Jump to content

Infrared Camera Cache


Cloak_N_Dagger
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

I've been thinking about hiding a cache and placing my PhotoTracker (remote game camera) nearby, to take pics of the geocacher as they approach the site. Of course I wouldn't tell them on the cache page that there was a hidden camera. I would let the camera be a surprise to them.

 

I thought the pics might be worth a few chuckles ... geocacher staring intently at their gps, swatting bugs, and making funny surprised faces etc.

 

So what do you think about this type of camera cache? I think most folks would enjoy getting a copy of the pic to remember the cache hunt. It might make a cool momento! icon_biggrin.gif

 

BTW,I've had my camera out in the woods for the last week or so, along a game trail. (not a cache location ...yet)

 

Look who showed up to pose for the camera! icon_cool.gif

sitbear2.jpg

2003buck8sm2.jpg

 

Someone feel free to "Markwell" me. Are there any caches out there using infrared sensing cameras?

 

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

Changing some folks mind, is like trying to herd cats.

 

55883_200.gif

Link to comment

The only thing I would warn about is ... while most of the caching community are pretty honest folks ... there are a lot out there that are not. That's a pretty expensive piece of equipment to post the location of ... to the world at large. I'm not too sure I would. I don't know about your area ... but in some places people have been looking up caches and trashing or removing them. Just a thought. Much easier to replace tupperware and trinkets.

 

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

Co-founder of the "NC/VA GEO-HOG ASSOCIATION"

... when you absolutely have to find it first!

Link to comment

Originally posted by Doc-Dean:

quote:
This is pretty slick! Is there a good way to secure it against theft??


---------

Doc - Theft of the cam would be a big concern. That's the main reason I haven't done it yet. Most of the cameras come with some type of anti-theft device. Usually a cable that locks the box to a tree.

 

Without going into detail, I have designed a way of securing it to the tree that's better than just a cable. icon_wink.gif Someone would need to bring some serious tools and equipment with them if they wanted to steal it. Of course ... someone probably would eventually. icon_rolleyes.gif

 

As my Pappy used to say, "A thief will work harder at stealing than working"

--------

Originally posted by Shadows:

quote:
I have been thinking about somthing like that also, but, with with no flash.

 

The camera can be set to use no flash and for daytime use only. I know a few guys that make "stumps" to hide them in, with a knothole for the camera lens. Kinda like some cache hiders I know. icon_cool.gif

 

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

Changing some folks mind, is like trying to herd cats.

 

55883_200.gif

Link to comment

I think its a cool idea, kinda like those photos of you on a roller coaster. However if you post it they will come....and steal your camera, no doubt in my mind about that one. If you don't post it you will hear people bit..ing about their privacy. Either way has it ups and downs, personally I think its a fun new idea that could enhance the caching experience.

Link to comment

Sounds like a really good idea!

 

Perhaps you could get round the problem of theft if you mention it on the cache page/complaints about privacy if you don't in this way:

 

Put it there for a limited period. Don't mention it on the cache page. When you remove it email everyone whose photo is in it to ask if they're happy for you to publish it on the web. (And if you want to be mean, when you publish the photos publish a name list of those who said no icon_wink.gif).

 

Bill

 

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

"Ah, take the Cache and let the Credit go..."

The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, trans. Edward Fitzgerald

Link to comment

Privacy? If you want privacy, stay at home. If you're out on public property, you have no realistic expectation of privacy. It's perfectly legal to take pictures of whoever you wish, on public property, and those pictures are yours to do with as you wish. I say secure the camera against theft, and go for it. You'll get better pictures that way than if you post a note on the page and people are looking for the camera before they look for the cache......

 

Nothing to see here, move along.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by IV_Warrior:

Privacy? If you want privacy, stay at home. If you're out on public property, you have no realistic expectation of privacy. It's perfectly legal to take pictures of whoever you wish, on public property, and those pictures are yours to do with as you wish. I say secure the camera against theft, and go for it. You'll get better pictures that way than if you post a note on the page and people are looking for the camera before they look for the cache......

 

Nothing to see here, move along.


