Securame

LOL, I was actually expecting some timelapse, not a 90 minutes video.

Its compatible with IPcam? Those are VGA and HDMI splitters, they do not do what you are asking for. A splitter will just show the same image on many monitors. If you want different output on 8 screens, you need 8 video outputs on your computer. The video card thewireguys links would do it, but it doesn't come cheap. Otherwise you can use several video cards, I am sure there are cheaper video cards with 3 outputs, but you would need a motherboard with at least 3 PCIE ports (3 cards, 3 video out each).

Nope. The wifi dongle is for connecting the DVR/NVR to your network without the need of UTP cable. It is not for connecting Wifi cams to the DVR/NVR without the need of having your own wifi network setup.

He already did try powering just one camera.

One is model KPD677, the other one seems to be KPC677. Different models, so I guess it might be that they have different cover. I have even seen the same DVR with different front covers, depending on who sold them. If you want to buy a KPD677, I would go for the one sold by focusonsecurity, even if it is a little bit more expensive. The other one says KPC677LH on the title, later on it sayd KPD677, then KPC677, and then again KPD677ZL. So who knows what he might be selling, I do not know if there are differences between those models, but maybe he just puts all the different models on the description, so he can just send whatever model he has in stock at any given moment.

Bad quality cabling maybe?

Agree with that; Cisco and Linksys are the ones I have found to do NAT loopback most often. I do have a Cisco at home, and I did have a Linksys at work until recently. We changed from DSL to Fiber 3 months ago so we got a different router, and the one we have now does not do NAT loopback, so when I need to connect to one of our own systems, I can not use the DDNS addresses, that sucks.

You do not need any "device", just a computer with multiple video cards/monitor outputs.

Awaiting for the video.

Never seen that before. Do you have access to the web interface? Did you check to see if the camera that is acting weird has the same firmware version as the others? You do not need to take it down to check that; you would not even need to take it down to update the firmware.

Because 99% of the consumer grade routers do not have a feature called NAT loopback; that would make your router notice that the connection to whatever.dyndns.org actually is meant to go to your own network, and forward it to the right IP.

What you need is a computer that has a graphics adapter with multiple outputs, and probably multiple graphics adapters if you want up to 8 screens. If using CMS, you will also need to be using a CMS program that supports multi-monitor. You could also do it opening a web browser on every window pointing to the right IP camera.

I think that with only 6 posts he can not post links and/or embed images.

You will, if you configure the substreams so they will all add up to less than the 768kbps upload you have.

Any modern IP camera will support RTSP or have some screenshot URL, so your program can easily connect to the camera to get the video stream or screenshots. I would recommend a Hikvision or Dahua IP camera to begin with, you have plenty of threads on the forum about them.

LOL

Well, that is weird, you should have more than enough to handle that. Can't help then, sorry, I would try to reset the NVR to factory settings and start from scratch.

Well, if you know the bitrate, you can estimate. 24mbps (which is not the same as 24Mbps) would be about 3Mb per second, which would be 180Mb per minute, 10.8Gb per hour, 260Gb/day. That would be of course if the bitrate is constant, and the camera records 24 hours (no motion detection, etc). Now, you probably just made up those numbers, since 24mbps makes no sense for a 1280x720 video stream; it would not even make much sense for a 1920x1080 stream, unless you are encodeing blu-ray movies. And you also have to keep in mind that the bitrate can be constant, but it is usually better to use a variable bitrate. That means that the stream will be encoded differently depending on the movement that the camera is seeing, maybe sometimes there is a lot of action going on, but then at night nothing is happening; with a constant bitrate the video would need the same disk space day and night, with a variable bitrate it will need less disk space when there is nothing going on. Go to http://www.hikvision.com -> support -> download and check out "Disk Calculator v3.0.0.3". Someone might have a link to some online tool like that, but that is the one I use to estimate recording times.

What resolution are those 5 cameras using? DS-7616NI-ST does support up to 16 cameras, but they have to be at D1 resolution. If they are 1080p it only supports 100fps (not sure how many mbps). http://www.hikvision.com/en/Products_show.asp?id=6077 http://www.hikvision.com/UploadFile/image/2012061511573429196.pdf

At what resolution? At how many frames per second? At what bitrate?

I do have plenty of Hikvision cameras and use them daily, and I am quite sure that none of them have a third stream; just main and sub stream. With IP cameras we are actually handling small "computers" that can easily be updated, many things can be done on software, but it is up to the manufacturer to do so. Could they add as many streams as they want? Sure, but as I said, every manufacturer has to keep in mind that the hardware specs of a product have to be able to work with ALL settings turned on at maximum. You might think "hey, I do not use options x-y-z, so with the processing power that is not being used I could easily have a substream of 720p", but someone else will be using options x-y-z, and then if they also configured the substream as 720p, the product would fail.

Are those your garbage cans? If that is the trash, I can understand someone thinking the fence was going to be thrown away, but if that is whoever cuts your grass, he should have bothered asking.

Ahhhh, that is correct, I didn't think on that. I was thinking that you could add a camera two times on the DVR, and then you would be able to have two "main streams"; but changing the resolution on the camera would change the resolution on the main stream on both. No extra ports, switches, or anything needed. The same way that you could have two NVRs recording the same camera at the same time (both NVRs connected to the camera), I was saying that you can have a single NVR connect to the same camera two times. But I guess that would be quite useless, since you could not use different resolutions/fps/bitrate. I have also seen cameras advertised as having "triple stream". I haven0t used any though.

First, make sure you can connect to your DVR from network, try to use a computer connected with cable on your internet (Thomson) router. If that works, you will need to forward the needed ports from the Thomson router to the D-Link router; then again from the D-Link router to the TP-Link router; and then from the TP-Link router to your DVR. I wonder why so many routers in there, do you have more things connected on the D-Link and TP-Link routers besides the DVR?

There is such a gap because otherwise you (and everyone) would be paying for it with a more expensive device. The point of the main stream is to be able to have a recording at the higher possible resolution/frame rate/bit rate, so whenever an event happened you will have the recording stored at the best possible quality. The point of the substream is so you can have a secondary stream on each camera that is light, so you can see it easily from somewhere else, be it a computer, tablet, smartphone, on the network or on the go. Each stream needs to be encoded, analised for events, stored, streamed, etc. and that needs CPU power which the NVR must provide. And each DVR/NVR has to be dessigned so it exceeds the CPU requirements of all channels with the max settings on (so that it is always able to do encoding at the maximum resolution on all channels at the same time, analise for movement detection, detection areas, video loss, sabotage, alarms, record to hard disk, etc) and if you wanted the substrem to be a 1.3mpx video stream instead of just 0.3mpx, that would make the processing requirements higher. If you really do feel the need of having a substream with as much quality as the main stream; just buy a NVR with double the channels you need, if you wanted 4 cameras, get a 8ch NVR, that way you can have each camera two times, and you can have 4 stream on each camera, with 2 of them being able to go to the max settings. Edit: So yes, it is a technical limitation. The fact that a device can encode multiple 1080p streams doesn't mean it can encode two times those streams with the same computing power.