CCTV_Guy

I dunno ... perhaps manufacturer's avoid proprietary constructs. All I know is that machines from Dead Micros, AT Video, AXIS, etc can be used by virtually any industry-standard browser on almost any machine. bill

Data nailed that one ... there must be a million devices that'll workas desired. Control via web browser is pretty much an industry standard now. bill

Rory .... Does your client need all 18 (or whatever) cameras transmitting video simultaneously, or can he live with only one camera from each site transmitting simultaneously? If he needs'em all transmitting simultaneously, hmmmm, that's a lotta different channels in use simultaneously. The most I'm familiar with is the Trango Falcon using 16 channels. Anyway .... However, if it's the latter, one camera transmitting from each site, then I propose the following .... At each site you place a single wireless video transmitter (I'm assuming for the moment that reception is not a problem ... no trees, LOS, etc) and a multiplexer. I guess any multiplexer would do, but one of my first choices would be the ATVideo Talon ( http://www.atvideo.com/Products/talon.htm ). And of course, the cameras would connect to the mux, and the selected video would feed the wireless video transmitter. Now .... here's the trick of it: from any of the sites, one selects a camera via a wireless ethernet link to the mux. The mux switches to the selected camera, the video is fed to the wireless transmitter and received at the receiving site and displayed or recorded as desired. Now, I can't speak for all muxes, of course, but in the case of the talon, you need one additional piece of equipment at each site because the talon can't be controlled over the 'net, but it can be controlled via an RS-232 stream. That device is an AXIS 2490 Serial Server (i.e. we're talkin' SoE, here). (http://www2.axis.com/files/userguide/2490/2490gs.pdf). On the other hand, one oughtta be able to find a mux that CAN be controlled over a network connection, OR, use a DVR. DVR's can be used to perform multiplexing chores and can be controlled over the 'net. Rory, I GOTTA bail out for 90 minutes or so to make an appointment with a client. This, as presented, is certainly not the solution you seek, but it might be a good first approximation. Best wishes, See ya a li'l later. bill

Hi Rory (how's it goin' in Nassau - Damn! I really envy you, although it's beautiful here today, too). Rory, you could stick bundles of'em in the OnQ cabinet (or virtually any other manufacturer's cabinet). The MM70 is roughly 70% the size of a pack of cigarettes. That's one reason why I like'em so much ... they take up so little space and they're very reliable. And they're inexpensive (or were when we bought a bundle of'em; don't have a recent price). NetMedia better than Channelvision? Oh, I don't know. I'm sure they're both very good. They're both very good brand names. My experience has been primarily NetMedia and we've been very satisfied, and even more importantly, our clients have been pleased. No calls from my clients is great news, and that's what NetMedia offers - no complaints. I'm sure the same is true of Channelvision as well (or Leviton, or any of the others) Best wishes, Hey, do you do much fishing around Nassau? bill

yet another thought comes to mind (and at my age, each is precious!) .... I think you've told us that you have the two cable systems installed in the house now. Had it been my home, I probably would have had the cable internet terminated at a single connection, presumably in the garage, and would have relied on a wireless LAN throughout the house. Best wishes, bill

ahhh, understood! yeah, we're too small to be in that league. Your playin' way out of our league. Best wishes, bill

Hello G22. I'm not certain that I understand the question that you're asking, but if you're referring to the gap between the satellite TV and the cable internet, there is a simple and inexpensive means of bridging that gap. The equipment I discussed in the earlier note would work for either cable TV or satellite TV so you could follow the same procedure for distributing your security cam's video throughout the house. When faced with a similar situation 12 or 18 months ago, I used a simple VCR to bridge that gap. I connected the VCR to the TV outlet, selected the channel assigned to the camera on the VCR's tuner, and fed the unmodulated channel video from the VCR output to a video server which was also connected to the home's LAN. Voila! bridge gapped. This procedure avoids interference between the two cabling systems (the satellite TV distribution and the cable internet) while merging the two systems functionally. On a personal level, I really like having the security cam video available at any tv outlet in the home. That way, with PiP (Picture in Picture), I can be watching my favorite TV show, bring up a second 'window' on the tv set, and watch the driveway cam to see my guest arriving (allowing me to open the garage door for her). Again, I'm not entirely sure I've answered the question you were asking. If not, sorry 'bout that. I'll try again if necessary. Best wishes, bill