 

Ahhh, because you can get away with it legally, that makes it right....right?

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by IV_Warrior:

Privacy? If you want privacy, stay at home. If you're out on public property, you have no realistic expectation of privacy. It's perfectly legal to take pictures of whoever you wish, on public property, and those pictures are yours to do with as you wish.


 

You are, of course, right. However, taking pictures of someone having a quiet walk in the woods, without their knowledge, although perhaps legal, is, in my book of morals, not a nice thing to do. It is sneaky, and a little bit sick. (If you are a fan of Jerry Springer and other sick, voyeuristic TV shows, you might disagree with me.) There are a lot of things that aren’t very nice, and in fact downright offensive, but you have the right to do them. Doing them though, doesn’t make it right.

 

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me. geol4.JPG

Link to comment

Could there be a compromise where the people whose photo was taken could give approval prior to the pics being published?

 

I dunno, it mostly creeps me out to think I'm being photographed unbeknownst to me. I know that there are surveillance cameras everywhere these days, but I guess I was hoping that alone in the woods was surveillance free.

 

Could be a kettle of worms. What happens when you 'catch' someone taking but not leaving a trade item? What happens when you catch someone not hiding the cache exactly as they found it. When does the fun turn into the accusatory?

 

And if I knew the camera was there, I'd probably primp before I got to the cache....cause I'm a tad more girlie girl than I'm usually willing to admit.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:

 

You are, of course, right. However, taking pictures of someone having a quiet walk in the woods, without their knowledge, although perhaps legal, is, in my book of morals, not a nice thing to do. It is sneaky, and a little bit sick. (If you are a fan of Jerry Springer and other sick, voyeuristic TV shows, you might disagree with me.) There are a lot of things that aren’t very nice, and in fact downright offensive, but you have the right to do them. Doing them though, doesn’t make it right.

 

_I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me._ http://www.cslaw.ca/geol4.JPG


 

Maybe he needs to get one of those airport scanners that can see through clothes. Yeah, that's the ticket. What? You don't like it? What are you, a terrorist or something? It is his legal right to see you naked, you know. You did have the audacity to go out in public and leave your home - it is your fault. You were asking for it....you exhibitionist! icon_rolleyes.gif

Link to comment

I think if you are out in public you are free game. It's not like you are in your house or backyard nekkid, you're out in a public/great outdoors area, nothing private about. If someone wants to take pictures of me whule I'm walking around a field or woods then so be it. Not trying to start anything, but if you're not doing anything wrong, who cares who's looking or taking your pic.

 

Can I have a loan, I'm low on cache!!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:

 

You are, of course, right. However,taking pictures of someone having a quiet walk in the woods, without their knowledge, although perhaps legal, is, in my book of morals, not a nice thing to do. It is sneaky, and a little bit sick. (If you are a fan of Jerry Springer and other sick, voyeuristic TV shows, you might disagree with me.) There are a lot of things that aren’t very nice, and in fact downright offensive, but you have the right to do them. Doing them though, doesn’t make it right.


 

Well Seneca .. I never realized that I was so "Sick" .... thanks for pointed it out. smiley-yikes.gif I'll rush right out and see a shrink tomorrow!smiley-hitting-self.gif

 

Heck I wasn't trying to spy on anyone, I just thought it would be fun for the geocachers themselves. I didn't plan on putting it in a public park and playing "Big Brother". The camera is currently on my property, and would stay on my property ... as would the proposed cache.

 

I'm not sure how the camera would take pictures of someone taking and not leaving anything at a cache either. The camera would most likely only take one picture of the visitor, as they walked up to the cache. It's on a time delay and would not snap another picture for several minutes.

 

I just wanted to make a cache that I thought would be fun for other geocachers. I didn't realize that I would offend people. Once again in this time of "political correctness" it appears that I have once again blundered.

 

Thanks for the comments and insights... I guess I'll just continue to take pics of the local wildlife with the camera.

 

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

Changing some folks mind, is like trying to herd cats.

