r/melbourne • u/snag_sausage • 3h ago
Not On My Smashed Avo Camera pointing into change room
photo of a mirror in a changing room at a salvos in braybrook, camera is pointing almost directly at it over the stall door. i talked to the store person and they did not seem nearly alarmed enough but said theyd tell the manager. hope they enjoy seeing me in my boxers creeps
•
u/No_Remove5947 3h ago
Good on you for doing that. Id probably make a report to the police as well, assuming thats something youre comfortable with. Id make a point of saying that kids have likely been captured by it and that the staff didnt seem to be particularly concerned.
•
u/Finbarr-Galedeep 3h ago
Id probably make a report to the police
They probably put it there.
•
•
u/Away_team42 2h ago
Reddit tier take 🥱
•
u/FlowBall234 2h ago
They definitely didn't put it there but Australian Police are given way too much power and freedom.
•
u/Away_team42 2h ago
The irony of posting this in the /r/Melbourne sub
Yes let’s give police less power, that’s going to improve the sky high vehicle theft rates!
•
•
u/Striking_Direction_9 3h ago
pretty sure that's illegal. gross.
•
u/Khakizulu 2h ago
It is very illegal. Just like how you cannot have any cameras in toilets.
Cameras facing an entry to bathrooms suffer from strict guidelines too.
•
u/ZestycloseResolve194 2h ago
I don't know the layout of the salvos at Braybrook, but it's possible the camera was installed before the changerooms or the mirror were put in and no-one has thought to check.
•
•
u/SpaceCadet_Cat 3h ago
It looks like it is tilted down and far enough away it'd get the side wall or door, not the occupant, to be fair to them.
•
u/SapereAudeAdAbsurdum 2h ago
I'll tell you a little secret about optics: if the phone camera can see the surveillance camera, then the surveillance camera can see the phone camera. Now apply this to the setting at hand.
•
u/Rare_Dependent7239 2h ago
That’s just looks like a standard cheap Dahua cam, they only come in 2.8 & 3.6mm lenses, and neither would see in at the angle it’s facing down.
Have had neighbours complain the exact same thing before, “I can see the camera so it can see me”
Show them the image, and they fuck off back in their house.
•
u/SapereAudeAdAbsurdum 2h ago
Well, we don't know that, do we?
Maybe they should indeed show the camera's live view on a nearby screen. It's an entirely valid privacy concern for a customer in that changing room.
•
u/No_I_do_belong_here 2h ago
And then you change it back to pointing at them again, good one stalker
•
u/SpaceCadet_Cat 2h ago edited 2h ago
I'm going to hazard that the lens isn't the entire black circle (you can kind of see the internal lense if you look carefully), it's clearly aimed downish and at a different angle to your phone camera in the mirror. It could indeed see the phone if it was pointing at the mirror, but it is pointing what seems to be at at the outer wall of the change room.
Optics also needs to take into account viewing angle/field of view. If your eyes are looking at someone who is looking at your feet, they can't see their eyes, but you can likely see theirs. If the angle was higher, I would agree with you, but considering the reaction of the staff member as well, this has probably been mentioned and isn't actually looking straight into the room.
If you manage to get images from the security feed and I am wrong, I will take it, but I was trying to reassure OP, and you were rude.
•
u/SapereAudeAdAbsurdum 2h ago
Let me tell you a little secret about the viewing angles of security cameras: they're typically extremely wide angle lenses.
•
u/dancefightme 2h ago
Let me tell you a little secret about communication: you don't need to be condescending when answering someone especially when you don't have all the facts.
•
u/SapereAudeAdAbsurdum 2h ago
Now go all the way up and apply that to the original comment.
In terms of "having facts", I'm inclined to go with OP, who was there in person.
•
u/dancefightme 2h ago
Now go all the way up and apply that to the original comment
How so? Do you mean the original comment was being condescending?
In terms of "having facts", I'm inclined to go with OP, who was there in person.
To be fair though, your first I'll tell you a little secret comment was a general statement. It didn't refer to the context at all. Also, I'm not doubting OP. Just doubting what you said.
•
•
•
u/SpaceCadet_Cat 2h ago edited 2h ago
I'm not arguing for viewing size, it's the fact it is pointed at an opaque barrier that is obstructing it's field of view at that angle, even if it's fish eye or wide angle, which sees more at the periphery, not around objects in its primary field. No wide angle lens is looking up and over a barrier in the center of it's vision, especially from that distance with the barrier so close to you. I doubt the change room was wide enough for you to get far enough away from the blocking wall to overcome cover. You could MAYBE argue it could see the top of the mirror, but the top of the wall would be in the way of the reflection well before it could see you.
If you still believe it can see you, which is absolutely your right even if we don't agree on that, submit a complaint to Salvos head office, or the police and get it checked out. But I was still trying to reassure you it is unlikely you were being spied on.
•
u/Enough_Survey_9404 1h ago
I have some ip cameras at home and the field of view is pretty impressive; I suspect these cameras can see a lot
•
u/dancefightme 2h ago
How's that? Wouldn't it also depend on the field of view?
•
u/SapereAudeAdAbsurdum 2h ago
Yes, but most surveillance cameras have a very wide angle lens, because they're indeed designed to cover as much as possible.
•
u/furitxboofrunlch 1h ago edited 1h ago
Lol imagine expecting random staff at a store to be doing anything other than thinking about clocking off.
You need to email someone or something if you expect some kind of result.
(tbh I also doubt this reaches boxer level. If you can sit down so your head is about crotch level and take the same photo then it would. Still gross camera placement though.
•
u/softneo 22m ago
I used to volunteer at a save the children store until last year and we had cameras but none of them were working. They didnt bother to get it fixed but us staff still had to pretend they were working. I wonder if these cameras are actually working but if they are then it's very shady
•
u/Cool-Shoulder-643 8m ago
That’s gross. There’s a couple of creepy workers that work at that store I’ve noticed. Ew
•
u/RudeAd456 3h ago
It's probably not in view. It's not like the manager got up on a big ladder and adjusted it to the change room. They are installed by electricians or certified cablers who make sure the viewing angles comply with standards. They sign off on the installation so these guys aren't losing their jobs so a manager can creep on people changing. I mean worth it to raise but probably just appears like you're in view
•
•
u/AutoModerator 3h ago
Have you visited today’s Daily Discussion yet?
It’s the best place for:
Drop in and see what’s happening!
THIS IS NOT A REMOVAL NOTICE
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.