SpyGuy10

I agree, since I just learned that the cost of a replacement outdoor PTZ dome camera will cost over $600! If it is a bad camera, is it possible to just replace the camera part (keeping the existing PTZ mechanism)? I'm guessing that it's not (except for a direct part-for-part replacement of the defective camera from Panasonic), but it never hurts to ask. The post was only moved about 2 feet (to provide clearance for a new doorway built into an existing adjacent wall). So none of the cable lengths were significantly changed. Whoever did the original install had made a sloppy job of the cable connections to the camera and they needed to be cut off anyway to remove the cables from the post. So the cables were shortened by no more than several inches. Actually there are two Uniflood 500 illuminators on the post. Both are powered by individual 250W 120VAC-to-28VAC drivers at the base of the post. They are completely separate circuits from the camera. A bad BNC was my first thought too when the DVR monitor first failed to produce an image from this camera. So I cut off the BNC on the coax end that attaches to the camera (this was the only BNC connector that was changed during the project) and made a new BNC connection. Same problem. That is when I connected the portable monitor directly to the camera output (to eliminate the coax run to the house as a source of the problem). Same problem. Thanks, I'll try that. I also want to connect a different camera at that post to see if all the cabling is good.

Caution when buying from Surveillance-Video.com (AKA: Canal Alarm Devices) in New York City. In short, they charged my credit card for an item never shipped (a dome camera costing $243) and then refused to refund my money. Details I am installing a CCTV security system for a private airport. On 13-May-2010, I called Surveillance-Video.com and placed a telephone order with Mr. Jeffrey Tauber for two surveillance dome cameras (CNB VCM-24VF and CNB V2167NVF) and a wall mount bracket. I specifically asked Mr. Tauber to check if all the items were in stock. He assured me that he had all items available and they would ship immediately. I authorized Mr. Tauber to charge my credit card for the order, and he charged the entire invoice amount of $411.92. He sent me, by email, a Sales Order detailing my purchase. My order was shipped by UPS Ground on 14-May-2010. The package was delivered to me on 21-May-2010, undamaged and unopened. Upon opening the shipping box, I discovered that it contained only one camera (VCM-24VF) and the wall mount bracket; the second camera (V2167NVF, costing $243.00) was not in the package. A printed copy of the Sales Order was included in the package as a Packing List, and it showed check marks penned in blue ink next to line items #1 and #3, and an “X” penned in blue ink next to line item #2 (the missing camera). I immediately called Mr. Tauber (21-May-2010) and he informed me that his company had backordered the V2167NVF camera on my order. At no time prior to my receiving the order, did Mr. Tauber (or anyone else from Surveillance-Video.com) contact me to inform me they had backordered that item. I was angry that Mr. Tauber had previously assured me that all ordered item were in-stock and available to ship. I was further angered that no one had contacted me to inform me of the backorder. I had already scheduled time to install the cameras upon receipt, and now my work schedule would have to be changed. Mr. Tauber assured me that he would ship the backordered camera immediately and would contact me back with tracking information. By early the following week, I still had not heard from Mr. Tauber so I called him again. He put me on hold to check the status of the order. When he returned on the line, he informed me that the backordered camera had been discontinued by the manufacturer and that he would research what the correct replacement model was to fulfill my order. He said he would call me the following day. Not trusting Mr. Tauber to get the correct information about the replacement model, I personally contacted the camera manufacturer, CNB Technology Inc., and learned that the correct replacement model was VCB-34VF. By late the following day, I had still not heard from Mr. Tauber, so I called him. He told me the replacement camera model was VBB-34VF. I informed him the correct model, according to the manufacturer, was VCB-34VF. Mr. Tauber began to argue with me and told me his part number was correct. After much discussion, he finally gave me the contact information for his CNB representative. When I called his CNB representative and discussed the situation, the CNB representative informed me that he had told Mr. Tauber the replacement was VBB-34VF because Mr. Tauber had given him incorrect information about the model of camera I had originally ordered. Once the CNB representative knew that I had originally ordered the V2167NVF, he confirmed that the correct replacement camera for my application was VCB-34VF. I called Mr. Tauber and he had already been contacted by his CNB representative. So Mr. Tauber was now aware that the correct replacement camera model was the VCB-34VF. He told me that he would ship that replacement camera immediately and call me back with tracking information. This was on or about 27-May-2010. On 31-May-2010, I still had not heard from Mr. Tauber. I called him to cancel the order. He assured me that the item would ship that day. I told him that if he did not have a package tracking number for me by the following day, I would cancel the order. On 01 Jun-2010, I still had no contact from Mr. Tauber. So I called him and told him I was cancelling the order. I demanded that he immediately process a REFUND to my credit card for $243.00 (the cost of the camera that was never shipped). I told him that if I did not receive a refund on my account within 24 hours, that I would be disputing the charge with my credit card company. Mr. Tauber said he would issue me a refund. He also warned me not to dispute the charge with my credit card company because, he claimed, it would “have a negative impact my credit rating”. I knew this was a bald-faced lie on his part to try to discourage me from getting my credit card company involved on my behalf. Mr. Tauber did NOT issue a refund to my credit card account for the $243.00. Instead, on 02-Jun-2010, he sent me, by email, a “Credit Memo” which is nothing more than a paper “I.O.U.” showing that his company owes me $243.00. At that point, I contacted my credit card company to dispute the charge. At this point, I have lost at least 3 hours on the phone discussing this case in detail with various customer service and dispute agents at my credit card company. Additionally, I’ve lost over an hour drafting a dispute letter and preparing the all the documentation to support my case. And that’s not counting all the time I wasted on phone calls to Mr. Tauber at Surveillance-Video.com to try to get him to ship the camera I paid for, and then to try to get a refund for the never-shipped merchandise. I’ve already lost more money in wasted time than what one of these security cameras is worth. I am disgusted by the dishonest business practices of Surveillance-Video.com and the outright lies told to me by Mr. Jeffery Tauber. Originally, I simply wanted a refund for the $243.00 item that was never shipped to me. But now, after reflecting upon the dishonesty of Mr. Tauber, and in light of all the time and money I’ve lost dealing with this dispute, I do not want Surveillance-Video.com to profit in any way from my business. I will give my business—and my hard-earned money—to an honest merchant. Therefore, I am now in the process of cancelling the entire order. Surveillance-Video.com can pick up the shipped merchandise at their expense.

