Mysterious numbers appearing on trailcam photo

[Bushranger]

I have a trailcam on my property (a cheap Tasco, about three years old), that has suddenly started to stamp pictures it catches of me when I drive past it on my Cub Cadet.  I has never done this before and only does it to me, not shots of deer, squirrels, racoons, or opossums...just me, but only on my new Cub Cadet...it never did such on the old Cub Cadet.  

Look just under my left hand...it looks like Red LED number "214".

Can anyone give an explanation of what and how it is doing this?  No guesses please.

[Ghideon]

7 hours ago, Bushranger said:

No guesses please.

Ok. I'll try to avoid that by asking questions then.

What happens when you pass the camera with the lights switched off on the Cub Cadet? Same red number "214"?
How do the lights on the new and the old Cub Cadet differ?

[Dord]

Have you noticed the red dots by your right hand? They seem to be in a similar position relative that side's headlight ie at about 1 o'clock.

[arc]

11 hours ago, Ghideon said:

Ok. I'll try to avoid that by asking questions then.

What happens when you pass the camera with the lights switched off on the Cub Cadet? Same red number "214"?
How do the lights on the new and the old Cub Cadet differ?

Asking a question! great idea! I passed on this yesterday due to that no guessing request.  You are on the right track for sure.

10 hours ago, Dord said:

Have you noticed the red dots by your right hand? They seem to be in a similar position relative that side's headlight ie at about 1 o'clock.

Nice observation. What is interesting also is that they each have the same offset to the right in relation to the headlight directly below them. To bad we're not allowed to guess what is causing this.    Those cameras have a hinged cover with a clear plastic window to keep dirt and dust off the lights and sensor but probably not the lens itself but I could be wrong.  I wondered if the cover could be slightly ajar. 

Edited September 27, 2020 by arc
spelling error

[Bushranger]

11 hours ago, Ghideon said:

Ok. I'll try to avoid that by asking questions then.

What happens when you pass the camera with the lights switched off on the Cub Cadet? Same red number "214"?
How do the lights on the new and the old Cub Cadet differ?

I cannot switch off the lights of the old or new Cub Cadet...they are automatically on when the unit is running.  

The headlights on the old unit were standard incandecent.  The lights on the new unit are different...seem to be White light from perhaps  LED or more modern.

By what theory do you think the lights could causing the display of Reddish colored "214"?

10 hours ago, Dord said:

Have you noticed the red dots by your right hand? They seem to be in a similar position relative that side's headlight ie at about 1 o'clock.

No, thanks for pointing that out.

35 minutes ago, arc said:

Asking a question! great idea! I passed on this yesterday due to that no guessing request.  You are on the right track for sure.

Nice observation. What is interesting also is that they each have the same offset to the right in relation to the headlight directly below them. To bad we're not allowed to guess what is causing this.    Those cameras have a hinged cover with a clear plastic window to keep dirt and dust off the lights and sensor but probably not the lens itself but I could be wrong.  I wondered if the cover could be slightly ajar. 

The cover on the camera is not ajar.

If the lights of the tractor are causing the Red immage via reflections, it begs the question: Why are there what appears to be numbers, and the same numbers "214" reflected.  

As an experiment, the next time I go out to retrieve the SD card to look at the captured images, I will drive to the Right more to change the angle of the headlights in relation to the camera and see if it makes any difference...but that would still not tell my why the "214". 

[zapatos]

7 minutes ago, Bushranger said:

By what theory do you think the lights could causing the display of Reddish colored "214"?

 

Isn't that just tricky word play to get around the rule of "no guesses"? 🤪

[StringJunky]

I don't think they are numbers. I think they are just lighting/reflection artefacts. Seeing numbers is pareidolia in action, I think. It's highly unlikely you would get the effect on both mirrors but there you go.

[arc]

But is it really a "214"? Our brains tend to mislead us in the most important details. Is there a part number on the mowers bulb assembly, reflector, or plastic cover?

Same for the backside of the camera's dust cover or the camera's surfaces behind that cover? The other posters are pointing you to the idea that those lights are causing a projection or reflection into or from the inside of either the lights or the camera. Wouldn't it be interesting if the electrical suppling the lighting to the headlights was at a frequency that made the lights interact with the infrared sensor's frequency.

Crossed with Strings post. 

[Ghideon]

Thanks for the reply.

1 hour ago, Bushranger said:

By what theory do you think the lights could causing the display of Reddish colored "214"?

We will come to that once enough data is gathered. Speculations at this early stage in the investigation, for instance about saturation of the digital camera sensor, resulting in red image artefacts, would be just guessing.

1 hour ago, Bushranger said:

I cannot switch off the lights of the old or new Cub Cadet...they are automatically on when the unit is running.  

1: Put a cover over both the lights and drive past the camera. Then put a cover over only one of the lights. Review the location of red number-looking artefact in resulting pictures.

2: If possible, tilt the camera and drive past it with headlights uncovered. Check how the red artefacts change. Especially note how the horisontal lines through the red "numbers" change.

 

 

Edited September 27, 2020 by Ghideon
missing word

[arc]

Interesting thing about LED lights is when we started installing them in signs I noticed that when I took a digital completion photo they had a 3 to 1 chance of appearing to be non-illuminated due to the shutter speed catching the power’s frequency out of phase.

I think your camera sensor though, is picking up a reflection of its own infrared sensor or some other aspect inside the camera past the lens, sort of like the headlight beam is bouncing off one of the receptors (infrared ?) and then reflecting back to them off the backside of the lens and maybe to the primary. 
 

I would like to see a test run of the mower at the same MPS but with the mower’s engine speed up higher to increase the magneto pulse frequency.

[Bushranger]

2 hours ago, StringJunky said:

I don't think they are numbers. I think they are just lighting/reflection artefacts. Seeing numbers is pareidolia in action, I think. It's highly unlikely you would get the effect on both mirrors but there you go.

There are no mirrors on the tractor...the lights on the left in this photo are "suspended" in space.  The "numbers" on the right have my cargo shorts or Black Bib coveralls as the backdrop.  In short, the Reddish images are appearing in mid air (on the left), and over non-reflective fabric (on the right).

Although I have studied photography in college years ago, I have very little knowledge about modern digital photography...that is why I posted this on a science orient site in the off chance that it would be seen by someone with digital photography credentials (that is why I specified "no guessing")...my "credentials" in regard to photography had to do with things like the emulsion coated celluloid and silver bromide...obsolete knowledge it would seem in that todays photography seems to have become devoid of such archaic methods in favor of digital images...which I know nothing about.

 

I know about flaring on a camera lens, but flaring on a lense is always an irregular shape.

Edited September 27, 2020 by Bushranger

[StringJunky]

4 minutes ago, Bushranger said:

There are no mirrors on the tractor...the lights on the left in this photo are "suspended" in space.

Right. I think this is likely going to be something to do with the vehicle lights causing internal reflections in the lens of the camera and feeding back onto the sensor. Good cameras have multi-coated surfaces on all its lenses to prevent this.. Cover your lights up to confirm it or not.

[swansont]

This kind of artifact - as seems likely - is known as a lens flare.

[StringJunky]

1 minute ago, swansont said:

This kind of artifact - as seems likely - is known as a lens flare.

That's the term that escaped me.

Edited September 27, 2020 by StringJunky