drvnbysound

I'm interested in installing a couple to areas where I can't run any wire (multi-story home with no access from above or below most of the walls) to but they do have 110V power somewhat nearby. It would be fairly easy to extend those close enough to the camera location(s), but then that also makes defeating the cameras pretty easy. Looking for suggestions...

In doing some research I came across the following page which provides a lot of information regarding RESOLUTION, along with some sample images, etc. http://www.axis.com/products/video/about_networkvideo/resolution.htm

Understood, and I have looked at ACTi before. However, I have used many Axis cameras for work in the past and have had a great overall experience with them. Pelco is another brand that I am also looking at and have also used in the past as well. Id prefer some software that was fairly brand agnostic - and the ACTi software is definitely not that.

So I know I want a PC-based DVR... but I have been battling the idea of getting a GeoVision card and installing analog cameras, or getting higher resolution IP cameras. I know there are pros and cons of each, and Ive read a lot of people say that IP cameras arent necessarily ready for primetime in the CCTV world. That said, I know I could have a much better chance of recognition and identification with higher resolution cameras. However, I really dont know of any good software that supports IP cameras - more specifically Axis cameras since they are more than likely what I would end up installing. As with most everyone, I am on a budget, so I'm not trying to break the bank on software. From what I have seen in the past, is that many companies that support IP cameras charge a license fee for each camera. Is there any software that doesnt (maybe up to say 16 cameras)? I know Axis has their own software, but I believe it runs upwards of $400 or so - and Im really not sure how good it actually is. Any/all suggestions are appreciated. One additional question regarding GeoVision... if I were to purchase one of their combo cards, which comes with the NVR software which supports IP cameras - are there then license fees also associted with each camera?

I see the post, but I cant find a question in it Put it to 640x480 deinterlaced though. The camera at 420TVL for example may have 520x493 pixels, which is better then CIF 320x240. The actual file size will still be small, even though it is 640x480. My question has certainly been answered at this point, but trying to put an explanation to my above thoughts.. Basically was that I didnt want to be recording at a HIGH resolution (1280x1024 - EXTREME EXAGGERATION) if the camera was only outputting 640x480 - simply to have the card or software "upscale" and pixelate the image more than necessary. So I was trying to work backwards, from the cameras resolution, to determine what resolution I would most likely want to record at.

Thanks for that info.. thats certainly helpful and along the lines of where I was trying to get. Knowing that, a general 4:3 native image from a composite video source would then be roughly 648x486. I suppose that means as long as the TVL numbers (which you say are for the SENSOR) are greater than 486 then camera itself wouldnt be doing any scaling of its own - or at least it wouldnt make since to upscale the image, to then downscale to NTSC composite standard. Which then leads me to rory's entry above... Thanks guys for helping me wrap my head around this

I certainly want a PC based system as I can set specific parameters via software for recording (ie. depending on motion in specific areas of a given field-of-view). Not to mention the flexibility of storage of a PC .... to RAID and/or add terabytes upon terabytes of storage. Then add in remote access (not that you cant remotely view cameras on a standard DVR setup), but also control cameras (PTZ), or even do it through GeoVisions iPhone/iTouch application ..... Yeah, I definitely want a PC based system I certainly understand that lighting will play a huge role in video quality of night-time images. I am probably going to go for some very low lux day/night cameras. I do have 4 flood lights that light up my front yard pretty well - I will have to play with camera placement some and make sure the lights arent washing out the cameras at night... but again, most of my questions were regarding actual camera resolutions... video quality is a whole 'nother beast Ive certainly been in some discussions regarding video quality - such as how large the target (person, vehicle, etc) needs to be in your FOV for recognition or identification, actual lighting quality (day or night), white balance, display calibration, etc. which can all assist in identification regarding flesh tones ... yeah.. as said, video quality is another subject in itself EDIT: Not to mention that with PC-based DVRs (no idea about standard DVRs) I can embed coding of the video streams into automation software (such as Homeseer or CQC) allowing the cameras to be viewed on touchpanel controls as well

CCTV_Suppliers: I dont currently have a DVR or any cameras, but am looking to purchase some during the late spring to early summer of this year and simply doing some research beforehand. I am currently looking at building a PC-based DVR with a GeoVision 8-Channel GV-1240A Combo card. The GeoVision website states that it can record 240fps @ CIF or 120fps @ D1 (both NTSC). That said, Im currently in a revolving door - basically regarding analog camera output resolution. If an analog camera is only going to output @ CIF resolution, there is no need to record at D1 just to have the software duplicate or interpolate pixels to "create a large image". If that was the case I might as well take my video to CSI and have them zoom in on the target object and enhance the image as they do so well on TV... since we all know how well that really works I only care to record @ 15fps, so if the camera is only going to output CIF resolution, I could save some money by going with a cheaper card that does 120fps (8 cameras x 15fps) @ CIF. If an analog camera does higher than CIF, thats fine too, Im just trying to figure out how TVL or any other spec that is given can relate to resolution.