I have a CNB vandal-resistant dome cam and I have CNB's wall mount bracket: I could also mount the cam directly to the vertical wall. This is an exterior application with full exposure to the elements. I think the arm mount (with the cam inverted) would provide better protection from rain, dirt, bird poop, etc. It may also be better for reducing solar glare on the dome. But the direct wall mount would be more discrete in appearance. Any advice appreciated.

I'm installing a security system in a small, private airport. We're starting with the main gate, pilot's lounge, and main office, but will probably expand to other areas of the airport later on. Right now, I have five cam locations mapped out and the cabling is installed. I'll be using CNB VCB-34VF, VCB-24VF, and VCM-24VF dome cameras. I still need to select a DVR solution. Originally, we were going to go with a standalone DVR device, but after reading advice in these forums, I'm now convinced that a PC-based system would be better. But I'm not sure which system to go with. The set-up we are planning has all the video cables routed to a secure utility room in the main hangar where the PC-based DVR would be located and connected to the main office local area network. The security video should be viewable on the office network computers, as well as remotely over the Internet. I'd like to be able to record in the best quality possible for the cameras; it would also be good to have an upgrade path to a hybrid analog/IP-cam system. Price is certainly a factor: the hardware and software (not including the PC or Windows) for recording at least 5 channels should be in the $1,000 range. Right now, I'm leaning toward the NUUO SCB-7008. Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any other recommendations?

Just to be clear, the VCB-24VF is listed by CNB as having "XWDR", meaning the wide dynamic range is achieved by post-processing in the Blue-i DSP. The VCB-24VF does not have a double-scan CCD required for true WDR (like their VCB-34VF).

Digital sharpening (edge enhancement) is no replacement for a sharply focused lens. With sharpening turned off, there is no reason the image should be "a bit blurry" with proper focusing of the lens. If the image cannot be made sharp with the lens, then perhaps you have a lens problem. But realize that you often have to tweak both the focus AND the zoom to hit a focal "sweet spot" where the image is sharp (at least that's what I've found with my CNB cams).

