Soundy

BTW, with the Video Insight, even if the network client doesn't do the trick for you, they do have a pretty good web client - just put a link to each site on the shortcut toolbar and you're good to go. As far as the spycams, I've used a number of different styles - built into a PIR (some with the PIR actually working, some just a dummy), or into a smoke detector. Can't recall the brand of the last ones I used, might have even been Honeywell. If all else fails, you can get cheap PIRs and mount board cameras inside of them yourself.

Ah, sorry... yes, that's Camacc's Vigil software (also at www.3xlogic.com). Catch is, I don't think they sell the software separately; AFAIK they only sell the complete systems. And they are a bit pricier than the DIY systems most people here deal with, but IMHO you really get what you pay for.

Vigil and Video Insight both have remote client software that will show multiple clients in one window. I can't say much about VI's because the last time I worked with it, it was intended strictly for LAN/intranet use and really didn't work well over an internet connection, but they may have improved on that by now. Vigil's remote client works great for multiple sites, though, and even lets you create "group" views of cameras from different sites. Here's an example, three sites for one client:

Interference won't be a problem as such, at least not in the same way as you're used to, because the signal is error-corrected, streamed digital video. EMI might cause brief signal drops if it's REALLY bad, but it doesn't put noise in the picture like with analog. As noted above, WiFi range is mostly affected by distance, which can be improved on with a better antenna and/or repeaters. Indoors, wall construction will be more of an issue than just distance - concrete or steel-stud walls will limit you moreso than woodframe, for example. If size is an issue, you may want to consider an IP camera, rather than an IP adapter for a standard camera. That way, the functions of the camera and the transmitter are all in one (relatively small) package. It also allows you to bypass one of analog cameras' main limitations: resolution. Analog video capture is generally limited to 740x480 or less, and using that adapter with an analog camera will impose that limitation. Because an IP camera doesn't go through that analog stage, resolutions of 1.3MP (1280x1024) and up are common.

It means this is four cameras in one enclosure.

What your potential is talking about is basically an IP network camera with built-in WiFi support. It's not like a regular unidirectional system where the camera transmits video and there's a box at the other end that receives it and spits out video. It connects to a WiFi router like any other WiFi device (laptop, game console, printer), and the DVR or NVR communicates with it through that network connection. At that point, any other computer attached to the network is able to communicate with the camera as well. scorpion's suggestion will work to adapt standard (existing?) analog cameras for wireless network connections. Keep in mind that WiFi is somewhat limited in distance, especially indoors. 802.11b/g is 30m line-of-sight, and considerably less if there are walls and floors between the devices. Going to an .11n router will get you about twice the range, even if the devices are only .11b or g. Any more than that, and you may have to look at adding repeaters or high-gain antennas.

Phone wire should work fine - I've done it over 200 ft. runs using two-pair un-twisted station wire... with the other pair running 24VAC for two cameras. It sounds ugly, but it worked great

Yes, Power over Ethernet in this instance would be used specifically for IP cameras. 10/100 ethernet uses only two of the four pairs of wire in an ethernet cable, so in its simplest form*, a PoE injector or PoE-capable switch would provide power over the two unused pairs to any receiving device that supports it (typically, cameras, access points, VoIP phones, etc.) In short: it still requires a wired connection, all it does is save the user from needing to run separate power and network lines. * The PoE spec also allows a method for "piggybacking" power on all four pairs, particularly for use with gigabit ethernet.

Yes, it is completely possible. You may not be able to find a single balun that passes audio and video (there are several that do video and control, with or without power), but there's nothing wrong with using separate baluns for audio and video - just get ones with snap-down or screw terminals instead of of an RJ-45 jack. GEM makes a single-channel audio balun that would do the trick nicely. Combine that with a similar video balun and you're good to go - double up the last two pairs for power. Other manufacturers may make something that's specifically suited to this purpose as well.

^OP linked to the DVR's manual, it's all in there.

You could, but it's quicker and easier to simply reprogram the zone for NO rather than NC operation. They're designed to do exactly that. That's true, but you lose some flexibility of control (arm/disarm, entry/exit delay, etc.)

Read what Scorpion wrote again... it will be quite difficult to strike the right balance between sensitivity and alarm falsing if you're relying soley on motion detection Yes, but read what niguel wrote again: Now, as for the hookup... Is there anything else on this alarm (your home system, etc.) or is it solely for experimentation? One thing, if you'll definitely want this on its own zone. You have 7 available, according to the manual. If you use Zone 7, be sure to program it for something other than PANIC mode, or the DVR triggers will set it off even if the system is disarmed (unless that's what you want). Most alarm sensors operate as normally-closed, and trigger when they go open. If you can, use a normally-closed output relay on the DVR. If it only supports normally-open relays, you may need to program the alarm to accept that on the zone you use. The EOL resistor SHOULDN'T be required, but if you have problems with it triggering, try simply adding one in parallel at the panel connections. Hmm, actually, looking at the DVR manual, it appears to only have a normally-open output circuit, which means it closes the circuit when triggered. Looking at p.54 of the DVR manual, and decoding the horrible Engrish, it looks like you'd use pins 13 and 25 of the DB25 connector. If you were going to use Zone 7 of the alarm panel then, you'd wire those to terminals 8 and 10.

