Fiona

I understand. You are required to use the 4NSYS as the controller. I would test each unit. But this only works if you have spare controllers and domes. 1. If you have access to a Pelco keyboard, use that to establish that the CCDA1435 is responding. 2. If you have a Pelco speed dome, connect that to the 4NSYS to determine if the DVR can control it. 3. Check that you are wired into the 4NSYS correctly. This method eliminates those parts or units that are malfunctioning. The tiniest mistake or error results in these types of setups malfunctioning.

Okay then. Speed, protocol, connection and ID are correct. (I take it you have double checked the setting on the DVR?) What type of connection is it? Second question: Yes. If the keyboard is controlling the dome, then a Pelco keyboard should work.

It is the same the world over. Ever ask yourself this question, "What would be the point of making the Law totally arbitrary? What would be the upshot of legal or criminal matters that favoured the perpetrators?" Surely there would be a wider social outcome to this: namely wider passive aquiecense or submission. Excerpt from the Independent: To add insult to injury, for his attacker to have had the gall to sue him and be paid €175,000 compensation makes a mockery of the system. As Mr McCaughey points out, Daniel McCormack "wouldn't have had two broken legs unless he was in my house".

Have you established the type of protocols used by Siemens? Many of the industrial giants (like Siemens) use their own command language. Pelco manufacture a device which allows non-Pelco keyboards or at least keyboards that don't use the P & D protocols to communicate with Pelco PTZ equipment. These devices exist so that a Pelco unit can be quickly integrated into a larger system controlled by a non-Pelco keyboard. If the Siemens unit does not recognize P & D, then the DVR won't control it unless: Some of the newer DVRs contain additional protocols for the control of units made by other Major pan-tilt manufacturers.

An earlier locked post made unsavoury remarks about Shenzen manufacturers: "The company name is "Yet Another Chinese Spammer That's The Same As All The Others". Go to Google and plug in "CCTV company in Shenzen" - choose any of the results randomly, and that will be the company name." This attitude stymies the dissemination of information about new products because: 1. Not all Chinese manufacturers are the same. 2. Some factories manufacture according to the stringent 9001 Certification. 9001 Certified generic equipment is built to a very high standard. Chinese contributions to this forum are encouraged.

So we have a neighbour who is capable of: 1. Picking locks: "We changed locks, but no luck." 2. Defeating PIRs: "intruders jam the DSC system when they come in" 3. Defeating Motion Detection: "CCTV cameras were on Motion recording" 4. Blocking Continous Recording: "AND in Regular recording mode too" 5. Tapping phone(s): "so we guess they tap and wiretap us" 6. Placing covert microphones inside the house: "Where should we search for the bugs?" Who hasn't misplaced a pair of socks?: "some stuff disappeared, later it reappeared again... even clothes" (i) What motive would be sufficient to defeat 1 thru 6? (ii) And what kind of a civilian could defeat 1 thru 6? Maybe the intruder is Napoleon Solo - The Man from U.N.C.L.E.

Jamie Hyneman from Mythbusters demonstrated that a PIR can be beaten when the intruder covers his body with a cotton sheet. The Patriot Act allows Law Enforcement to enter a premise in the US and conduct searches unbeknown to the owners. These searches require a warrant. If your house is being searched, the State could be doing it. I would assume then, that no amount of technology will stop them.

As far as unpickable locks go, I use the Mul-T-Lock MT5. This ingeniously devious lock uses a key unlike anything you've seen before. A set of double pins strike both lateral faces of the key making keyless entry potentially impossible. If it couldn't defeat the interloper, it would certainly throw down the gauntlet. http://locksmithindallas.org/the-new-mul-t-lock-mt5-is-an-unpickable-lock/

To verify that this is not a hoax, how do the alleged intruders enter your house? There are a limited number of entry points to a house. It is possible to establish if any door or window has been opened by using discrete material jambed in all frames.

I'd still like to know your company name.

I messaged you a few days ago enquiring about your company name? Did you get the PM?

Yes, I have researched this but I cannot find an explanation. Question: How are megapixel cameras achieving such huge resolutions when they are using the same CCDs employed in analogue cameras?

Seriously, do you have Tourette Syndrome or something like that? This would explain your endlessly abusive personality. Pixel miniaturisation was not mentioned. "Pixel Miniaturisation" there, how hard was that?

The short answer to the original question must be Pixel Miniaturisation. CMOS sensor manufacture must have managed to miniaturise the pixels sufficiently to allow the resolution to increase by a factor of 5.8 times as can be seen in the Axis illustration and comparison of pixel dimensions per given area. Pixel miniaturisation is therefore allowing greater resolution within any given sensor dimension. This will have implications where camera dimensions cannot be increased: i.e. chassis cameras. http://www.crazyengineers.com/toshiba-1-12-micrometer-pixel-cmos-image-sensor-launched-576/ I would have to simply assume that pixel minitarisation is less practical for CCD sensors.

