.

You could always build some sort of interesting decorative trim box under the eaves to conceal a camera, too. Only a really discerning eye would recognize that box as out-of-place.

Let us know what you come up with. Welcome to the forums!

Geoff
SecurityInfoWatch.com

[madmartian]

Geoff - Good idea! You also reminded me that I've seen decor made to hang from gutters.

bjohs - the house is set back from the sidewalk with the garage being the most forward. The left camera will view mainly in front of the garage, watching the car and trash can areas (both have had vandalism). The right camera will look left and watch the walkway to the house as well as the front yard area (which has also had vandalism to the plants).

In regards to hidden vs visible, the goal is to catch who is doing the vandalism.

[Bill Warnock]

As an installer you probably have taken into consideration the light levels and possibility of blooming. Along with Geoff's suggestion, consider an infrared illuminator built around the camera, killing two birds with the same stone.
Enjoy the day,
Bill

[madmartian]

Thanks Bill. I've experimented with infrared vs Sony ExCam (.0003 lux) and I am currently thinking the Sony's will be going into the decor without infrared. This particular installation is shaded for much of the day (and rains half the year) and in theory the cameras will be under the eaves, so I am not anticipating a huge problem with blooming. It also has a street light right there as well as the floodlight in the center of the garage, which will be using real floodlight bulbs once the new cameras are in.

Admittedly my experience with security is less than most of you as I primarilly do home automation, so I appreciate tips on things like avoiding blooming.

[Rooney]

Another product you may look into is motion detector outdoor lights with the camera built in. They are concealed and also provide a level of security when the light comes on.

[MetzLyov]

In regards to hidden vs visible, the goal is to catch who is doing the vandalism.

Here is a question for you about the above approach - what will you or your client do if you catch someone on the video vandalizing a property? Do you know what entails to go forward legally against such vandalism or costs associated with possible prosecution or possible restitution (if provided you will pursue this as a criminal case) vs. if you were to decide to take such party in a civil case?

The answers are not that easy as it may seem...

[madmartian]

Rooney - I've been trying to find a model of motion detector floodlight cam where the cam is concealed. Supercircuits used to carry a good one that had the camera hidden in the motion detector that they would configure with an ExCam. Unfortunately, it's been discontinued. I have seen others that I don't like as much because the camera is not concealed or the camera is not low light enough. A bullet camera mounted to a floodlight is too obvious for this application and most cameras above .05 lux just aren't good enough.

MetzLyov - That's a different and involved discussion, and one that doesn't have an answer yet. The key is to get the evidence first, then identify the person, then determine what to do about it. Is it a close neighbor? Is it someone known or unknown? Is it a member of the neighborhood association? Is it someone not part of the neighborhood at all? Why are they doing it? Different answers to these questions would lead to different results.

[integrator97]

The key is to get the evidence first, then identify the person, then determine what to do about it. Is it a close neighbor? Is it someone known or unknown? Is it a member of the neighborhood association? Is it someone not part of the neighborhood at all? Why are they doing it? Different answers to these questions would lead to different results.
It is much more difficult than most people realize, to identify someone, much more so outdoors, and in the dark. Typically, if you know the persons being recorded, they should fill you screen or view, from head to toe. If you do not know the person, they should fill you screen from head to waist. This is FBI recommendations. If you've spent much time reviewing video or watching live video, you know what I mean.

So deterrance is much better than having them on video. That being said, get the highest resolution at the lowest possible lux, provide as much light as possible (if the lighting is behind the subject, add light or re-consider the IR illumination, otherwise you'll just have a shadow), and record at the highest resolution possible.

[bjohs]

I don't know if this will help, but here are a few links to covert outdoor cameras that may just do the trick.

http://www.brickhousesecurity.com/outdoor-electrical-box-hidden-camera.html

http://www.4hiddenspycameras.com/elboxcocawib2.html

http://www.123securityproducts.com/st115wc.html

[madmartian]

integrator97 - thanks for the recognition tips.

bjohs - I have looked at the electrical box cams but prefer something less unsightly. I found an ideal product, but unfortunately not available in the US, or even a compatible system like Japan:

LAMP-CAM (http://smartprodukter.com/product_info.php?products_id=339&cPath=&osCsid=5a1db1d06)

[HotelSecurity]

integrator97 - thanks for the recognition tips.

bjohs - I have looked at the electrical box cams but prefer something less unsightly. I found an ideal product, but unfortunately not available in the US, or even a compatible system like Japan:

LAMP-CAM (http://smartprodukter.com/product_info.php?products_id=339&cPath=&osCsid=5a1db1d06)

You can't put a small camera in a lamp yourself?

[integrator97]

You can't put a small camera in a lamp yourself?