Just off the top of my head (since I've been researching/discussing these systems recently): NUUO 7000-series cards, the Gen IV (Intellicam) "Enterprise-class" DVR, the AVerDiGi SA9000ePRO, some of the GeoVision cards. I'm sure others can name more.

Actually, the NUUO SCB-7008 uses H.264 hardware compression. The Aver does have MPEG4 hardware compression, which AFAIK is slightly superior to H.264 compression in terms of image quality. I did err by not adding in the cost of the PC for the NUUO solution in my price comparison. Could you please list specific features that the Aver system does that NUUO cannot do?

Yes, I understand fps. I said that 10fps is "not good" based on the fact that many systems are capable of recording D1 at 30fps per channel. As for storing high resolution, that argument hardly applies in today's age of cheap TB hard drives. And why do you need to store the "high-resolution evidence" for as long as possible on the primary storage drive anyway? Most recordings are 99.99% uneventful and perishable. The events of interest occupy only a tiny fraction of recorded video, and of those events, only a fraction would be considered "evidence". Since any "evidence" would be copied/backed-up off the primary storage drive, I see no reason to limit the resolution and the frame rate of the recorded video.

Thanks for the info. But I don't see the advantage of the Avermedia over the NUUO. True, you pay for additional software licensing for the NUUO to add IP cameras, but let's do an apples-to-apples comparison: NUUO SCB-7008 (8-ch analog card) + 8-ch IP software license: $1,000 + $1,060 = $2,060 AVerDiGi SA9000ePRO (16-ch mixed analog/IP): $3,439.00 So comparing 16-channels of mixed analog/IP, the Aver system will cost almost $1,400 more, even after paying for the NUUO IP camera licensing. And since we don't have any IP cameras at this time, I can start with the NUUO analog card for just $1,000 and then add more capability later as needed. From what I can tell, NUUO's software is feature-rich and is comparable in capability to the Avermedia system. But I'm not yet set on the NUUO; I'm still seeking more recommendations and feedback.

Would that be the AverMedia NV6480E16 Card? According to their specs, it's only capable of recording analog at 160fps at D1 resolution (10fps per channel). That's not good at all. Btw, what's the deal with their website? All the product images are missing.

The VBM-24VF has BLC, but it's not a WDR camera. From the description of your problem, I don't think BLC will offer the solution you need. I think you need WDR. I would recommend the VCB-34VF. The difference in low-light capability between the VCB-34VF and the VCB-24VF is small. Here is a comparison of the relevant specs: VCB-34VF ======= Wide dynamic range: Up to 72dB Min. Illumination: 0.1 Lux(Color) / 0.0002 Lux(DSS On, B/W) VCB-24VF ======= Wide dynamic range: Up to 60dB Min. Illumination: 0.05 Lux(Color) / 0.0002 Lux(DSS On, B/W) As you can see, the double-scan ccd of the VCB-34VF offers much greater dynamic range (the dB scale is logarithmic, so 72dB is MUCH greater than 60dB). Both cams have excellent low-light performance, and the difference between the two is only in the low-light color capabilites. They are rated the same for B/W low-light performance. The cam you have has similar low-light capabilities as the VCB-24VF so I'd recommend testing the low-light performance with the cam you have. If your scene is so dark at night that you need very high-performance low-light capabilities, then I would consider adding illumination, and by that I mean white light (not IR). After all, the best deterrent to crime is to eliminate dark places for criminals to hide.

The CNB camera to buy is the VCB-34VF. This is a true WDR (Wide Dynamic Range) cam with a double-scan CCD. The way it works is the CCD takes two scans of the scene at different levels (one scan optimized for the bright areas and one scan optimized for the dark areas) and the Blue-i DSP integrates the two scans into a single image. CNB also has two new "XWDR" cameras, the VCB-24VF and VCB-24VD. But these do not have the double-scan CCD (hence the "X" in XWDR). These use a single scan CCD and then the image is digitally optimized by the DSP to produce the wide dynamic range image. These have a lower dynamic range than the double-scanned VCB-34VF, although the single-scan CCDs used in these XWDR cams have better low-light sensitivity.

