Soundy

I suppose you can't really go wrong, for <$70...

Is there a lot of instances of people lurking around the office in the dark? If not, there's probably not a lot of call for IR cameras.

eSATA is good too, but more limited in distance. Great if you can put the array within a foot or two of the DVR. NAS is handy if you want to put your NAS in a different, more secure location.

If you're going with that many drives, why not just go RAID5? With RAID1, you still have to shut down the machine to swap the failed drive. Here's what I'd suggest: Get a small RAID5 drive enclosure with four drives, like something from QNAP or Synology, and iSCSI interface (be sure it supports this). Load it with drives and configure as RAID5. Be sure to use one with hot-swappable drive bays (some don't have this; defeats half the point of RAID5). Generally, these will beep madly and can usually email you if a drive fails; RAID5 will then allow you to hot-swap the bad drive without ever shutting things down, and will rebuild its array seamlessly. Then use a single small (40-80GB) drive for your system drive and if your software supports it, a separate partition for a "backup" data drive in case the NAS is offline temporarily. Once your build is complete, use an imaging program like DriveImage, Acronis, or Paragon, to create an image of your system partition on the backup partition, then copy that onto a DVD-R (Paragon, at least, supports imaging direct to optical disc). Now, if a data drive dies, you can hot-swap it with no downtime and no data loss... if your system drive fails, it's relatively easy to drop a new one in and restore your image. Mirroring system drives can be done, but it can be a major pain if there's any other kind of failure - say, of the motherboard itself, or the disk controller. It's usually less hassle to simply have that backup image.

What kind of connector does it use? Most Pelco domes I've seen use a 2.5mm submini TS (aka headphone) plug - readily available from most electronics suppliers. A number of others use a two-pin connector and actually include the "adapter" cable - I have dozens of these.

Umm... how?

Actually, the SAFEST way is not to open up your network to outsiders at all - cameras pushing their streams out to an external webserver eliminates the need to open ANY outside ports or give ANYONE else, ANY kind of direct access to your NVR or cameras. The IQ511 I have here on my desk will push time-lapse stills to an ftp server at minimum 1s intervals, effectively the equivalent of 1fps. Such a method would give coherent "video" to the webserver with relatively minimal bandwidth requirements - all the load would be on the remote webserver. Sign up with GoDaddy or a hosting site like that, a little HTML code to display the images, and away you go.

"I assume I can connect to a single camera via a web browser provided I have the right IP address and port forwarding setup, thus bypassing any NVR software frontend" Not with Arecont cameras Yeah, well, I don't like Areconts anyway (you may have heard ) To the OP: they're a bit pricier, but I recommend IQEye - they'll handle everything mentioned above. Newer versions even have a "cameo" function that lets you pre-define different views and crops.

"I assume I can connect to a single camera via a web browser provided I have the right IP address and port forwarding setup, thus bypassing any NVR software frontend"

One of our restaurant customers puts BIG-ASS UPSes in their new sites and run ALL their electronic systems off of them - computers as well as the back end of their A/V systems... their flagship store that we did last year has two of them that are about the size of a medium-sized fridge.

If the viewers are connecting directly to the camera, then yes, it could theoretically affect the stream to the NVR... however, the internet pipe is probably so small (maybe half a megabit if you're on DSL) that it wouldn't have the bandwidth to put enough "strain" on the LAN to be a problem. What would probably be preferable would be to use a remote streaming service, and send the camera's stream to that; then the remote server handles all the demand instead of your broadband connection. Or, if you don't need "live" views, many IP cameras have the ability to send video clips or images via ftp - you could build a page on your webserver (which presumably has sufficient bandwidth to handle the demand) that simply displays an image with a set name, and then have the camera upload a new image of that name on a set schedule - once every 30 or 60 seconds, for example. Edit: another advantage to this method is that you can also send the output of several cameras to the web or streaming server...

Most power outages around here last two, three minutes tops... if it's more than that, it can be hours or days. In these cases a basic 650-850VA SOHO UPS easily keeps things running through most outages. We've used APC, TrippLite, and most recently found some screamin' deals on really nice Belkin models at Costo. All work pretty much the same... the main thing I try to look for is a battery format that we can easily replace from our wholesaler. I have one that I had to go retail to replace a battery (12VDC, 7Ah) and it cost $35... the same capacity battery from ADI/Burtek is about $11, but none of theirs would fit the one particular UPS.

Nothing wrong with a scheduled reboot, especially if it's software-initiated for a clean shutdown. Windows traditionally likes regular reboots anyway Oh, and for those who poo-poo Windows for this reason in favor of Linux-based embedded systems... we have a Mango Raven video-analytics box on one site (embedded PC running a custom stripped-down Linux) that stops responding now and then as well, that I've now got on a power timer to cycle the power to it on a weekly basis - haven't had any problems with it since. I also have a daily power-cycle timer on an old Capture Fastrax II PTZ dome whose autofocus is flaking out now and then, but is cleared up by a camera reboot.

Not to confuse things, but you don't HAVE to use a "non-PoE" port to connect your switch to your router. PoE should enable automatically on a per-port basis if there's a PoE-capable device plugged into it; if you plug in something that doesn't use PoE, then power shouldn't be enabled on that port. BTW, any particular reason you're using the router in Bridge mode, rather than the standard NAT mode?