 

55883_200.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by The Rocket Pack:

I think if you are out in public you are free game. It's not like you are in your house or backyard nekkid, you're out in a public/great outdoors area, nothing private about. If someone wants to take pictures of me whule I'm walking around a field or woods then so be it. Not trying to start anything, but if you're not doing anything wrong, who cares who's looking or taking your pic.

 

Can I have a loan, I'm low on cache!!


 

Then why would you have a problem with cameras in your home? You must be doing something wrong there, eh?

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Cloak_N_Dagger:

Heck I wasn't trying to spy on anyone, I just thought it would be fun for the geocachers themselves. I didn't plan on putting it in a public park and playing "Big Brother". The camera is currently on my property, and would stay on my property ... as would the proposed cache.


 

I didn't realize it was on your property.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Cloak_N_Dagger:

Well Seneca .. I never realized that I was so "Sick" .... thanks for pointed it out. http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/html/emoticons/smiley-yikes.gif I'll rush right out and see a shrink tomorrow!http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/html/emoticons/smiley-hitting-self.gif

 

Heck I wasn't trying to spy on anyone, I just thought it would be fun for the geocachers themselves.


 

I didn’t say you we’re sick. In fact I think it was good of you to bounce your “fun” idea off others on these forums before going ahead with it. You asked “So what do you think about this type of camera cache?” and I honestly told you what I thought. I am presuming you asked, because you weren’t quite sure how other cachers would feel about it, and you wanted some input before going ahead with it. As you can see from the responses, some cachers appear to have no problem with it. Well now you know that at least one cacher thinks going ahead with your idea would be “sneaky, and a little bit sick”. I apologize if that was not the type of input you were looking for.

 

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me. geol4.JPG

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by SamLowrey:

quote:
Originally posted by The Rocket Pack:

I think if you are out in public you are free game. It's not like you are in your house or backyard nekkid, you're out in a public/great outdoors area, nothing private about. If someone wants to take pictures of me whule I'm walking around a field or woods then so be it. Not trying to start anything, but if you're not doing anything wrong, who cares who's looking or taking your pic.

 

Can I have a loan, I'm low on cache!!


 

Then why would you have a problem with cameras in your home? You must be doing something wrong there, eh?


 

Like I said, home is suppose to be private. What you do in your own home is your own business. What you do walking down the street is everyones business. Personally I have no problems with security cameras and the like. The idea of a cam near the cache would be very cool.

 

Can I have a loan, I'm low on cache!!

Link to comment

Actually, you might have an expectation of privacy in the woods/public parks. Recently here in CT, a couple was video'd copulating in a discrete area in a public park and the videographer was prosecuted.

 

Just 'cause it's public property doesn't mean anything--think of a public bathroom after all!

 

I for one wouldn't appreciate being photographed w/o my knowledge. Simply note it on the cache page--I doubt you'll experience any more vandalism than if not.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Randy

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by The Rocket Pack:

Like I said, home is suppose to be private. What you do in your own home is your own business. What you do walking down the street is everyones business. Personally I have no problems with security cameras and the like. The idea of a cam near the cache would be very cool.

 

Can I have a loan, I'm low on cache!!


 

I didn't realize that was the way it is supposed to be. I guess I can now murder someone in my home and it is no one's business. Hmmmm, no, it fails that test.

 

What I am saying is that this privacy you cherish inside your home must be worth something. So, why dismiss it as meaningless elsewhere. A place where you are not watched seems more inviting that a place that is. If one enjoys privacy at home, why would one suddenly not do so elsewhere? Even if, to the letter of the law, it is legal to rob us of that, should that happen? Or if it does happen, I'm not going to stick a smile on my face and shrug and pretend it doesn't matter.

 

But all that is just me being argumentative. If it is on his land I don't have a problem with it.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by RJFerret:

Actually, you might have an expectation of privacy in the woods/public parks. Recently here in CT, a couple was video'd copulating in a discrete area in a public park and the _videographer_ was prosecuted.

 

Just 'cause it's _public_ property doesn't mean anything--think of a _public_ bathroom after all!

