Soundy

I doubt the problem is really with the software, it's just inherently limited for what you're trying to do - GV simply isn't designed as advanced audio software, the same way as it's not designed for advanced video editing and processing. What you're running into is an "audio gate" function designed to cut out background noise... if possible, you may need to lower or disable that altogether. Short of that, you might need to look at adding a compressor to the chain - a device that boosts the low levels and lowers the high levels so the overall audio level is more even. A hardware unit inserted between the mics and the MOTU input is probably your best bet, but you could likely also do it in software - if the MOTU software doesn't have a live compression function, you should be able to use any of dozens of plugins.

Welcome aboard!

Well, what you need is a DVR that can create an outgoing remote-access connection to a central server, and then you connect to that server and it facilitates your connection back to the DVR. Remote-support applications like TeamViewer use this concept. I'm not aware of any standalone DVRs that use this concept, but there are some IP cameras that do - they've been discussed here before, I couldn't tell you the brand and model off the top of my head. If all you need is remote viewing and no local recording, that might be a way to go. Most IP cameras also do support sending to remote sites via email and/or ftp... that might be something to look into.

I could give you a half-dozen ways to do it if you were using a PC-based DVR... could probably do it with a PC on-site running something like TeamViewer VPN and acting as a bridge to the DVR.

We've been using NANOV monitors on a lot of commercial sites - they have composite loop-through as well as S-video and VGA inputs. Don't know what the pricing is, but I recall that they're a lot cheaper than the Pelco LCDs we were using before. Don't think we've had one fail yet, all running 24/7 for spot and customer-awareness displays.

Greetings, from yet ANOTHER coming out of an IT and A/V background I've been here a while, it's not as scary a transition as you might think

As seen in other threads, even some of these specs (and manufacturers' claims thereto) can be questionable at times. Ultimately, one of the best indicators is the old adage, "you get what you pay for". eBay and other online "discounts" and "sales" notwithstanding, a camera's price is usually a pretty fair indicator of its overall quality. Thing is, most of these cheap online cameras are built around the same basic components from the same few manufacturers (a LOT of them use the same Sony CCDs, for example) and the biggest difference from one to the next will be the actual construction quality of the rest of the assembly - a cheap camera, for example, may not be as watertight/weathertight as a the pricier model that uses the same internals. The point of all this is, don't expect miracles from a $30 camera - there are reasons that a professional/commercial camera may cost $300 despite appearing to have similar design.

Seconded!

May I trouble you to ask what kind of DVR's\NVR's you used in this instance? I was thinking about the 4ch NUUO mini. Any thoughts, good or bad there? thanks so much!! We're using Vigil PC-based hybrid DVRs (made by Erron's company, in fact). In this particular client's sites, we've got 32-channel systems running anywhere from 18 to 28 total cameras (largest one has 23 analog and 5 1.3MP IP cameras).

If I'm reading this right, you're wanting to capture the split-screen output of the quad?? Either way, the higher the res, the better if image quality is important, but you're not going to get much higher than 640x480 with standard analog capture (740x480 at best with current technology). Regular video is 30fps, so any higher framerate than that for capture is pointless. It's really hard to say what's "good enough" without knowing what you're trying achieve with this - whether it's just to see what's going on or whether you need to identify people, etc.

I assume you mean "switching" type, vs. transformer? I've never noticed a performance difference of one over the other. Switching supplies are definitely far smaller and run a lot cooler for a given current rating, and are inherently a regulated output; the drawback is that they're traditionally more expensive, but that's becoming less and less the case.

Exactly! I have seen quite a step forward from 0.3MP (VGA) to 1.3 MP and no such step from 2 to 3 MP. Well, there's nothing wrong with intermediate steps... 1.3MP is an easy place to start, since if you're going to go "megapixel", by definition that means >1,000,000, and 1280x1024 is a pretty good "common" ratio (actually, 1280x960 would maintain the proper 4:3 aspect as well as being an exact doubling of VGA's 640x480)... but the next FULL step from there is 5MP, which would be another substantial price jump as well. It's a pretty hard either/or sell, so you need to have something in between. Well, you could always look at Arecont cameras... the first one I saw was using a Canon 70-210mm f/4L lens (the lens was probably worth more than the camera - being a Canon DSLR owner, I was drooling ) and had a sensor that looked about the same as the one in my 300D. Of course, there are parallels here to the "megapixel race" in consumer cameras, where small-sensored point-and-shoot cameras are pushing 12-15MP because it's an easy selling point, while suffering from poor low-light performance (in particular) compared to SLR formats because the sensors - and thus the pixels - are so tiny.

Depends on how you define "sells best", for starters... if you're talking sheer volume, it's probably the cheap-ass embedded DVRs packaged with cheaper-ass IR bullet cams, sold at Costco and on Fleabay. For us, it really depends on the client - the site, the needs, the budget. There is no "best seller" - we generally recommend what we think is most appropriate for each specific camera location. A site can have a mix of analog and IP; box, dome and bullet; embedded or PC-based DVR... there is no one-size-fits-all best solution, and thus no one "best seller".

Thank you! I Trust in God more I hope than people.. hehe "In God we trust... all others pay cash."