The Highwire units I've used are 10/100, so they'll (theoretically) handle as much video as can be crammed over 10/100... doesn't look like they have a gigabit version (yet).

I don't think anyone has disputed any of those statements. Yes, analog is cheaper and easier to maintain. All your "facts" are correct. The whole point of IP is, current analog CCTV technology has a limitation on resolution, period. The only widely-available option to go beyond that currently is IP-attached megapixel cameras. You keep crowing about the cost difference and how it's "not worth it", but that's really up to the specific needs of a specific job, isn't it? You go on about higher storage costs, limited framerates, relative low-light performance... well, not everyone has the same low-light requirements, not everyone has the same framerate requirements, and not everyone is so concerned about storage, espeically with today's cheap drives. The fact is, YOU'RE the one who refuses to remove his hands from his eyes and ears, continually trying to convince us all that megapixel and IP are bunk and are no good for anyone's purposes, with no regard for individual client needs. Well, you enjoy wallowing in the 1990s, singing "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" while the rest of the industry leaves you behind.

If the wires are going straight through into a warm, moist indoor airspace, that moisture will condense when it hits the inside of the cold dome. Granted, in my experience, it has to be pretty cold outside and REALLY moist inside for it to become a problem, but that's 99% likely where your problem is coming from. Sealing really well where the wires come into the dome should do the trick... to be extra-sure, seal where they enter the wall on the inside of the building as well.

Power is PROBABLY not the issue, but to be sure, check the voltage at the camera, WITH the camera powered up. It's possible that the IR LEDs kicking in are dropping the voltage enough to cause the camera to revert to color. My guess would be that the light sensor is just getting confused... and yes, a flood light pointed toward the camera could be affecting it as well. One thing you can do to test the theory, is to cover the light sensor with something like a small piece of black tape, and see if the camera goes to IR mode and stays there. It may not be enough to fully block it in the daylight, but it might cut the light interference that's causing it to keep reverting to color as it gets dark.

Does it settle in to B&W once it gets a little darker, or does it keep switching through the night? Look for any other light source that could be affecting it - I believe most have a separate light sensor to trigger the switch, much like the systems that turn building and street lights on at dusk.

Welcome! "Remember Kyle, there are no stupid questions, only stupid people." Now then... Both the cameras you listed output analog NTSC or PAL video (depending on the market they're designed for). In order to "broadcast" either to a website, you'll first need some form or video-capture hardware; something to take the analog video signal and digitize it. That would normally be a PCI card or USB dongle that plugs into a PC, with its associated software. Some devices will include software that will do what you want (pushing images/video to a remote website); some will run a webserver locally on the same computer that can be accessed remotely; and some will require additional or different third-party software to achieve your goals. Between the hardware and software options, there are far too many options to simply start listing them off. Other factors in the decision may be whether you want to view and/or store the video locally; whether you need to keep it for an extended period of time or whether it's just for live viewing; what level of quality you require; whether you have a broadband (high-speed) internet connection available at both locations... well, you get the idea. As to your last question: IP and CCTV are NOT the same thing. CCTV (closed-circuit television) is a rather generic term. As the name implies, it's a direct connection (whether wired or wireless) between the camera and the viewing/recording system, as opposed to a broadcast system that spews the signal out indiscriminately. It doesn't necessarily refer JUST to surveillance and security video, but that's the most common usage of the term. IP stands for "internet protocol" (generally shortened from the full "TCP/IP - transport control protocol/internet protocol") and it's one of many types of network transports (others are NetBIOS, Netware, IPX, etc.) that can operate over a wide range of network media (ethernet being the most common, but there's also the likes of fiber, token-ring, and so on). Your webserver that you want to push the video to would be operating via TCP/IP. In relation to CCTV, "IP" typically refers to cameras that digitize their video internally and then transmit the video over the network using TCP/IP, rather than sending an analog video signal. I won't get into the advantages and disadvantages of either method here (there are plenty of threads on that already), but for your purposes, it may be worth noting that most IP cameras also include a built-in webserver, so it can be viewed directly from the network. Many also have video- or image-push features, so the camera itself can send the video you want directly to the website. The downside to this is the cost - the IP functionality generally adds a decent premium over analog cameras. The counter to that, however, is that no additional capture hardware is required, and in some cases, you may not need additional software either. Hope that helps!

