Photo Blocker Spray ??

paul moore

Hey just wondering if anybody here has used this stuff ??

It seems very expensive for a can of this stuff but if it works !!!

It depends on a flash to work,

Seth Brundle

I have heard too many stories of it being an overpriced can of air!
Anyhow, its pointless unless you plan on passing a fixed gatso. All other forms of speeding related photography don't use flash.

Hobbes

Not sure if they have them here yet but in the UK the cops can see that your plate has been doctored on the video feed they have and you get charged for it.

Pretty sure its illegal though in Ireland as well.

overdriver

I saw it tested somewhere, and it doesn't woirk. Fact. The cops can enhance the resolution on the photo and do you anyway. You would also be in a world of crap for attempting to use it, I would imagine.

paul moore

How would they charge you for it ???

How would they track u down,they cant do you for it.....its not law to have a photo-genic no. plate ...??
Wait till you see this country when the private company are in action
When i was in Sydney there was a stretch of road leaving the city across the Bridge and you could get 8 tickets in about 5 mins, Crazy

overdriver

The photo of the plate shows it's abnormal. They can mess withthe photo and still get your reg. then they have the speeding charge, and whatever they can drum up for altering your plate ( non-standard) and attempting to circumvent the law.

The test I saw was UK based. SO I don't know if the same rules would apply here.

I'll try find it...


EDIT

Here you go, not the one I saw, but close enough. The other reviews are very helpful too.

http://www.ukspeedtraps.co.uk/platespray.htm

Our man in Havana

They can only use filters on the negative or zoom in the image. They are not allowed to manipulate the image by electronic means.

fletch

I see they were selling this at the BigBoysToys show in the RDS for €35 a can..how were they getting away with it?

Our man in Havana

fletch wrote:

I see they were selling this at the BigBoysToys show in the RDS for €35 a can..how were they getting away with it?

Because it don't work?

fletch

Bond-007 wrote:

Because it don't work?

The demo guy sprayed some of the stuff on a number plate and then got his digital camera and took a photo and it seemed to work....

Our man in Havana

flash or non flash?

Capt'n Midnight

Not sure if it's here or the UK but some speed cameras take several pictures with differend exposures, more than just underexposed /normal/overexposed to get around problems like that. Digital photography is getting better all the time.

fletch

Bond-007 wrote:

flash or non flash?

Flash....as a test I used my camera phone without the flash and the number plate appeared perfectly....those Gatson vans don't use flashes do they? so the product really does have limited appeal

turbo

i tried it and it didnt work

Esel

turbo wrote:

i tried it and it didnt work

As in you got a ticket, the evidence for which came from a Gatso camera?

SouperComputer

here ye go, guaranteed to work every time

turbo

esel wrote:

As in you got a ticket, the evidence for which came from a Gatso camera?

i put it on a plate and then took some pictures and the number could always be seen

Wossack

Price of photo blocker spray - the price of a normal can of lacqeur = idiot tax

Jumpy

You could try the all new "Driving at the Speed Limit"

overdriver

:d

kippy

When i was in Sydney there was a stretch of road leaving the city across the Bridge and you could get 8 tickets in about 5 mins, Crazy

If you were an idiot and didnt drive within the speed limit.

Drive within the speed limit and cop yourself on.
Have you no idea of the dangers of speeding-even with all the accidents on our roads?
People like you, should imo not be allowed to drive these roads.
Kippy

Seth Brundle

kippy wrote:

If you were an idiot and didnt drive within the speed limit.

I don't think there is any driver that can admit to having never broken a speed limit so get off your high horse.

kippy wrote:

Drive within the speed limit and cop yourself on.
Have you no idea of the dangers of speeding-even with all the accidents on our roads?
People like you, should imo not be allowed to drive these roads.

Does this mean that if I go 1km/h over the limit Im a danger and more likely to kill someone than if I was 1km/h under the limit?
What about someone driving at 49.9km/h outside a school when all the kids come out? Its a legal speed so is it then not dangerous?

kippy

Kbannon,
What you have said is fair enough.
This thread however is to do with purchasing a material which will intentionally try to avoid the detection of speeders.
Why would an honest law abiding citizen who breaks the speed limit by 1kph want to use this material?
Its very easy to twist opinions and arguments but we all know the dangers of people who speed. And I am not talking about 1k over the limit either.

Seth Brundle

if thats the case then state it and don't come out with the mantra crap that 'speed kills'.
Speed doesn't kill - Inappropriate speed (along with loads of other things) kill!!!!!

kippy

The reason we have limits is that some people dont seem to know for themselves what an inappropriate speed is.
Trying to get away with speeding or breaking speed limits in my opinion should be frowned upon.
The general feeling in this thread is that the practice being discussed is not frowned upon.
Sorry if I did not make my point clearer.
Kippy

Seth Brundle

Im not condoning using the spray (I believe I was one of the first to say that it doesn't work) but Im not going to condemning speeding outright. There are roads that are well able for higher speed limits - a classic example is by citywest after the DC road opened and was 30 or 40mph.