I was gonna say.... Hop on over to your local Lowes Depot and look at the lamps, and see how much room you can have. Then order up a camera that will fit, grab your power tools, some glue, a hammer, tape and a can of nut buster, and you're good to go.

What I like in these catalogs, even the popular ones here in the USA, is the camera in the non-working smoke detector (shown on the lamp-cam page). These are illegal to use or install (though not to posess), yet still sold. According to national fire codes (NFPA 72 etc), you cannot install a non-working smoke detector. If it looks like a smoke detector, it better work. That's not to say you can't put one in a working smoke detector, but that's never done.

[madmartian]

Yes, that's what I am looking at doing, lacking better options of other decor. There are a few issues with porch lights - one is I need space inside the housing for the camera that is not inside the bulb space. Another is the space needs to not get too hot from the bulb. I found a possibility at Lamps Plus (note the fat area sticking from the wall - most outdoor lights are more ornate and can't hold a camera).

Lamps Plus (http://www.lampsplus.com/products/s_cranston-wall/?lpqsv_cid=114)

I need to go to Lamps Plus and check it out. Still, the camera would need to be glued in and would not be adjustable like the one from Sweden. I still think other decor might give me more mounting options and adjustability.

[SecTrainer]

I don't feel we know enough about the layout of the property, the nature of the vandalism, or even whether "catching them vandalizing the property" is truly the best strategy since this obviously means allowing the vandalism to take place. I'm also not sure why you seem to have ruled out wireless cameras.

A sketch, if not photo(s) would be very useful. I'm particularly interested in the perimeter of the property and the approach path the subjects would or might take to the garage from the perimeter.

The fact is that in many courts today, a charge of trespass will probably get you about as much "mileage" as a charge of vandalism, especially if these are juveniles. This might suggest several alternative strategies that would both gather the necessary evidence for trespass and also permit other measures (lights, alarm, etc.) to be implemented that would prevent the damage to the property. I'd be inclined to go for the double whammy.

One thing is for sure, though, and that is that getting "identification grade video" in varying light conditions is no slam dunk because it isn't enough to get video that's good enough for you to identify someone who is familiar to you. It has to be good enough that a cop, DA, and ultimately a judge or jury who is totally unfamiliar with the subject can identify them from the video. There's a very big difference. You might be able to recognize someone from a variety of features, (for instance, a particular gesture or item of clothing) whereas the others I mention would require good facial images to compare with the suspect's face.

[HotelSecurity]

CSIS (Canada's soy agency) were watching a guest in my hotel once. They put a camera inside a SORTIE (exit) sign. They had to disconnect one of the 2 lights inside but the camera was so small that when our Maintenance man saw it & changed it he didn't even notice it inside.

[integrator97]

CSIS (Canada's soy agency) were watching a guest in my hotel once. They put a camera inside a SORTIE (exit) sign. They had to disconnect one of the 2 lights inside but the camera was so small that when our Maintenance man saw it & changed it he didn't even notice it inside.
Were they after black market soy? Whole bean or what? :p

Just what does the soy agency do?

[HotelSecurity]

Were they after black market soy? Whole bean or what? :p

Just what does the soy agency do?

SPY not soy - I need a new keyboard!

[CameraMan]

What I like in these catalogs, even the popular ones here in the USA, is the camera in the non-working smoke detector (shown on the lamp-cam page). These are illegal to use or install (though not to posess), yet still sold. According to national fire codes (NFPA 72 etc), you cannot install a non-working smoke detector. If it looks like a smoke detector, it better work. That's not to say you can't put one in a working smoke detector, but that's never done.

Holy forking spit! Really? Can you cite?

Seriously, my Holiday 2008 catalog goes to the printer TOMOROW, and I have JUST enough time to yank the 2 non functional smoke detectors in the covert section.

[SecTrainer]

Holy forking spit! Really? Can you cite?

Seriously, my Holiday 2008 catalog goes to the printer TOMOROW, and I have JUST enough time to yank the 2 non functional smoke detectors in the covert section.

I'm wondering about this interpretation myself. Yes, it is true that any detector you install must be functional.

However, these cameras are NOT DETECTORS in the first place. They are cameras that just happen to have that particular form factor. This is actually quite a different thing. As long as one isn't installing these cameras INSTEAD of required smoke detectors, or as a SUBSTITUTE for required smoke detectors, I'm not aware that they violate the code.

You'll find other cameras that are disguised as emergency lights, for instance. They would be "nonfunctional" as emergency lights and you could not satisfy code requiring such emergency lighting by installing these cameras. However, as long as you're not doing that, the code would have nothing to say about them any more than it would have anything to say about what form factor a motion detector must take.

Installing a camera that looks like an emergency light is NOT the same thing as installing a nonfunctioning emergency light, and installing a camera that looks like a smoke detector would not be the same thing as installing a nonfunctioning smoke detector.