No more ideas, sorry... that's a strange one alright. What IS the actual voltage reading AT the camera?

Nothing that complicated, really... sometimes you get a bad or flaky power supply that will measure full voltage with no load, but can't provide any current when there's even a small load on it, and the voltage will drop out. In that case, a new power supply is all it takes.

The NVR should have no problem handing monitoring and remote access along with recording. What I've done in similar situations, was to add a second NIC to the DVR, and plug that into the in-house LAN/VPN, so it could accessed from head office. In one site, however, I just patched the cameras' switch into their network and assigned the DVR's NIC an alternate IP on their LAN, and they can remote into it that way... so far, no problem doing it that way. In fact, in two of these sites, I've used an 8-port LinkSys switch that has eight 10/100 PoE ports, and two GBe ports - I connect the DVR to one of the GBes, and on the other, an Enhance R8 or T8 RAID-5 array for extra storage (8x1TB@RAID5=6.5TB, yummy!) BTW, I've found out that the Vigil system CAN operate as a pure NVR with no capture hardware needed - they cost a little more than a Geo or Insight, but IMHO they're well worth taking a look at. The latest versions have (or will soon) Video Analytics built in, and the whole interface is very clean and polished. Their remote client is outstanding, especially if you have multiple sites to monitor. The only drawback vs. the VideoInsight is lack of a web viewer - they provide some dev tools to roll your own, but Vigil doesn't come ready for web-based viewing out-of-the-box like VI does.

Keep in mind that a 400mm lens will have a LOT tighter field of view on a 1/2" sensor than on an APS-C or 35mm sensor. 400mm to a 1/2" 1.3MP camera is probably going to be something like 1200mm to an APS-C sensor (just a guess, without doing the actual math).

Silly question, but are you sure your power connections are the proper polarity? With most 12VDC cameras with barrel connectors, the "tip" should be positive and the shield is ground.

Well, you have a pretty good stock of options out there for cameras, from basic VGA-res consumer-grade cameras to $10,000 uber-cams I've set up a few sites now using PoE switches, and it sure is a dream to not have to run separate power. My one suggestion would be to make sure you have at least one gigabit port for your PC; most cameras have only 10/100 interfaces, and will actually work fine even at 10Mbit with lower framerates, but the more you have, the more load will be concentrated on the PC's connection. If you have plenty of dedicated wiring, I'd also recommend keeping your cameras and NVR on their own network... in part to keep the traffic off the rest of your LAN, and in part just for keeping everything nicely organized. There are a number of IP-only NVR systems out there... the one I'm most familiar with is Video Insight. It also has the option to add an analog component (with the appropriate hardware) so it does allow that avenue of expandability... just in case you should need to go there in the future. Personally, I really like the Vigil systems from 3xLogic/CAMACC, but I'm not sure if they actually have an NVR-only system yet; all the ones I've dealt with have been hybrids and the software has required that the capture hardware be present. Hopefully they're working to get past this. The one drawback to IP is that it's still somewhat more expensive than analog. The upside to that is that if you're going all-IP, you save a fair bit on the capture hardware... and depending on the circumstances, a single megapixel camera can often give you the equivalent coverage of two or three analog cameras (meaning, you can use a wider lens on one camera to cover as much area as multiple IP cams with tighter views, and still get the same detail). The other catch is that IP cams have a bit of catching up to do for low-light, and most (at least of those I've used) don't support auto-iris lenses yet, which can be an issue if there are wide variations in the lighting. The video is all digitized in-camera; the recorder needs only to store the incoming data stream (and in some cases, re-process/re-compress it). No specialized hardware is required, nor is a special video card. Most systems' onboard VGA should be more than sufficient for display; 3D isn't necessary. Nope, although if you're using more than just a few cameras, I'd recommend a gigabit port (see above regarding the switch). Again, pretty much any modern machine should have that on-board as well. Check out Video Insight's "IP Server" offering. Again, if the need ever arises, the necessary hardware and software can be easily added to provide analog support as well. I believe the license is purchased on a per-camera basis, so anytime you need to add another camera, you just extend the license (you'd have to talk to them about pricing though). I'd love to recommend a look at Vigil as well, but again, I don't know if they make a "pure" NVR system yet (would be worth looking into). For cameras, we've been really happy with the IQEye cameras - we've mostly used the IQ511 "box" cameras, and their A11 "Alliance series" dome cameras. The 511s can be bought in a kit that includes a 4-12mm lens and can use any manual-iris C- or CS-mount CCTV lenses; the domes I've used come with a 2.5-7mm lens, but I believe there are other lens options available as well. All their cameras support PoE, and start at 1.3MP and go up from there.