 

Hope this helps,

 

Randy


 

A public bathroom doesn't mean it's ok to take someones picture. Not many ppl (i say not many because there are some) walk through the park with thier pants around the ankles. The person getting arrested for videotaping the more than romantic couple is just wrong. The other people should have gotten busted and the tape confiscated.

 

Can I have a loan, I'm low on cache!!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:

My guess is that you may be able to TAKE the pictures legally, but PUBLISHING those photos without permission could be a no-no.


Sooo... all the pictures of celebrities taken in public places and published in "newspapers" like the Enquirer, Sun, etc. are crossing a legal line?

 

--

Pehmva!

 

Random quote:

sigimage.php

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Cruzin!:

 

Sooo... all the pictures of celebrities taken in public places and published in "newspapers" like the Enquirer, Sun, etc. are crossing a legal line?


 

News organizations play under a different set of rules; as do 'public' figures.

 

Celebrities can, and do, sue over the publication of photos.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by The Rocket Pack:

 

A public bathroom doesn't mean it's ok to take someones picture. Not many ppl (i say not many because there are some) walk through the park with thier pants around the ankles. The person getting arrested for videotaping the more than romantic couple is just wrong. The other people should have gotten busted and the tape confiscated.

 


 

I tend to agree (and add the tape should be destroyed). But here is where you have the results of common sense being absent on both sides. It reminds me of that Carlin joke (probably lifted from someone else) about the guy who breezes through redlights explaining "don't worry, my brother drives this way" and then stopping at the green light because "my brother might be coming the other way!"

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Cruzin!:

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:

My guess is that you may be able to TAKE the pictures legally, but PUBLISHING those photos without permission could be a no-no.


Sooo... all the pictures of celebrities taken in public places and published in "newspapers" like the Enquirer, Sun, etc. are crossing a legal line?

 

--

Pehmva!

 

Random quote:

http://sthomas.net/sigimage.php


 

The short sighted decision of some court means we have two standards. Seems pretty lame to me, but isn't that the case celebrated by liberals all over regaring Larry Flint? You know, those liberals who want to treat everyone the same.....sometimes....when it suits them.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by SamLowrey:

 

I didn't realize that was the way it is supposed to be. I guess I can now murder someone in my home and it is no one's business. Hmmmm, no, it fails that test.


 

Ok now you are just being silly and a bit sarcastic. The whole topic was privacy of taking pictures in public of strangers. Your home obviously is not public. The fact is that when I walk out of my house I am in the PUBLIC view, no longer private. If you happen to show up on camera in the background from a news crew are you going to sue the station for airing it. Anyway, I think this topic has been beat into the ground whew!!

 

Can I have a loan, I'm low on cache!!

Link to comment

It all comes down to what is a "reasonable expectation of privacy". A public park...no. A bathroom in a public park....yes. The legal definition is "The expectation of privacy is not reasonable if there exists a vantage point from which anyone can see or hear what was going on and if this vantage point is or should be known or "reasonably foreseen" by the person being surveilled." According to United States v. McIver [9 th Cir. 1999] 186 F.3d 1119, 1125, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in the national forests.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BadAndy:

A public park...no. A bathroom in a public park....yes. The legal definition is "The expectation of privacy is not reasonable if there exists a vantage point from which anyone can see or hear what was going on and if this vantage point is or should be known or "reasonably foreseen" by the person being surveilled."


 

Ironically, you can hear what's going on in a public bathroom (as they have great ventilation), so no expectation of privacy!

 

A trysting spot in a public park would offer such as surrounding foliage blocks sight and distance from trails prevents overhearing... Voila! Legal privacy.

 

I'm glad we have courts to deal with these gray areas!

 

I find it shameful but amusing in the U.S. that we still subscribe to the puritanical attitudes that love is bad but violence is publicly acceptable!

 

This is an area where the rest of the world is certainly a lot more sensible.

 

IMO,

 

Randy

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by RJFerret:

 

A trysting spot in a public park _would_ offer such as surrounding foliage blocks sight and distance from trails prevents overhearing... Voila! Legal privacy.

 


 

Actually, from the vantage point of the "natural surrounding foilage" there would be no such assumption.

