http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7910921090914131395

The first part on naming bandits you may find interesting but the last half of the story may help convince those above you to spend some money to lower cameras for better surveillance photo's.

I will be using this. Thanks for the link, Larry.

Passed along to my security officer just now. Thanks for the info.

Very good story, we still have the high mounted cameras. Looking into relocating them.

Great story. I am looking into re-positioning my cameras ASAP.

I know this is an old thread, but I just saw it and called our security officer to ask if our CEO had heard about the benefits of installing security cameras low enough to actually record the customer's face. Yeah, they have heard about it but don't want to spend the money that it would take to get it done. It really bothers me that the expense issue outweighs the safety issue. Hopefully the day will never come where we should have had the lower cameras.

We just spent some pretty good money to re-vamp our entire surveillance program. All but 3 or 4 branches (out of 35) have gotten or is scheduled to get all new equipment. In most cases, I've been able to position the cameras low enough and tight enough to get good face shots of customers.

In many cases, aesthetics comes into play as much as money.

I don't understand why the expense thing is a big deal. Nearly every bank I've been in recently utilizes up-to-date computer equipment for teller systems through PCs. Webcams are CHEAP, and the software is easy to use/set-up. (You just point the webcam toward the customer instead of the PC user.) There is information available through the BOL infovault. Nearly any IT person can do this and set-up is fast. It doesn't take much hard drive space if it's set-up properly.

IT isn't my area, it's compliance. But this is a BIG deal safety wise.