I certainly understand that video quality and recorded resolution are 2 completely different things. When I look at various sites that list analog cameras they almost never (and none that I have seen thus far) list an output resolution. That said, my initial question was basically how does a 540TVL (or other TVL rates) camera relate as far as a resolution? As described in my previous post, there is really no reason to have the DVR set to record at full D1 resolution if the camera isnt outputting that high of a resolution.

I dont understand where "multimedia" resolutions dont apply - I find varying resolutions on the GeoVision website for particular capture cards as well as most any DVRs. Where particular cards record at various resolutions and varying frame rates. That said, while a particular capture card could record at a D1 or 4CIF size, it doesnt necessarily represent the same resolution of a given analog camera - or thats how I am interpreting it - please advise if this is wrong. Which means that a DVR or capture card could effectively be interpolating pixels to create a resolution higher than the output of a given camera.

Anyone?

I also wanted to note that buying a particular camera doesnt mean getting that resolution forensic data if the DVR doesnt record at that resolution. Having a D1 res camera may be great, but if your DVR only records at CIF then you may have wasted some money That said, what resolution will you actually get from a 540TVL camera (QCIF, CIF, Half-D1)?

Ahh, so i'm an idiot. For some reason I thought the GV-800 was a combo, but apparently it's a "capture card". After further inspection I think I want the GV-1240A - providing it would provide the ability to record 8 cameras @ 15fps, correct? I believe the Geo site read 120fps @ D1.

Rory, thanks for your response. Taking what you have said, I think the P4 (2. I have is pretty much a non-starter, so Im going to proceed with building a custom machine for the Geo card. I suppose I should follow that up with some more specific information on my plans. RIGHT now, my home is wired for 3 security cameras - one at each corner of the front side of the house, and the third above the front door. I plan to start out with these with the provision that I will add additional cameras down the road - particularly the back yard. Knowing that, I have really been eyeing the 8-channel GV-800. As far as viewing the video. I certainly dont think I would be doing this often - particularly not from the PC itself. I plan to have it in a pretty much hidden away in a rack. What I would like, and know the Geo can do it, is to be able to view the feed(s) on my living room and MBR TVs. Again, I dont think I would do this often, but it's a really nice feature. I do plan to have a home automation panel in the future as well (hoping to do so later this year) which would give me the ability to put in the hooks to have the TVs automatically change inputs and view the video when the door bell is pressed or when motion is detected (exterior motion sensors) in the front yard. I do certainly want the 8.3 version installed as I have already downloaded the GeoVision iTouch/iPhone app and would like the ability to view the feeds while away from home as well - whether through the app or some remote PC. Hopefully this provides a little more specific information on the intended end-state.... knowing the above, would there really be any benefit of using a Quad-Core vs a Dual-Core? BTW I was looking at Core 2 Duos and Core 2 Quads... As said in the previous post, they wouldnt be the same clock speed (3.0GHz Core 2 Duo vs. 2.66GHz Core 2 Quad). Would there be any performance difference? As far as your comments on the HDDs - I am definitely planning to use a separate HDD for my OS. As far as the DVR storage drive, I was considering using a Western Digital AV-GP series (made for surveillance and other A/V uses) 2TB drive. I know you mentioned SSD's above - I just dont think they are ready for prime-time yet for surveillance needs and are obviously much more expensive for some of the higher capacities. While I do have a budget in mind, I'm not planning to build "on-the-cheap"... I figure if I'm going to spend the money, I might as well do it right, and buy parts that future-proof me for quite a few years at least. From what I have seen, ballpark pricing for the above items - the CPU(s) run around $170 for either one, and the 2TB drive is about $200. I figure I can get a GOOD PC done for around $600-$700.

... so I googled and came across this post ... it looks dead so I wanted to revive it I am looking into a couple of options for a GeoVision card (particular model still undetermined as Im still evaluating my needs and trying to decide how "future-proof" I want to be). That said, I have seen that all of the GeoVision cards have varying recommendations for PC hardware which is perfectly understandable. One card in particular (GV-800) has a recommendation for a P4, 3.0GHz w/ HT (old technology). I am considering building a custom PC, which I would also want to future-proof, and I am stuck... I can get a 3.0GHz Dual Core processor for the same price as a 2.6GHz Quad Core. That said, how much does the clock speed of the processor matter for the GeoVision cards? Can they actually utilize the processing capability of a quad core? Would there be an advantage of using one vs the other? Opinions please.... On the other hand, I actually have an older P4 w/ HT. Unfortunately, its only 2.8GHz. This is obviously under the recommendation . Does anyone have any idea what problems I would experience by trying to use this machine? Basically, its an old machine that I dont really use anyway, so I could potentially task it as a DVR for now, saving the cash for building the custom DVR machine at this point if it would still suffice. If my needs grew later, I could look at building the custom PC at that point. I would still need to investigate futher details of the old PC.... I believe the GV-800 recommends 1GB of RAM. RAM comes in all sorts of colors and flavors - so RAM performance is also a variable. 1GB of DDR3 1333 > 1GB of DDR 400. Does the type/speed of the RAM matter at all? I dont think that is specified on the GeoVision site at all.