 

heh

Link to comment

Um, Hey Cloak, I think it's a cool idea, and I'd do it if I had one. I was just looking at those cameras in a catalog, and hadn't even thought of the "caching angle". You'll always find someone who has a problem with whatever it is you do. I think that the your concept is an innocent, fun idea, and that you have no malice or illegal intent to your action. Go for it!

 

"I'm 35 Years old, I am divorced, and I live in van down by the river!" - Matt Foley

Link to comment

quote:
Have you seen this website? This photographer does camera traps and has gotten some amazing pictures! Just thought I would share

 

Neat site! I had never heard of these camera traps before. Very interesting!

 

But I don't really like the idea of being one of the things caught in the camera trap! I doubt I would be horribly offended or raise any kind of stink about it, but I would still feel a little put out that I was secretly photographed. I would have second thoughts about doing this without telling people they will be photographed. If you do it without telling, certainly don't publicly publish the pics without permission.

 

pokeanim3.gif

Link to comment

I still think it is a cool and unique idea, and as its on your land you are free to do as you wish. The one thing I do agree on is you should send the person the pic and let them approve it before posting it anywhere. If they don't want it posted you delete it no harm done. I also stand by the don't post that you have a camera at the cache, someone will steal it. I'll give 100 to 1 odds any takers?

 

I see your lips moving but all I hear is blah blah blah

Link to comment

quote:
SECRET PHOTOS OF CARLEENP FOR SALE

Just send a SASE and $10 to me!


 

Can I have copies for free? You know, I might also have to sue you if you make any kind of profit! icon_biggrin.gif

 

Seriously, someone else mentioned peeing in the woods. I could just image the situation where I decided to take a leak outside (I'm an outdoors woman after all) in some backwoods area and got caught on hidden camera. Ay yi yi....!!!!!

 

pokeanim3.gif

Link to comment

in IN, video voyeurism is a felony. Probably pretty much the same elsewhere.

 

Problem is, definitions are very vague and computer files and pictures are very tenacious. (FBI has people that can read erased hard drives, many times even after the files are overwritten)

 

I heard of a family in IN being prosecuted (persecuted) for taking a pix of their baby nekkid- just like the pix nearly everybody has and like the ones shown in tv commercials.

 

I would be concerned that I might get some pix that could land me in jail or cost me a fortune to defend myself.

 

Caint never did nothing.

GDAE, Dave

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Xitron:

I still think it is a cool and unique idea, and as its on your land you are free to do as you wish. The one thing I do agree on is you should send the person the pic and let them approve it before posting it anywhere. If they don't want it posted you delete it no harm done. I also stand by the don't post that you have a camera at the cache, someone will steal it. I'll give 100 to 1 odds any takers?

 

I see your lips moving but all I hear is blah blah blah


 

Wait till he places it and lets have a dollar pool.

 

Caint never did nothing.

GDAE, Dave

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by ChurchCampDave:

 

Wait till he places it and lets have a dollar pool.

GDAE, Dave


 

Save your dollars Dave. icon_wink.gif Based on some of the negative responses, I don't think you'll have to worry about my camera at any of my caches.

-----------

The purpose of the camera wasn't to try to degrade anyone or be voyeristic. (BTW, If anyone is peeing on my cache ... you deserve your pic taken! icon_razz.gif )

 

The idea was just to have fun. I never said I would publish the photos. I believe I said I would send the cacher a copy of the pic for their own enjoyment. They could do with it as they please.

 

For what it's worth ... remember how surprised you were, when you first found out there were so many geocaches near your home? You might be just as surprised at how many of these cameras are being used by people for wildlife photography and home surveillance. I know several stores that can't keep them in stock.

 

Anyway, Don't worry about a camera at ANY of my caches. Does that mean I'm taking the camera out of the woods at it's current location? Absolutely not. Tomorrow morning the POSTED signs go up. If you're caught on the camera, then that just means you are trespassing. I'll continue to use it to take pictures of wildlife on our property. icon_smile.gif

 

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

Changing some folks mind, is like trying to herd cats.

 

55883_200.gif

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...