Why Mount A Camera Like This?

IP camera with analog "test" output (which cannot be flipped) connected to an analog PVM.

Bohan: Because ingress ratings are scaled, some ratings are more 'watertight' than others. The mounting orientation of that housing, especially lower IP rated housing that could be constructed with weep vents or covered hinges.

Funny thing is, ingress ratings (at least at IP65 and 66) are based on the housing's ability to withstand a water jet of a given pressure, which could come from any direction... I don't know that it would necessarily have any direct relation to its sealing against standing water on a seal, which is what some housing designs may give you when mounted upside-down. I suppose, in theory, IP67 (full immersion) should handle it, but it's amazing the way water can find a way through over time.

At least in the example above, the housing is undercover, if not actually indoors. In the instances I've seen, they too were under cover, so weather sealing wasn't really an issue... but it did look awfully cheezy.

Keeping with this theme, then, I'd like to share some pictures of an install I came across a couple years ago... and yes, this most definitely was NOT a professional install.

Plastic no-name housing in the style of your standard Pelco EH-3512... but with vent holes in the bottom. Oh, did I say bottom? Not the way it was mounted:

Yup, those vents are actually open to the sky:

Obviously this thing has had some water buildup inside of it:

Good news is, the seals on the front of the housing were so bad...

...the water never rose high enough to actually immerse camera - two of these housings, same setup... both cameras still working!

oh, the humanity.

Dude, you have no idea... and this was one the MINOR horrors from this site! The others probably deserve their own thread - anyone for an official "hall of shame" topic?