Gawd, Lyov! You aren't talking about PELCO, are you? Man, I 've had nothing but success with PELCO equipment. And their commitment to customer support is absolutely outstanding. Admittedly, I have direct experience with only a few of the items in their catalog, but those few I've used have worked well. I have three Spectra-series dome cams, a Legacy Receiver/Driver (LRD41C21-1) a PT570PP pan&tilt mount and a PELCO housing for another camera, all on an ultra-luxurious 80-foot yacht. Trust me, this owner wouldn't tolerate shoddy materials or workmanship, not after what he paid for the yacht. Bottom line is that he's pleased with the equipment. It takes some pretty well designed and manufactured equipment to withstand an at-sea deployment lasting literally months at a time. ( http://www.showboats.com/Articles/New-Notables/New-Notable-In-Disguise.asp ). I think PELCO's equipment is fairly priced and quite reliable. The one failure I had with a Spectra dome after a year of service with another client was repaired free-of-charge by PELCO. Even the cost of transportation was borne entirely by PELCO. On yet another project, the PT570P and LRD41C21 I placed atop a crane in downtown Bellevue, WA lasted ... well, until the project died for lack of funding. Never had a problem with the PELCO equipment (or the Trango equipment for that matter). Perhaps I misunderstood your post. In any event, sounds like you had a horrible experience whoever the manufacturer was. I'd be angry too, under those circumstances. Best wishes, bill

Able1, just a minor detail ... "I agree that it would be more practical to place a 4 channel DVR at each site so that .... " In your original note you mentioned purchasing one camera for each of four sites. Consequently, unless you're planning for future expansion, you oughtta be able to get away with a single-channel device at each site. Best wishes, bill

Hi Les. Good question. It's probably possible with a PC-based DVR and one heckuva broadband connection. But the PC would have to switch between the connections so one might see gaps in the recorded video. Frankly, it sounds kinda klugey to me, but perhaps someone here knows of software designed especially for this task. I would think that a better arrangement would be to dedicate 4 PCs at the central location (one for each of the 4 camera sites), convert the digitized video received from each DSL connection into analog video, and then use a conventional (analog) DVR to record the 4 channels of converted video. This can be done rather easily and inexpensively, and allows one to take advantage of the many features offered by analog DVRs. Here's what may be an even better idea .... my experience has been that network cameras also offer an analog video output. Why not buy 4 relatively inexpensive single-channel DVRs, placing one at each site, dedicated to the camera at that site? Then place the DVRs on the DSL line so that the central location can see the video (live or recorded) from each site simply by addressing the site's IP address. That sounds like a more reliable method. What do you think? Best wishes, bill

Sure! There must be a million modulator manufacturers in the marketplace. Several that come to mind at the moment are Channelvision ( http://www.channelvision.com/ ). OnQ Technologies ( http://www.onqhome.com/ ) & NetMedia ( http://www.netmedia.com/ ). Yet another manufacturer is Leviton ( http://www.leviton.com/ ), and they have the advantage of being available at Home Depot, i.e easily available to DIYers, at least that's true here in Seattle. We favor NetMedia's MM70 single-channel modulator ( http://www.netmedia.com/cutsheets/mm70_cutsheet_led.pdf ) in an OnQ cabinet but there are many multi-channel modulators out there and they all work equally well. In our typical configuration, the OnQ video engine ( http://www.onqhome.com/jahia/webdav/shared/docs/2005cat/video_engine_acc.pdf ) merges the cable/antenna/satellite channels with the modulated security cam video and sends the combined video on to one or more OnQ amplifiers which distribute the video to the outlets in the home. Frequently we use ChannelVision filters ( http://www.channelvision.com/index/56 ) to take out a range of channels, enabling us to hijack one or more channels that the cable company is using. That is, channels in use by Comcast are filtered out and we assign the MM70 output to a channel within the range of those channels filtered out. Filtration, incidentally, is a recommended procedure when working with Comcast's digital TV. You can read a bit more about it on the HomeToys site at one of the articles submitted by ThermoSight for publication ( http://www.hometoys.com/htinews/jun02/articles/thermosight/thermosight.htm for example). It's really pretty easy and relatively inexpensive! Best wishes, bill

Can you spell out what those features are? When I Google AVR-400SN, I get exactly one hit and that's in Korean. It seems to me that basic cameras are dirt cheap now. The bulk of your money will be spent on the DVR which, it seems to me, is really the heart of your system. If they have any DVRs left, I think it'll be tough to beat ATvideo's prices for fully-warranteed Discontinued Specials/Open Box Specials. But, as mentioned a moment ago, without knowing what your requirements are, it's difficult to say that ATvideo will meet'em.

RIP, There are some pretty good deals on DVRs et al at http://www.atvideo.com/ . Click on 'Discontinued Specials' & 'Open Box Specials'. In many cases these are brand new devices, still with full factory warranty and support, and come with features including motion detection, network-capable (including internet) and data compression. And best of all, ATV is making them available at hundreds of dollars rather than thousandes of dollars. We've used these same devices (at full price) on several wildlife projects and I can vouch for their quality and the company's commitment to technical and customer support, two of the most important characteristics as far as I'm concerned. It'd probably be worth your time to make a call and see if they have any DVRs left. Best wishes, bill

Nope, don't work for Microsoft although they're a great place to work (and I am, or was, a programmer since '67). re PELCO, don't know about their fixed domes, but I've had great success with their Spectra and Spectra SE domes (have three on this yacht: http://www.hometoys.com/htinews/oct04/articles/thermosight/watching.htm ). Lenses, servers, switchers, housings (including explosion-proof (well ... let's say 'resistant')). They make a ton o' stuff. Actually, PELCO offers a what I think of as a large selection of products, but as I said earlier, to me, their real strength lies in their commitment to customer support. Best wishes, Rory. I really envy you in Nassau ... must be beautiful there (can ya use any help? I can be there in three days). Best wishes to all, bill

