[kikkoman]

I would think for real time point to point communication to work the source and destination points should be known instantly.

[Dark Helmet]

I think it is one of those olden days things that have just stuck cuz people expect it to be like that.

[gururafiki]

With the NSA on top of things, I'm sure tracing the call is not a problem.

[sambeau]

It used to as someone had to go down to the exchange and trace the number throught the mechanical dialling system (reading each number off some sort of tumbler or something).

Nowadays its all computers. It really should be instant.

[ajprice]

Yeah, theres tracing a call, and theres the old 'image sharpening computer' that takes the whole episode/film to give a perfect image of someones face from the bottom right corner of a blurred photo or CCTV camera. I couldn't believe they used it on Battlestar Galactica season one.

[sambeau]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat...phone_exchange

[analogika]

Originally Posted by ajprice

Yeah, theres tracing a call, and theres the old 'image sharpening computer' that takes the whole episode/film to give a perfect image of someones face from the bottom right corner of a blurred photo or CCTV camera. I couldn't believe they used it on Battlestar Galactica season one.

I thought the same thing.

Shame, as it's such a completely amazing series otherwise.

[goMac]

CallerID?

[Ulrich Kinbote]

Originally Posted by ajprice

Yeah, theres tracing a call, and theres the old 'image sharpening computer' that takes the whole episode/film to give a perfect image of someones face from the bottom right corner of a blurred photo or CCTV camera. I couldn't believe they used it on Battlestar Galactica season one.

It's easy. Take an out-of-focus low-res grab from a security camera... tap, tap, tap, press enter: A perfect photograph. Then it's just a case of using that program that files through a billion faces (all of which are in the data base, criminal record or otherwise) to match the photo to a person. Lastly, simply click "What are they doing now?" and you get a live satellite feed of the person in question, usually coming out of the supermarket and unlocking their car.

Don't you know anything?

[davesimondotcom]

The "tracing the call" time thing is simply used as a dramatic device. It heightens tension. But it's become tiresome, for sure.

As far as the "image enhancement" thing - that's been a thorn in my movie/tv viewing experience for years. What's worse is when they take an image of a license plate, with a shadow over it, tiny, on an angle, while moving, taken with an ATM camera and enhance it so it looks like a photo taken in a studio so they can read the number. You can't make something from nothing people!

One of the worst offenders in this was the movie "Rising Sun" where they enhanced a reflection from a security camera or something like that. What crap!

[mydog8mymac]

Originally Posted by goMac

CallerID?

Brilliant!

[Cadaver]

The NSA is listening to your calls and reading all this right now anyway.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by Cadaver

The NSA is listening to your calls and reading all this right now anyway.

How bored they must be.

[brassplayersrock²]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

How bored they must be.

in that little little room where the internet lives....

[hyteckit]

Tracing the phone line doesn't mean who is calling, but also where they are calling from. CallerID let's you know what number they are calling from. I guess you can also figure out their address from their phone number if it is a landline. I don't know why 911 keep asking for a home address, even though they can look that up. Maybe they need authorization in order to look up the caller's info and that is what's taking a minute.

[Skeptik]

I think this one minute tracing charade is a bit like the 555 xxx xxx numbers on TV. We all know it's fake.

[Skeptik]

...

[Salty]

I love on CSI when they take a blurry web cam photo and make it look pristine. I always look at it and just go... no... you're wrong. YOU'RE WRONG! Like OK if they're using film or something, you've got a slight chance. But they'll do like a security camera's reflection or something and it's like... that's such bull!

[- - e r i k - -]

No one ever said that before in this thread Salty.

[GSixZero]

I agree that it's really silly when they sharpen a blurry CCTV camera to perfect sharpness and then read the numbers off a credit card, but there are some really crazy optical techniques out there. There's a technique called Dual photography where they can synthesize what a single light source 'sees'. There a great video on the standford site of them reading a playing card without seeing the face, but only seeing the light reflected off the face of the card onto a book.

Here's a good description of the technique.

From: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7453

A card trick to flummox even the most expert of conjurers could hold the key to unparalleled trick photography and special effects.

Researchers from Stanford University in California and Cornell University, New York, both in the US, have demonstrated a way to identify a playing card whose face is turned away from the camera. They did it by measuring projected light as it bounced off the face of the card and one other surface before reaching a camera.

Key to the conjuring trick is a technique known as "dual photography". This involves retracing the path light takes as it bounces off different surfaces, pixel by pixel. A light projector - with millions of controllable pixels which are switched on in turn - illuminates the scene. The reflected light from each pixel is recorded sequentially by a digital camera.

It is then possible to retrace the path of each pixel's light and reconstruct the image, as it would appear at the projector, using a principle known as Helmholtz reciprocity, which states that light flow can effectively be reversed without altering its transport properties. The entire process can also be accelerated by illuminating several pixels at once, after calculating which ones will not interfere with each other.

Check out the video: http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/dual_photography/ (It's 63MB)

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by goMac

CallerID?

As a "programmer" you should know better than anyone that it can be easily faked.

[James L]

Originally Posted by hyteckit

Tracing the phone line doesn't mean who is calling, but also where they are calling from. CallerID let's you know what number they are calling from. I guess you can also figure out their address from their phone number if it is a landline. I don't know why 911 keep asking for a home address, even though they can look that up. Maybe they need authorization in order to look up the caller's info and that is what's taking a minute.

There are multiple types of 911 services, and not all are enhanced.

In non enhanced 911 systems, they don't get addresses displayed on their screens.

In enhanced 911, an address does appear on the dispatcher or call taker's screen, but there are many, many, many documented cases of people's addresses being listed incorrectly in the directory (note, this directory is often separate and apart from the phone book listings).

The 30 seconds it takes to confirm an address is WAY better than the 20 minutes it can take to send an ambulance on a wild goose chase, only to have to reroute it to the correct address once people realize that the initial address displayed on the screen is wrong.

I always tell people to contact a non emergency line in their local dispatch center to make sure they are listed correctly. Also, to makes sure their house numbers are prominantly displayed and visible, especially at nighttime. I have gone to calls where the people had NO light on outside of their house, NO person standing outside of their house flagging us down, NO house numbers AT ALL visible from the street (completely obscured by a bush), etc. Then, they complain that we took too long to get there.

Make it easy for us. Confirm a correct address, and have your house numbers clearly marked from the street. These are things that can be done well before you ever need 911. During the emergency if you can turn on a porch light at night, or have someone in the house go out on the street to wave us down, that is really helpful too.

[Salty]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

No one ever said that before in this thread Salty.

I was the first to mention CSI.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Salty

I was the first to mention CSI.

.

[Gamoe]

Originally Posted by GSixZero

but there are some really crazy optical techniques out there.

According to Steve Jobs (from what I recall of a keynote), it is mathematically possible to focus an unfocused photo. He said, however that it was computationally prohibitive for current personal computers, but made allusions to it being possible for a personal computer at some point in the future. Of course, I realize that Steve is not really a computer wiz, and it wouldn't be the first time he's said something incorrect.

I wonder if I should be keeping my unfocused photos or just continue trashing most of them.

BTW I love two quotes from Jobs and Woz:

Jobs: He was the only person I met who knew more about electronics than me.

Woz: Steve didn't know very much about electronics.