I've seen something similar happen on Vigil DVRs a couple times as well, it was very rare, and rebooting generally cleared it up for several months. One machine had to be rebuilt (reinstall Windows and all software/drivers) for other reasons, and the problem never reappeared on that machine... so I would tend to suspect something in software.

Agreed, if it was JUST the VGA output, I'd first suspect the video card, as most of these types of systems use the card's overlay mode for the camera display, and I've seen instances where that can be problematic if you have old or incorrect video drivers. However, the fact that the problem also occurred on the remote clients pretty conclusively rules out the video card, IMO. However, it also doesn't conclusively point to the capture card. It could also be the capture card's driver, the software itself, or any of the hardware in between, including the PCI bus, the system RAM, northbridge or southbridge... anything that the data passes through. Since you've been unable to duplicate the problem, I'd say just chalk it up as a one-off glitch for now. If it repeats, you might try reinstalling the DVR software and the HIKvision driver, running a full hardware diagnostic (memtest and/or prime95), and as a last resort, reinstalling everything from the OS on up.

So, you think you need a quad core and maybe a couple videocards in SLI for a DVR machine...? As you have been told, a computer so old (Celeron 1.3Ghz with 256Mb) is not worth upgrading. Doesn't matter if it works as well now as it did when you purchased it last century, you would spend more in bringing that computer up to date, than on buying a new machine with specs a lot better than what the upgrades will give you. Seconded - I would guess that thing uses SD-RAM (PC100/133), and unless you have some laying around or can find some used modules for cheap on Craigslist, the RAM alone will probably cost you more than a new machine. This is our main supplier - http://a-power.com/home-457 - they have brand new systems starting at

"Am I wrong in thinking that I will get a much better quality system if I go with IP Megapixel cameras?" Well... kind of. But you're on the right track. As the others have noted, overall system design is critical. You'll definitely get higher RESOLUTION with IP cameras, but whether it's better QUALITY video depends on a lot of other factors: compression, conditions, environment, lighting, lenses, general camera quality... Case in point, you could get a bargain-basement 1.3MP IP camera for less than you'd pay for an all-analog Panasonic WV-CP484, and while you'd get higher resolution, you probably wouldn't have a better picture, especially under extreme lighting conditions. The main problem with cheap Costco package systems and their ilk, is that they just pack up a bunch of one-size-almost-fits-all cameras that will do a "fair" job in almost all circumstances, but nothing that will excel when it comes to specific needs. Sounds like this guy has done something similar, setting you up with a bunch of generic gear that doesn't quite do a "good" job at anything. Of course, it's possible that what you DO have simply isn't set up properly - poor focus, poor positioning and aiming, incorrect resolution and compression settings, etc.

Pretty much all IP cameras are remote-configurable through a web interface. Generally, no special software needed once they're properly connected to the network, although most also have utilities for centralized management and batch configuration. As for climbing a ladder, most IP cameras don't have any on-camera adjustments anyway, other than the zoom/focus/iris on the lens itself.

Ferrite cores and ground loop isolators are two different things. Now granted, the only isolators I'm familiar with are the types used in audio, particularly car audio, but those simply use a 1:1 matching transformer to physically "break" and isolate the audio runs, both signal and ground. Within the wires they are... inside the camera, you'll find them tied together.

I'll give you 10:1 odds that your problem is a ground loop. The problem with most cheap 12VDC cameras is that the power and video share a common ground. If you get too much difference between the power and ground run for a particular camera, you end up with different-length ground paths, and hence ground-loop issues. With separate power supplies, this will almost never cause a problem, on a central power supply, but the more cameras you add with common power AND video grounds, the worse the problem gets for all of them. Using separate power adapters for each camera is one way to work around it, and they don't have to be close to the camera... they just have to keep the power grounds separate from the other cameras. A better way to work around it is not to use cheap cameras - *good* 12V cameras will have regulators or other designs by which video and power aren't sharing a common ground. 24VAC cameras avoid the issue completely, as they will necessarily have internal rectifiers and regulators. Using baluns in this situation will actually make the problem far worse, because a balun essentially puts a transformer inline with the video signal, thus GREATLY increasing the line length - you end up with a video ground that's technically hundreds of feet longer than the power ground. Baluns are great for killing induced EMI noise, but terrible for ground loops.

ak357 has some spiffy little cameras that connect out to a central server and allow you to access through that, so there's no need to mess with firewalls and port forwarding, and no need for DDNS.

Go FLIR

Why would they? The innards are usually the same: your typical bullet camera is just a small board camera in a round housing, while your typical dome camera just puts that same board in a flat, round housing with a plastic bubble over it. If anything, domes and boxes have more room for better support circuitry for better image processing. As for view, that's entirely dependent on the lens used. Most bullets have a fixed lens and don't have room for varifocals, and while most dome cameras use the same boards and thus the same mini lens mount, there's more room inside most dome designs for varifocal lenses, allowing more flexibility. Camera "style" is the LAST thing you should consider when it comes to view and picture quality.

Alas, reality doesn't always allow us to do things as they're "supposed to be" done. And again, in my experience, straight wire (twisted pair or not) with baluns handle induced noise better than coax. Coax is designed to effectively shield itself from the noise... a balanced line basically just cancels it out. Of course, if you want the best of both worlds, terminate your coax with baluns - baluns certainly don't require twisted-pair to work effectively.