Herminshs, a kid from Terryville here .... Please permit me to put in a good word for PELCO. They have absolutely OUT-FRIGGIN'-STANDING technical and Customer support! I also think they have great products as well. Their pan-and-tilts are cost-effective, rugged and reliable (I would, however, sell my soul to see them offer an inexpensive serial p&t -- heck, I'd sell my soul to see anyone offer an inexpensive p & t!) and the Legacy Receiver/Driver (LRD41C2x-y et al) is another very cost-effective device, IMHO. But I gotta say, on the strength of their customer service alone I think they're a good buy. They've made me look good on several occasions with free repairs or ultra-quick turnaround. Hope all goes well for you in Waterbury. More years ago than I care to admit, I almost bought my second sports car there ... a li'l '63 Austin Healey. Just didn't have the money - fresh outta the Navy an' broke. Forty years later I still miss that car! Best wishes from Seattle. bill

There are, as they say, many ways to skin a cat, but I think Thomas and DataAve have offered economical & effective suggestions. Not sure what you meant in your first note about wanting to avoid 'hacking' - does that mean you want to avoid wireless? Perhaps the simplest answer is a combination of what Thomas and DataAve suggest .... two DVRs, one in 'A', one in 'B, and each equipped with its own broadband connection and IP address. This avoids wires running across the road (presumably beneath the road) and wireless connections. It also avoids the problem of re-converting digitized video to analog which alternative solutions might present. Factory security folks should welcome this configuration because their network easily connects to either DVR to view recorded video, control current recording, or control the cameras' PTZ. In this configuration, factory security folks are unaware of the physical location of the DVRs ... all they know is that the DVR is at www.xxx.yyy.zz1 & www.xxx.yyy.zz2. And some DVRs can be programmed to automatically offload the daily video to a central server (presumably in factory 'A') via the broadband connection. The offload can even be scheduled to occur in the middle of the night so that no one is frustrated by a heavily-burdened network. No one would even need to walk across the street to manually offload the video ... the DVR can offload itself ! Best wishes, bill

because .... The names of the devices, varifocal and auto-iris, are highly suggestive of the function they perform. The varifocal lens allows one to vary the focal length of the lens within design limits. One may (manually!) zoom all the way out to get wide coverage area in front of the camera, or zoom in to focus on one particular counter or shelf. Similarly, auto-iris implies an automatic iris .... the aperture which lets in light is enlarged or reduced automatically in order to match the changing ambient light level, resulting (hopefully) in an ideal image under most lighting conditions. In the case of the lens, the alternative to varifocal (which I think one generally pays a bit more for) is a fixed focal-length lens. It's less expensive, but it provides only a single focal length, thus, it's not easily ported to another application. You can determine the focal length you need for your application on any one of a million lens calculators on the 'Net (Googling on "lens calculator" oughtta return a million hits); ours is found at http://www.thermosight.com/LensCalculations.htm. A caveat regarding lens calculators .... in many cases, the algorithm is predicated on industry-standard imaging chip dimensions, but some imagers deviate slightly from that standard. Consequently, most calculators' results are approximate, take'em with a grain of salt. Don't expect accuracy to the n'th decimal place. As VST_Man said, there are a million great lens manufacturers out there and Sony's certainly one of'em. Before you go shopping, however, determine what type mount your camera uses, C or CS, then make certain the lens you purchase matches or can be adapted to the mount you have. Best wishes, bill

Jonathan, sorry to read of your disappointment with CCTVfactory, but why would you select equipment from Bob's Jams, Jellies and CCTV Stuff when there are so MANY well-known brand names in the marketplace? If it's price, then you haven't done your homework .... for instance, check out ATVideo's Falcon DVR for $250 (and up) [http://www.atvideo.com/Sales/disconprod.asp]. These units are new and under warranty, and ATVideo has an honest-to-goodness Tech Support staff. And their stuff works. I have a Falcon here at the office [we paid $1400 for ours when they were new]; we have one at a remote site which the client prefers over his $3500 Dead Micros DVIP (http://www.thermosight.com/HanfordHawk.htm), and we have a number of them elsewhere ... all earning their keep, so to speak. re the camera .... cameras are dirt-cheap and can be picked up anywhere. Indeed, I'm sure my local grocery store is gonna start selling them in blister paks at the checkout counter next week. However, unless someone whose opinion you respect recommends a no-name device, I recommend stickin' with known-good brand names. And, if you select the system components yourself rather than buying what the vendor wants to sell to you, then YOU get to determine overall system performance by selecting components that fit your application, rather than making the application fit the equipment you bought. I'm sorry to read of your disappointment (I remember my dissatisfaction with some NetGear equipment!) and hope that by the time you see this, you'll have resolved the system problems you had. Best wishes, bill