Underwater CVS Camcorder

cvs underwater

[Everett] got such a great response to yesterday’s nightvision hack he decided to write up this underwater CVS mod. The outside is a Pelican #1010 case. The camera fits almost perfectly inside. A small foam shim is used to position the camera lens between the two thick plastic ridges. Everett relocated the power button to the front of the camera and placed a guard around the shutter button on the back. The shutter is now wired to a reed switch at the back of the case. To start the camera recording he’s attached a magnet to a spring on the outside of the case that you slide over the reed switch to trigger it. If you missed it yesterday, he added an example shot from the nightvision cam. It isn’t swimming season so the only underwater pics he has are from the bathtub, which he luckily hasn’t posted. If you want to start hacking on a CVS cam, [morcheeba] warns that they still haven’t completely broken firmware 3.62 and above. Here is the FAQ.

21 thoughts on “Underwater CVS Camcorder

  1. I live in Missouri and we dont have any CVS stores around here…I looked on ebay but the cheepest camera i found there was like 70 bucks, anyone have any info on how i can get my hands on one of these for a reasionable price?

  2. Your comments: Its a joke. I’m just pointing out that you could easily pop it in a few ziplocs and achieve the same quality of water proofing. Its cheaper, and a whole lot easier. It may not survive a getting run over by a bus, but you probably won’t be doing anything like that with your camera. Besides, the whole point of these things is that they’re cheap and disposeable. There’s no reason to waste money on some bizzare protective casing when you could slip it into a baggie. I mean, if you’re under water, why does it need a protective shell? Are you scuba diving with sharks? Plus, you don’t have to fuck with magnets, reeds, and springs. You just push the buttons through the plastic.

    I just don’t see the point of something like this. Extra time, money and effort going into some ridiculous disposeable camera armor that obscures the camera’s view. Look at the thing. It has a plastic ridge right over the lens. What are you videotaping that requires both water proofing and an armored shell? Water polo on jet skis?

  3. If you actually READ the article he mentions that with the addition of a small shim at the bottom of the case, the camera is raised to a point where the ridges are NOT in the field of view for the camera sensor.

    Sure, this may be a disposable camera – but after going through the effort of breaking into the firmware, rigging up a custom usb cable etc., one wouldn’t want it to be damaged. It’s gone from being a disposable camera, to a personal possesion, one worth considerably more than the disposable camera it originally was.

    Zip-loc bags would provide water protection, and the ability to press buttons without adding reed switches and magnets. They would also be far more likely to put a fold or wrinkle of the plastic, or a printed label, directy in front of the lens – obscuring the view.

    It’s not ridiculous, it’s useful and well thought-out.

  4. I see your point 13, but when clear, label free ziplocs are 2 bucks a pound, you might as well use a handful, fold the loose material over the edge, and put duct tape around the edges of the camera. Unless you’re paintballing on ski-doo’s or something, you don’t need the protection a 15 dollar acrillic case offers. The odds of the baggies ripping underwater in a situation where the other case would have saved you are slim, to say the least. Plus, with baggies, you wont get any glare or reflections, like you probably would with a pelican case.

  5. Stephen (#8): I have found Walgreens sells the same type of cameras. They probably sell the same type of video cameras. The internal hardware is a little different, but the price is about the same, and the USB connection/hack is the same. I’m not sure if the firmware has been hacked for them, but I’m betting it has been. So, if you have a Walgreens, that is an option for you.

  6. I’m sorry if i sounded angry, Everett. I’m just pointing out a simpler solution. It’s like that old joke about the space pen. America spent millions of dollars developing a pen that could write in space. The russians used a pencil.

    I’m not mad at you for coming up with a solution like that. It’s great that you take such a creative approach to problems like this. I’m just pointing out an easier way of achieving the same goal.

  7. Aye. The damage potential of a free floating, sharpened graphite pencil in a space station or shuttle is amazing. Pens are a much better choice. Don’t want to lose a crew member or vessel to a cheap writing utensil. :-

Leave a Reply

Please be kind and respectful to help make the comments section excellent. (Comment Policy)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.