CMOS Elephant

Axis website appears to hedge it bets on CMOS versus CCD to protect its analogue market share: http://www.axis.com/products/video/camera/megapixel/index.htm Seems like there's an elephant in the room. If CMOS is getting a fourfold increase in resolution, then the cost of a 2K x 1K image has to be divided by 4 before it can be compared to the cost of an analogue image:

I haven't found a single document that explains this. And I have been through at least a dozen. CMOS sensors appear to produce far higher resolutions for a given sensor size than equivalently sized CCD sensors. The endless plethora of net articles which dissect ‘photoactive epitaxial layers’ and ‘shift registers’ hardly mention the differences in resolution. For so many very high resolutions to occur from CMOS, one would expect an occasional reference to this anomaly. (Notwithstanding marketing hyperbole.) For example: Sanyo VCC-HD2500 at about 2K x 1K resolution. Sensor - 1/3” CMOS http://www.mayflex.com/_assets/downloads/VCC-HD2100-2300-2500P-final.pdf Plus the Samsung SCB-6000 HD at about 2K x 1K resolution. Sensor - 1/3" CMOS http://www.samsung-security.com/SAMSUNG/upload/Product_Specifications/SCB-6000_Specifications.pdf The CNB IGC2050F at about 2K x 1K resolution. Sensor - 1/3" CMOS http://www.cnbtec.com/en/html/product/product.php?seqx_prod=1278

Hi ERM322, thanks for the lovely PM. The best recommendation I have for you is this. If you have the time and the interest and the commitment, you can build a very good home system yourself. If you are not so technically minded that's OK too. You can specify to an installer that you would like a purpose built system. Many installers or cctv companies will only work with products they stock or use regularly - so specifiying an exact camera or DVR may be difficult. The very good installers shouldn't mind too much is you hand them a list of the items that will be recommended on this form. If your installer balks or complains about those recommendations then you will know they are not up to scratch. There are many very experienced installers on this forum and, on a good day, they can save you a lot of money and save you from endless headaches. If you stick with their recommendations, you will be able to get quick forum support. The fundamental question has to do with the objectives you have for a system. This depends on the layout of your property and specific concerns you want the cameras to address. Often folk think of a CCTV system as a panacea to various security problems, when it can only function as part of an overall security plan. The last thing I'd say here is please don't make price the criterion for any purchases. Better, more expensive cameras are a very cheap investment in the long run: when calculated over, say, five years or longer. P.S. Don't be afraid to ask any questions. That's the only way to learn.

A brief history of the CCD (charged coupled device) and the CMOS (complementary metal oxide semiconductor) which are the most common camera sensors: The invention of the CCD in 1969 is credited to Willard Boyle and George Smith who had both worked at the Bell Laboratories since the 1950s. Boyle and Smith co-shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2009 for their work on the CCD. Gil Amelio is credited with the first commercial application of the device in the early 1970s. The CCD is the most common sensor used in closed circuit cameras. The CCD produces an analogue signal. CMOS sensors belong to a different category of sensors known as Active Pixel Sensors. These sensors employ amplifiers attached to each pixel. The theoretical groundwork that anticipated the manufacture of Active Pixel Sensors was first describe by Peter J. W. Noble, Savvas G. Chamberlain and P. K. Weimer in the late 60s. Tsutomu Nakamura popularised the term with his work on Charged Modulation Devices at Olympus Cameras. (We may speculate that Charged Modulation Device Sensor CMoS may have been the original acronym intended by Nakamura.) The theoretical description of the CMOS sensor is credited to Eric Fossum while at NASA. Willard Boyle also had a later affiliation with NASA. As mentioned earlier in this thread, CCTV may have originated within the German Rocket Programme on the island of Peenemunde which was led by SS Officer Wernher von Braun. Von Braun led the tightly knit team of German speaking German nationals who ran the entire NASA rocket programme until 1975. Frank Wanlass must also be acknowledged for his work at Fairchild Semiconductors in 1963. He was awarded a patent for APS logic circuits in 1967.

Perth, Western Australia.

Update: National Welfare Fraud Convictions 2010: 8000 National Welfare Fraud Convictions 2011: 4000 50% drop in convictions in 12 months. Welfare Fraud believed to be on the increase. Government just announced the recruitment of private surveillance companies and investigators to replace government investigators.

It appears that CCD sensors and CMOS sensors were developed at roughly the same time in the 1960s. Though the CMOS sensors had benefits which are only now being widely exploited today, the commercial application of CMOS was restricted due to the complexities of the digital signal which found no corollary in DSP performance. All the while, CCD produced an easy to handle analogue signal. This explains why CCD has enjoyed a protracted dominance over CMOS.

Pelco also manufacture the IWM24 Wall Mount with an integral 24VAC Power Supply for the Spectra and other models within its range. http://www.schneider-electric.hu/html/epuletfelugyelet2011/PDF/09_pelco/9.6_Mounts/c288m-h.pdf

Still waiting. 1. I've seen a locksmith pick a lock. He didn't use "two hair pins." 2. All locks are not "pretty much the same." 3. According to this rationale: Some locks can be picked, therefore all locks are useless. 4. Iconic brand name locks aren't "just as easy."

Really? I am certain the manufacturer would be interested to see that. Please direct me to the youtube page.