SpeedCam

In the taxi game speeding infringement notices take ages to arrive as the owner first determines who is the lucky recipient. Thus some months later it's near impossible to recall the incident, especially those involving flash-less digital cameras.

Given this was my first speeding ticket in five years and only the second in twenty years, it's somewhat annoying to tarnish my record. Apparently I was clocked late at night in the Cross City Tunnel doing 66kph in a 40kph roadworks zone, normally 80kph.

Before paying I ordered the images and proceeded to thoroughly check the details. Now I have a puzzle maybe some knowledgeable readers can help explain, whilst waiting for a response from the RTA. Their website camera page doesn't cover my query.

According to their headers both images were recorded on 'Frame 77', indicating only one frame from one camera was used. Yet to my eyes, the images don't correspond with each other in three areas...(images enlarge)...

1. the image on the left depicts reflections of continuous overhead tunnel lights along the vehicle roof. However the close-up shot, on the right, fails to show these reflected lights.
2. comparing both images it is evident they are framed with different alignments. That is, the close-up image is tilting to the right.
3. there is clear tonal variation between the images, although this may be the result of a different lens filter or focal length.

These discrepancies tend to suggest either two cameras were used or, more likely, two instantaneous shots taken from the same camera. However given both images quote the same Frame number, I'm wondering what's the story with these discrepancies..?

Sure, I'm clutching at straws but with $231 and 3 points pending, I'd like to be certain.

Comments

[2rf9yh2twg9h]

The difference in color must be related to the fact that the close up is "brighter". It is interesting that in the close up the rear of the car is brighter, the top of the car is dimmer than the rear, the wall is darker than in the other picutre, and the tail lights are dimmer than in the other picture. This probably means they are using a different wavelength of light for the closeup. I wonder if they are illuminating the close up with infrared - would that also account for the reddish tone in the color image?

Some type of illumination in the close up would also explain why it is sharper than the other picture, and why the foreground (rear of the car) is brighter than the back ground (wall, top of car).

[nick savva]

Are they the same car/time?
The picture at the right clearly shows a 'witches hat' that is not obvioous/present on the other picture.

[rd]

did u notice the cone on the right of the car in the 2nd photo?

[Interested]

The second photo might be taken in infra-red to better show the number plate. That would explain the different lighting. It would also explain the different orientation, since it would have been taken from a different camera.

However there's no getting away from the witch's hat in one photo and not the other. Clearly these are not the photos taken at the same place and time.

Adrian, please let us know what you find out about this.

[Shosh]

I've had the privilege of 3 fines in the CCT within 9 months, one also at 66kph in a supposed 40kph zone (which I believed at the time was an 80kph zone). Interesting hey! I now drive around 50-60 kph in there and will probably be booked next for going too slow! Either that or I'll total myself trying to keep an eye out for the speedo, signs and trying to ignore my fellow travellers giving me the bird, honking and high beaming me. Time will tell, but I might just be hailing down your taxi soon!

[adrian]

Thanks for the interesting opinions folks, will address soon. Right now I've got an appeal to lodge. Later...

[K.B.]

Sorry to disapoint, I thought that as well about the witches hat, but try changing the brightness/contrast and light filters in the first photo and you will notice an outline showing the witches hat is there, just not picked up in the flash from that photo. Also you will see the break in the white dividing line where the witches hat is.

[adrian]

Yes, K.B., the answer lies in the witches hats, correctly identified by you in first image. The second image has the cab at the next white lane marker, with a differently positioned witches hat.

Whilst this suggests two cameras are used, as suggested by another commentor, I guess the absence of overhead light reflections in second image is due to a break in lights. Passing strange, though. Therefore I must concede the images are correct.

On a general point it's ironic that 1km/h less in speed would have reduced my fine from $231 to $77. The Government got lucky there. Wonder how often that happens...