cglaeser

One of the features I absolutely must have is the ability to view the same cameras in both real time and recorded video at the same time, and the recorded video must be available almost instantly (not like Exaq that has to rebuild the recorded stream each time you go back and forth between live and recorded). Can XProtect do that? Best, Christopher

u75XQdTxZRc

This is an excellent suggestion by tomcctv. However, please keep in mind it is driven by your strong desire to use a Mac. IMO, this is the tail the wagging the dog because the OS is driving the camera selection. Mobotix makes fine cameras and perhaps you would settle on them anyway, but FWIW, I would rather design a system around other requirements than the computer or OS. For example, the 3MP cameras by HikVision are a hot topic right now on this forum. I don't yet own any of these cameras but the price/performance of these cameras is very compelling. My guess is if you go with MacOS you may save a few dollars by using a low-end Mac Mini but in the end will spend more money on the full system due to limited camera selection. Again, FWIW. Just be sure and spec everything out first before buying anything. Best, Christopher

I set up an Atom for a friend with eleven cameras (three 5 MP IP and eight analog on two four port video encoders) and it's a little screamer. He has a high-speed Comcast internet connection and I'm amazed at how fast I can review video on a remote client or iOS device. I think I spent $200 on parts. YMMV. Best, Christopher

Zotac is a great Atom solution. I got the impression you are looking for plug and play. I built a Zotac system for a friend and it has worked extremely well. Typically, you have to install memory and a hard drive. I did that in about four minutes. As I recall it was tool-less. Plus, you have to install an OS. I installed Windows which was pretty easy. Perhaps someone sells a ready to run Zotac out of the box; I'm not sure. My guess is that building a Zotac system and installing the OS will be easier than building an NVR on a Mac mini only because the Mac OS is such a rare bird in the surveillance world, which typically means you are on your own for any problem solving. Best, Christopher

The Zotac Atom is both very small and very low priced, but if you are looking for ease of setup, you should probably consider solutions other than the Zotac and Mac mini. Best, Christopher

Who said Windows? An Atom running Linux is cheap. And, regarding your comment about "one function", you really should consider designing a system for "one function." If you stick to your guns to use MacOS, just be aware that the solutions are limited and if you encounter problems you will likely be on your own to solve them. Best, Christopher

Why do you want to use MacOS? Best, Christopher

I doubt Avigilon is selling my phone number, but if that is a major concern for you, then perhaps some other VMS is a better option for your particular requirements. Best, Christopher

True enough. I contacted Avigilon directly and got a response within 12 hours. We stopped short of pricing when I questioned why they required my telephone number, How can their authorized dealer for your region contact you if you don't want to give them your contact information? Best, Christopher

Are you in the US? If so, what city and state? Best, Christopher

What was your gross revenue last year? Best, Christopher

I strongly encourage you to try the demo. I'm not an installer and don't have prices for you, but I use Avigilon every day and the VMS is exceptional, especially if you need extremely fast response in tactical situations (i.e. the suspects are still on the premises and you want to simultaneously monitor them in real time and also review recorded video). The Avigilon encoders continue to be exceptional value as well. Other manufacturers have cameras that are competitive on the price/performance scale, but IMO the Avigilon VMS is an exceptional product. FWIW, all this talk about not being able to get pricing is nonsense. I could get pricing from multiple sources on any business day by simply picking up the phone and requesting a quote. Best, Christopher

+1 5 fps should be sufficient for a surveillance system in a liquor store, and you could likely make do with less.

15 fps is a compromise? What is your application that 15 fps is a compromise?

Certainly gives an interesting vantage point.

Of course sensor sensitivity will vary, but as a general rule, the sensitivity at 940 nm will be roughly half that of 850 nm. Or said differently, 940 nm will require roughly twice the power output. Similar to the human eye, sensitivity starts to fall off at those longer wavelengths.

"Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know." - King Arthur tFylQ6_1bgQ

Yes, both must conform. ONVIF includes provisions for camera motion detection and Hikvision supports at least a subset of ONVIF. Some day, many of these cameras will support ONVIF camera motion detection. My question is the following: Has anyone confirmed that Hikvision has implemented ONVIF camera motion detection in any of these cameras? Best, Christopher

Do you mean latest ONVIF or latest Hikvision implementation of ONVIF?

Are these Costco Swann sufficiently ONVIF compliant to record on motion detection with systems like Avigilon? Edit: ... using the Hikvision flash.

Another way to manage power is to sync the IR with the sensor. Messoa does that with their latest LPR camera. The electronic shutter speed is relatively fast to minimize motion blur of moving vehicles, and the IR does not need to be powered while the "shutter" is effectively closed. Best, Christopher

A friend installed an Avigilon 5MP bullet and the image is very soft. I tried increasing the sharpening to 100% and the image quality to 1, but it's still soft. I tried focusing remotely, but it appears that focus won't go far enough towards infinity. When I focus to 0, it is very OOF as you would expect, but when I try to focus to INF, it never passes through a part of the range that appears focused. I'm guessing this may be a bad copy. Comments?

Informative article. Thanks for posting. Best, Christopher

Copy and pasted from Wiki: While there is a modest increase in compression performance of JPEG 2000 compared to JPEG, the main advantage offered by JPEG 2000 is the significant flexibility of the codestream. The codestream obtained after compression of an image with JPEG 2000 is scalable in nature, meaning that it can be decoded in a number of ways; for instance, by truncating the codestream at any point, one may obtain a representation of the image at a lower resolution, or signal-to-noise ratio – see scalable compression. By ordering the codestream in various ways, applications can achieve significant performance increases.