I think that two different things are being conflated here resulting in a misinterpretation of the code, but I look forward to the cite on this also.

[integrator97]

Holy forking spit! Really? Can you cite?

Seriously, my Holiday 2008 catalog goes to the printer TOMOROW, and I have JUST enough time to yank the 2 non functional smoke detectors in the covert section.

I've got someone looking for the reference right now. As soon as I get it, I'll post it and PM you.


I'm wondering about this interpretation myself. Yes, it is true that any detector you install must be functional.

However, these cameras are NOT DETECTORS in the first place. They are cameras that just happen to have that particular form factor. This is actually quite a different thing. As long as one isn't installing these cameras INSTEAD of required smoke detectors, or as a SUBSTITUTE for required smoke detectors, I'm not aware that they violate the code.

You'll find other cameras that are disguised as emergency lights, for instance. They would be "nonfunctional" as emergency lights and you could not satisfy code requiring such emergency lighting by installing these cameras. However, as long as you're not doing that, the code would have nothing to say about them any more than it would have anything to say about what form factor a motion detector must take.

Installing a camera that looks like an emergency light is NOT the same thing as installing a nonfunctioning emergency light, and installing a camera that looks like a smoke detector would not be the same thing as installing a nonfunctioning smoke detector.

I think that two different things are being conflated here resulting in a misinterpretation of the code, but I look forward to the cite on this also.
The reason is that it's a life safety device. Basically, as I recall, if it looks like a smoke detector, pretends to be a smoke detector, it has to be a working smoke detector. Even if there is another one 5 feet away. You can put a camera in a working smoke detector, just can't have a non-funtional one. As soon as I find the reference, I'll let you know.

[HotelSecurity]

I've got someone looking for the reference right now. As soon as I get it, I'll post it and PM you.


The reason is that it's a life safety device. Basically, as I recall, if it looks like a smoke detector, pretends to be a smoke detector, it has to be a working smoke detector. Even if there is another one 5 feet away. You can put a camera in a working smoke detector, just can't have a non-funtional one. As soon as I find the reference, I'll let you know.

Please post it here because we had one in an area covered by sprinklers which did not require smoke detectors.

[integrator97]

Sorry guys, but I was out all day and only had a few minutes to look. I called one of the fire inspectors, and he knew what I was talking about but couldn't cite it either, and is supposed to get back to me. He actually said he had to check because there's a restaurant with no fire alarm, but several smoke detectro cameras. I also emailed one of the nbfaa & nesa instructors, but he's going through a UL inspection in his central station, and sid he'd try to get me book, chapter and verse (his words) tomorrow after they finish.

[integrator97]

Here's one of them. International Fire Code 901.4.4, 2000 edition. Unfortunately I don't have a copy, but I'm trying to get the actual wording. The instructor also thinks it's in NFPA 101 Life Safety Code, but hasn't had a chance to get to it yet.

[Aust-SecMan]

If this is a temporary installation to ID the culprits, would it not be more efficient to set up the cameras inside the house at a window facing the problem area? A DVR and a couple of cams at the windows and the job’s done….

Or have I missed something in the post? :confused:

[madmartian]

The house is set back from street. The garage sticks out from the house. The window on the house is blocked by the garage to the left (as you look out the window). There is a view of the front yard that got trashed, but the DVR is in the garage and the wireless cameras I have tried pretty much suck. The forward part of the house is all garage.

[integrator97]

I finally got my copy of the 2006 International fire code.
Section 901.4.4 Appearance of equipment
Any device that has the physical appearance of life safety or fire protection equipment but that does not perform that life safety or fire protection funtion, shall be prohibited.

So, you can hide a camera in a working smoke detector, but you can't use those fake smoke detectors with the camera in it. Same thing with the sprinker heads with cameras. They gotta work.

I'm not sure if the exit lights are considered a life safety device, or just part of building code.

[Darksat]

Why not just get an alarm box for the garage and put the camera inside it, it acts as a deterrent and hides the camera as well. in fact most crims will walk up to the alarm and have a good look at it so you will really nail them.

[integrator97]

Why not just get an alarm box for the garage and put the camera inside it, it acts as a deterrent and hides the camera as well. in fact most crims will walk up to the alarm and have a good look at it so you will really nail them.
What do you mean by "alarm box"?

[psycom]

He probably means a panel box gutted. But wait... why gut it? Hook the darn thing up and use the alarm as a partitioned part of a current system. Run it wireless. DSC has good stuff that can be partitioned and I've used wireless devices w/o a problem just for a situation like yours.

Are you trying to catch them? Heck, by now I'd have them in jail. when did you start this thread?

You really want a camera system set up hidden? PM me and I'll tell you how to do it or make a unit for you if you can't. I don't want to post it here otherwise it won't be so secret would it?