LC475

Hi All! I recently got a Geovision card (a couple, actually, for 24 cameras -- two 1120As). In the old Geovision software, you got a static jpg stream URL ala http://x.x.x.x/cam1.jpg . In the 8.5 version Geovision software, you get a jpg stream address of: http://x.x.x.x/[long hash that's a combination of username, password, and time]/cam1.jpg I understand the security benefits of this. And what would be really nice would be to have a static jpg stream URL *and* the ability to require authentication to see it. But if I'm choosing between one or the other, I choose to have a static URL for the jpg stream, because I need that. Are the old, unsecured versions of Geovision software compatible with the 1120A? Can I just downgrade to version 7 and disable network security and will that work? Or, rory seems to have done a lot of work with the Geovision SDK -- is there any way to just strip the hash requirement out and have the server serve out http://x.x.x.x/camx.jpg streams like before?

Anyone have any ideas? Rory, I think you might have the knowledge to do something like this, would you be interested?

I also need this file. If anyone has it, I would be so grateful. Have a good day!

I am trying to determine whether a video encoder aka video server will do what I want. The site has 24 analog cameras and 3 IP cameras. The DVR card running the analogs went bad. I'd like to just integrate them into the IP system. On these video servers, does EACH INDIVIDUAL CAMERA have its own separate stream? Does EACH INDIVIDUAL CAMERA have its own separate IP address and port number? Can all the cameras be streamed simultaneously? In other words, if I buy a video encoder with 4 camera inputs, for example this: http://www.byremote.net/products/specs/240q_specs.shtml or this: http://www.ipcamera-store.net/axis-12-channel-video-server-bundle or this: http://www.acti.com/product/detail/Video_Encoder/ACD-2200 ...when I get it all hooked up and installed will it be as if I have 4 separate IP cameras? Or will it be like having one IP camera with a multiplexed picture in a 2 by 2 grid? Is this the best way to achieve what I'm wanting, or is there another alternative?

hi power over coax has been in the industry for years . not used as much now but in the late 80 early 90s. but all you need to look at is what ever exists and for the future that comes as a balun for cat5 also exists for coax. new stuff all the time ........ coax ..... 2 cameras 2 audio 2 data 2 alarm 2 power over 1 RG59. Oh, cool! I had a feeling that someone would come and tell me I was wrong, since at least in theory power-over-coax clearly should be possible. I've never seen it, though.

Many IP cameras can be powered over the ethernet connection. This is called PoE (power over Ethernet). So the "con" you named in question 4 is not necessarily true. In fact, it is more true for CCTV than IP! A CCTV camera can never be powered with just the RG6 cable, you always need an additional power source -- whether plugged in to 12V at the camera's location, or two 12V wires run along with the RG6 (Siamese cable). IP often can be powered with just ethernet.

Thank you everyone for your help. I feel like I am finally on the right track to get something that will work in a good and satisfying manner. If anyone else has any other ideas, please keep posting here! I am open to any suggestions.

I have used a D-Link consumer-grade NAS for 10 Mobotix cameras. It works. Not very well, but it does work. You will have to lower the frame rates down. Mobotix can deal with junkiness in a NAS, to a greater extent than other cameras, because each camera has a rolling buffer, so if the NAS is not available it can wait awhile (seconds, not minutes). Then if things are really bad the camera will automatically switch into burst mode, to transmit to the NAS in bursts instead of a constant stream. Conclusion: all the other advice is fine, and they're right that the better NASes are, well, better! But if you will only have one camera one consumer-grade NAS will work OK for you. That is, unless you need to save 30 frames a second or something -- just keep it to something reasonable like 5 frames a second and no problem. The big issue I would consider is: how long? The consumer-grade NASes do fail more quickly. Do you want to come out again in two years if it goes bad? If you are just putting in one camera, you could just buy a 128 GB SD card to replace the one in the camera. That will give you two weeks, maybe four. That would be the most elegant solution, hardware-wise. http://www.amazon.com/Lexar-Media-Flash-Memory-LSD128CRBNA133/dp/B004SAMZW4/

I agree that a rear-view camera is the best idea. Better to just buy something made to do exactly what you want right out of the box than to reinvent it yourself. I assume you are in the US, and the power you have is 120 V AC? Just steal a power wart from any random appliance or device that uses 12 V. 12 V is one of the most common. Or, if you're in a big city, there may be a thrift store or computer store that sells orphaned power warts for very cheap -- two dollars each or something.

if you mean to get your ip stream to the aver. then all you do is add ip cam address No, I mean from any random computer browser can I see the IP stream? That's good. Mobotix.

So is the software good? How would it compare to Nuuo, which is about the only one I've seen that's any good? Can the streams be viewed in just a pure browser as generic motion jpeg streams, or is an activeX plugin required? If so, if there's an IP address I can type in like http://1.1.1.1:1111/aversql/cgi-bin/faststream.jpg , then that's just as good as converted to IP, in my mind. They are essentially all generic IP cameras at that point. Does Aver's software do that? Are Aver's iViewer and AndroidViewer free, or cost extra?

Wyoming at the moment. This project I'm talking about is in Denver, Colo.

So have you used that Aver box? Is the software clean and fairly intuitive? How much will it cost?