Thanks for the feedback. That's what I was thinking when I ordered the bracket, but then I was wondering if it was necessary. You've confirmed that it's recommended. I'll use the bracket.

UPDATE: SureveillanceVideo.com finally issued a refund of $243.00 to my credit card account; it posted on 26-Aug-2010. That's 3-1/2 months after I had placed the original order, almost 3 months after I had canceled the order, and exactly 2 months after Mr. Tauber admitted in writing to my credit card company that he owed me the money and promised to refund it as soon as my credit card company lifted the $411.92 chargeback (which my credit card company did on 07-July). During the past two months, my credit card company contacted Mr. Tauber several times and he played the same game with them that he played with me: making false claims and promising to call back, but never doing so. At one point (at the end of July or beginning of August, I've forgotten the exact date), Mr. Tauber actually told my credit card company's billing dispute department that he had issued the refund to my MasterCard, but "there must have been a problem with the transaction at his bank and he would have to call his bank and find out what happened." Do any of you believe that nonsense? Of course he never called my credit card company back, nor did he ever provide any documentation to substantiate his outrageous lie. But when they ACTUALLY issued a refund, SureveillanceVideo.com did send me an email. on 24-Aug-2010, I finally received the following: ============ Dear Mr. Liu, The credit memo 18460 in the amount of $243.00 has been refunded, please allow 2-3 business [sic] for refund to show on your credit card statement. Thank you, Jennifer Lehnert Office Manager 212-343-4354 ============ According to my credit card company, the MasterCard rules are such that SureveillanceVideo.com had until the beginning of September to refund my account or my credit card company would seize the funds from SureveillanceVideo.com's merchant account and enter a negative score on their credit record. So Mr. Tauber waited until the last possible moment to refund my money. In the meantime, I was deprived from the use of my $243 for 3-1/2 months. Is this a company you want to do business with?

This was NOT a "blunder". This was intentional FRAUD. The "Chargeback Response" letter they sent to my credit card company on 25-June-2010 stated that, if my credit card company would credit back the entire amount in dispute, then they (Surveillance-Video.com) would issue me a credit for the $243.00 they owed me. My credit card company reversed the suspension of payment to Surveillance-Video.com on 07-July-2010. It's been two weeks now since then and, to this date, Surveillance-Video.com has still not credited ANY funds back to my credit card. If you want to continue to give them your business, that's your prerogative. But don't try to tell me that this was just a "blunder". They knew EXACTLY what they were doing when they made the false promises to ship me the camera. They knew EXACTLY what they were doing when they issued me a worthless I.O.U. "credit memo" instead of refunding the $243.00 back to my credit card. And they know EXACTLY what they were doing now by still not refunding my money! Note: And the problem was NOT a lack of availability for the replacement camera. After I got fed up and cancelled the "back-order", I ordered the missing VCB-34VF from David at "The Security Depot" in Texas. David had it drop-shipped from CNB the same day I placed the order and it arrived 3 days later via UPS Ground.

No need to desolder the CCD. Just take a pocketknife and carefully pry the CCD off the board so you can inspect the back of the chip for the model number. Reattachment is simple too: just use a drop of superglue (but don't use too much!). Yes, that's a joke. Do NOT do that! Seriously, if you can't trust the specs then why buy the camera? These days, cameras from REPUTABLE manufacturers are inexpensive enough that I can't understand why anyone would buy a questionable piece of junk.

UPDATE: I just received in the mail a letter from my credit card company. It included the chargeback response from Surveillance-Video.com. They are now claiming the order for the second camera was canceled on 14-May-2010 (the day after I placed my original order), and they even generated a false Sales Invoice (dated 14-May-2010), to try to back up their story. Surveillance-Video.com NEVER sent me a copy of this bogus invoice showing the cancellation of the second camera, nor did Mr. Tauber ever mention it during any of my numerous conversations with him after I received the package and discovered the second camera was not shipped. On the contrary, he kept assuring me that they would ship the backordered camera, and then the replacement for the backordered camera. Why would he be promising to ship me a camera if they had already canceled it from my order? Clearly, they created this fraudulent document after I filed the billing dispute in an attempt to cover their behinds. They did admit in their correspondence with my credit card company that they owe me $243.00, yet to this day, they have still not issued me any refund for any amount. The bottom line: this is a VERY UNSCRUPULOUS company. Not only do they lie to their customers, but they are willing to create false documents and lie to the credit companies (both to their credit card processing company that administers their merchant account and to my credit card company). Btw, falsifying documents is a CRIMINAL ACT.