Every driver is responsible for their actions and therefore must drive at a speed appropriate (or lower) for the conditions. if they exceed the speed limit (accidentally or not) then they broke the law but don't assume that they will instantly kill.

kippy

Im not condoning using the spray (I believe I was one of the first to say that it doesn't work) but Im not going to condemning speeding outright. There are roads that are well able for higher speed limits - a classic example is by citywest after the DC road opened and was 30 or 40mph.

Every driver is responsible for their actions and therefore must drive at a speed appropriate (or lower) for the conditions. if they exceed the speed limit (accidentally or not) then they broke the law but don't assume that they will instantly kill.

Not condoning but not exactly condemning it (the practice of avoiding getting caught for speeding) either.

I dont think I said I assume that anyone breaking the speed limit will instantly kill and if that has been interpreted from my postings I apologise.
Every driver is responsible for their actions, thats a point I've consistantly put across in many posts in this forum. However not every driver has the intelligence/sense to know how safe these actions are and as such these actions have to have some form or legal limitations.
I dont see how the OP's post can be construed in any way but to travel consistantly at high speed and avoid getting punished for it.
This is not in anyway responsible driving and the OP's post should in my opinion be frowned upon by responsible drivers.
Kippy

Duckjob

kbannon wrote:

if thats the case then state it and don't come out with the mantra crap that 'speed kills'.
Speed doesn't kill - Inappropriate speed (along with loads of other things) kill!!!!!

Well said.

"Speed kills" makes a nice soundbite for our government to bandie around but unfortunately it doesnt get to the root of the problem as to why people are being maimed on our roads, which in IMO is due to dangerous manouvers / overtaking on blind corners and bends and other assorted f*ckology.

If speed were the main factor in road fatalities then the gov. should run an ad showing somebody cruising down an empty M50 at night at 140kph and suddenly spinning off in a fiery wreck. Based on their current ad campaigns, their mantra should be "Driving like a f*cking tool kills".

kippy

http://www.science.org.au/nova/058/058key.htm

Might be worth a read.

Stark

Wow, I never thought that by doing 65kph in the 60kph section of the M50 that the risk of me hitting a child cycling out of a driveway with another car coming against me could double. They should have named the hypothetical child Squishy. Poor Squishy, I shall think of him the next time I have a few drinks and decide to stray over the speed limit while having my chat on my mobile phone.

kippy

Wow, I never thought that by doing 65kph in the 60kph section of the M50 that the risk of me hitting a child cycling out of a driveway with another car coming against me could double. They should have named the hypothetical child Squishy. Poor Squishy, I shall think of him the next time I have a few drinks and decide to stray over the speed limit while having my chat on my mobile phone.

This is exactly why we have a problem in this country.
People cant see the dangers and take the piss out of anyone trying to highlight them.
There is a reason for speed limits, a very good one.

Stark

Someone think of the children. Think of Squishy.

Maybe you can explain the reason for the 5km/hr speed limit near my house.

kippy

Someone think of the children. Think of Squishy.

Maybe you can explain the reason for the 5km/hr speed limit near my house.

If you want to take the piss, I can start a thread in TCN?

Seth Brundle

I think this thread can be closed unless there is more info about these useless aerosols!

blorg

Stark wrote:

Wow, I never thought that by doing 65kph in the 60kph section of the M50 that the risk of me hitting a child cycling out of a driveway with another car coming against me could double. They should have named the hypothetical child Squishy. Poor Squishy, I shall think of him the next time I have a few drinks and decide to stray over the speed limit while having my chat on my mobile phone.

I believe it is 60kph because of roadworks. So replace child Squishy with roadworker Squishy and yes, exactly.

gyppo

Kippy has made some very valid points here.

Imo, the sale and use of aids to avoid speeding penalties should be made illegal, if it is not already illegal. It would be a fair assumption that anyone considering purchasing any such aid/device is contemplating breaking the speed limit, and will therefore intentionally be acting illegally.

This is a lot different to a driver who unintentionally exceeds the speed limit by a few km/h for a few hundred metres.

Kippy's comment to the OP (who appears to have problems with the speed limits - otherwise why would he/she be interested in buying this magic spray?) was totally justified. Anyone purposely seeking information on aids to avoid speeding penalties certainly does not give an impression of a responsible law abiding motorist.

The a la carte intrepretation of the speed limits in this country would be laughable if it were not the source of so many tragic accidents. People seem to think of speed limits as guidelines. Speed limits are absolute limits under optimum driving conditions - thats the law, and it must applied evenly.

Inappropriate use of speed is a major factor in accidents resulting in death and serious injury. Many drivers do not have any comprehension of what is an appropriate speed however, hence the need for speed limits - not whatever driver X thinks is a safe speed.

Its not that long ago when the penalty points system was first introduced, and for the first few months, Irish motorists slowed down.
Read this article, http://www.rte.ie/news/features/roadsafety/publications/MaxillofacialInjuries.pdf
and then decide whether there is a correlation between excess speed and injuries.

blastman

Here we go, the talking-in-absolutes brigade are in...