Well, if it's any help, I have done something just like this - "real-world". Added four 1.3MP IQ cameras feeding *two* DVRs (one just outside the office, above the office door - NOT my idea! - and one in a remote locked room - site had problems with someone tampering with the "main" DVR). As with your instance, the site really doesn't have a lot of inherent network traffic - the network mainly serves the paypoint terminals and administrative email. The DVR and cameras are connected to a basic D-Link DSS-5 5-port 10/100 switch (in the ceiling outside the office), which is linked to the office's main (enterprise-grade) switch. Also plugged into the main switch is an iSCSI-attached NAS array (located in the office) for additional storage. From that switch, a line feeds to the phone/electrical room, where the incoming WAN connection is... a second 5-port switch in that room splits the WAN out to the office, and to the "backup" DVR. Thus far, there has not been a problem with this. The company's IT manager regularly remotes into both machines via VPN, both with the remote client software and with VNC, and has no issues with lag or speed. THEORETICALLY, it's not a great setup. THEORETICALLY, the results should be disastrous. REAL-WORLD, the whole site is a $#!t-show and the install had to be completed with what little space and time was available. REAL-WORLD, it actually works just fine.

Actually, the 30m cables are likely not an issue as much as the power adapters are. If you're using regulated adaptors/power supplies (which I assume they provide with the cameras?), those will be putting out a solid 12VDC at their outputs... but the drop over 30m of cable could easily be a couple volts once the IR kicks in. If you use unregulated supplies, they'll probably be producing closer to 17VDC at their outputs, so that after you lose a couple volts to line resistance, you've still got plenty of potential at the cameras (and slightly less loss as well, by virtue of the higher voltage). Now the catch to this is that some cheap cameras don't handle over-voltage well and can fry if the supply voltage is too high... but those are relatively rare and limited to the REALLY cheap ones, in my experience... I've probably used 5 times more unregulated 12VDC wall-warts than regulated versions, and only had one or two camera failures that MIGHT be attributable to overvoltage from an unregulated supply (I say MIGHT because no effort was ever made to ascertain whether that was actually the cause).

If by big you mean the master bathroom is bigger than any room in my house, then yes, it is BIG.

Yeah, the jump from 3.1MP (typically 2048x1536) to 5MP (typically 2560x1920) isn't really that great an increase in resolution... to actually double both axes, you're looking at a FOUR-TIMES increase in total resolution. Going from 1.3MP (typically 1280x1024) to 5MP would be about that size of a jump.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hmmm, I need to understand how camera failing because of IR consuming more current u mean camera had problem putting out good levels (voltage drop) then I don't have question or camera become defective ? and why depends on camera camera will consume only whatever its design for power supply is a ? do u have enough or not No, the problem is, the smaller the wire, the more its resistance... when the IR kicks in and demands more current, Ohm's law dictates that the voltage will drop more. If it drops below the camera's operational minimum, then the camera will shut off. It's not a matter of the current the power supply is capable of delivering. Personally, I just avoid IR cameras... I'd rather use something that actually has good low-light response instead of trying to get around poor performance with a cheap hack like IR LEDs.

Well, must be nice to be able to just do all that work and then bill the client for it, but here in the real world, you generally have to get the client's approval BEFORE embarking on spending tens of thousands of dollars and ripping up the parking lots and driveways of an operating gas station. If they don't want to spend that money, you have to come up with something else.

Agreed, WiFi will probably not be the best way to go here. Although data rates with basic VGA-resolution cameras won't be that high, your signal strength and coverage will likely be an issue, even with an 11n router (I'm guessing this is a BIG house?).

Do you know what "chico" is? It's a thick liquid that's poured into pipes where it hardens into a solid plug to seal the pipes... in this case, to prevent gasoline fumes from venting back into the building. It's required by Canadian Electrical Code at both ends of the conduit used to feed out to the pump islands, and it's pretty much impossible to remove after it's in there, without cutting, chiseling or jack-hammering the pipe to bits. Like I said, it would be nice if we all lived in a perfect world where "back hauling" is possible anytime someone wants to add cameras to an installation like this... I never said they're wrong. I said when you know the rules, and WHY they're the rules, you know where you can bend them, and how far. While there's no certification required for CCTV work here in BC, I do have a background in electronics and electrical theory, so I do know where the wire/current calculations come from. I also know that published specs are typically de-rated, sometimes by as much as 30%, to allow for a little "wiggle-room" and for real-world variances that we simply have no control over. Just because "the rules" say that you can't run more than "x" amps on "y" gauge wire for more than "z" distance, doesn't mean the whole thing is going to instantly go up in smoke if you're pulling "x+.01" amps for "z+.01" meteres.

Well first thing is, you probably won't find suitable cameras in the "cheap" range - you need something with a good fast-reacting iris or AGC. As far as the DVR, the camera shouldn't matter, as long as it supports the local video standard (NTSC for North America, PAL for most of Europe, etc.)

Yes, but that one's not megapixel.

Well, it would be nice to live in a perfect world, but very few of us actually have that luxury. When the client is insistent that you get a new camera into a detached pump canopy whose conduits have all been sealed with about a foot of chico at each end, you do what you can with what you have, unless you can convince the client to spend tens of thousands to dig up the parking lot and put in new conduit. Well if that's the case, then what's the point of baluns in the first place? Fact is, the whole "balanced line" design INHERENTLY eliminates induced line noise, including that caused by AC on adjacent pairs. I've never once seen AC interference caused by running 24VAC over the same Cat5 - or station wire, or intercom wire, for that matter - as video-via-baluns. I've had far more trouble with ground loops using 12VDC.