Note: I did clear this with a forum moderator before posting. I hope it saves others from the loss of money and time that I have suffered.

Thanks Rory, but it wasn't Geovision. Geovision doesn't have any voice-over narration (at least not the two videos I just checked). Also, in the demo videos I'm looking for, the quality of the video was much sharper and the software GUI looked much more professional.

Last week I was opening dozens of security hardware and software websites. I saw one which had a number of software demo videos that showed such things as missing object detection and/or foreign object detection. But now I can't find that site. I've tried opening sites in my browser history, but still can't locate the page of demo videos. I distinctly remember that the video had a narrative voice-over discussing the features and the voice was that of an Asian male. You could tell by his voice that he was enthusiastic about the product. So I don't think the videos were NUUO (no soundtracks on their demo videos), nor Exacq (their vdeos are narrated by someone with a US accent). Does this sound familiar to anyone? I'd really like to find that site again.

Google lists the Hikvision main Website in China as "This site may harm your computer." Any idea why? Not too good for a security company.

I'm looking for a sub-$1,000 commercial-class 16-channel DVR. Last year, I was talking with Mike from Shoreview Security, and he recommended the Gen IV systems (Intellicam), although the models have changed since I spoke with him. Unfortunately, Mike is no longer available. But the specs for the G4-XLA16HD look impressive and the price is right: $896 for a "bare" unit (no drives -- I will install my own SATA hard drives and DVD-RW). Any feedback? Searching the forum archives, I know there was some contention and criticism between some of the dealers posting here and Intellicam. But that was over 4 years ago. And Mike seemed like a knowledgeable and reputable guy, so I don't think he would recommend the Gen IV units unless he really believed in their quality and performance.

Are you sure you are talking about Gen IV's current models? Here are side-by-side images of the XTS unit you linked to, and the current Gen IV "Business Class" DVR (the most economical of their three current models). The XTS is really hard to see but that's the best image XTS has on their {crappy} website (their main menu has a link for "Costumer Support"). But even with the tiny fuzzy picture, I can see that the two units are not identical, at least not externally. XTS Video : XTS-DVR720-S Gen IV : G4-HD-E This is the Gen IV "Commercial Class" G4-XLAHD that we are considering for purchase. When I spoke with the Gen IV rep, she told me that the 4 live video feeds on their demo site was at CIF resolution. I mentioned to her at the time that they should also provide a demo feed at 4CIF for comparison purposes. I cannot see why (or even how) they could broadcast across the Internet at a higher resolution than what's being recorded. Even an old IDE hard drive has MUCH more bandwidth than a DSL or cable Internet connection.

That's certainly an option (I think they still honor that return policy). But unless doing side-by-side comparisons with other units, it's difficult to know if you're getting the best system for your money. And it's always easier to buy right the first time than deal with the hassle of returns and re-purchasing, especially when there are others involved in the purchase approval process. I do appreciate your feedback on the systems you had. It makes me more comfortable with purchasing an Intellicam unit if that's what we decide. But I am still curious about the PC-based DVR cards. Unfortunately, when I called Nuuo's tech support, the guy gave me incorrect information that conflicted with the specs published by Nuuo on their own website. And like many others in the CCTV business, he kept confusing "D1" and "4CIF" as if they are the same. I realize the difference is minor (720x480 vs. 704x480), but I expect a manufacturer to be accurate about what their systems' actual specifications are. (To be fair, Gen IV also makes this mistake by claiming on the G4-XLAHD "Product Features" that is allows "Up to Two Channel Full D1 recording", but then in the "Technical specifications", they state the resolution on those two channels are 4CIF.)