Hi Tom, What would it be like to "go hybrid"? What does that mean? I just want a solution that won't be horrible. I tried buying IDS Falcon framegrabber cards that convert analog to IP, but because of the way they use the interrupt on the PCI bus, they give terrible frame rates (1 frame per 5 seconds) with 24 cameras hooked up. My thought is that if I get everything on IP, more possibilities will be open to me, and eventually I might find some software that will not stink. Most software I've tried or seen, does. None of them are slick, intuitive, easy, and reliable. Instead, they're ugly, convoluted, and there's no way a non-computer-person will ever be able to use them effortlessly and comfortably. I looked at Luxriot. Is that what you mean by hybrid? Because resolution is not crucial for most of these cameras, my plan was to get 8 inputs via two of these for $700 total: http://securitybestbuy.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=23_27&products_id=2237 or one of these for $750: http://www.thenerds.net/VIVOTEK.Vivotek_VS8801_Video_Server.VS8801.html or whatever I can find that's cheapest. Then, if each of the channels is truly separate and independent and at D1 resolution, then I can hook up a few old-fashioned multiplexers -- those things are cheap! -- before feeding into the video server, making 6 of the inputs actually a 4-paned grid of 4 cameras at CIF resolution. That's my tentative plan; one of them, anyway. Thus my question as to whether each input functions as a separate IP camera with a separate IP and port, and whether all of them can stream at full resolution all at the same time. Anyway, again, I just want something that won't stink. Maybe that will be awesome, if possible. I've tried doing it myself, blazing new paths with this IDS Falcon idea, but that failed so badly that I would like someone who has some depth of experience to help me get something set up that will actually work, that we'll actually be happy with. I know that there's many guys here with security businesses and I'm hoping some of you will have the know-how in this area that you can help me out and make some money selling me on your solution. Thanks.

CCTV is just a technology. It's not good or bad. It depends on who is using it. If it is private individuals and companies using it, they are employing the tech to cut down on theft, protect their house, things like that. Admirable and legitimate uses. The government, on the other hand, has suspect motives. They have the goal of making money off of red-light tickets, tracking people, torturing dissenters, imprisoning kids with illegal lemonade stands, who knows. The government is full of bad people with bad ideas doing bad things. So I would rather they not have any cameras. Surveillance is a power and I want government power to be as limited and minimal as possible. I was once the victim of a crime. My laptop was stolen, along with some money and other stuff. I really wished the gas station across the street had some cameras that might have seen the car that did it. Alas, they did not. So surveillance is a good thing, as long as it's the people doing the surveillance, and not the rulers. Elsewise, quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Thanks!

Did it work?

If you're building VPNs across multiple sites, one thing to keep in mind is IP address conflicts. You can't have 20 192.168.1.101s. So, you might change the subnet for each site, e.g. 192.168.2.xxx for one site, 192.168.3.xxx for the next, 4.xxx for the next. Other than that, your systematic port numbering is good, always best to keep things organized, and as everyone told you, put the ports in the router, not in the cameras themselves. Officially, you should use ports 49152–65535 for custom or private purposes like this. That's best practice. For practical purposes, it won't usually cause any problem to use most anything above 1024. Definitely never use any below 1024. There don't appear to be any registered ports in the low 11,000s, unless you have a two hundred camera installation, then you'll run into "Savage:Battle for Newerth" Server Hosting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_TCP_and_UDP_port_numbers ). If you are not currently engaged in the battle for Newerth, however, this will not be cause for great alarm.

I take it you have sold them?

I have Mobotix cameras that I am trying to set up so that I can view the past recordings over the internet. How do I map my NAS to show up as a drive letter so that I can direct MxCC to look at that path for recordings? I can set it up as a web folder using the IP address and port and Windows can see it fine, but MxCC seems to need a path with a drive letter. Thanks.

When it comes to computers, there's almost always a way to do it. But if you get off the beaten path, it can require creativity, or money. The software might have some kind of auto-backup feature you could harness to snap a picture every hour/minute/whatever. Then, you have your FTP software set to synchronize the website with the contents of the directory where the picture is being saved. You could use Windows built-in task scheduler, maybe, depending on your set-up. Quickeys -- http://www.startly.com/ -- a user-friendly macro-making program might be useful. With it, you can set up complex actions, like record yourself doing whatever it would take to manually snap the picture and upload it to the website, then just set that action to repeat every X minutes.

OK! So I understood correctly. This test rules out everything, as you said, except for cabling! there's something wrong in that cabling run those 6 cables are going through. Maybe they're all kinked, maybe they pass too close to an electrical line or something else causing interference, maybe the conduit or whatever they are in has flooded and they're all underwater, an animal has chewed the lines up... Who knows!?! But it is definitely something with the signal getting from one end of the cable run to the other end -- your troubleshooting proves that. Using your CAT 5 is a good idea. If that doesn't work, you could fish the new cable that you ran over top the road, that you know works, through with the other 6 cables and see if it works. Or a high-quality, shielded cable.

OK, thanks! I think IPVision does support 2-way, so it *is* possible for 3rd party software to do.

That's my question. Anyone know?

This seems like a very important piece of the puzzle to me. Does this mean that you ran a different RG59 cable temporarily from the DVR to the BNC>VGA adapter and that everything worked fine with this cable? No double image? If so, it appears you already solved your problem. With cable 1, it doesn't work, switch to cable 2 and it works, that is pretty clear that the problem is a bad cable. Run a new cable. But, that is so obvious, there's probably a language-barrier problem and I'm misunderstanding. Other than that, the BNC>VGA converter is a prime suspect in my mind. Try finding some screen with a BNC connection to use temporarily so you can plug the BNC cable directly into the screen and see if you get the same problem.