shockwave199

True, but even a human test is somewhat subjective. Besides having to take into account the various angles at which a person's face can be viewed, you must also consider that the human brain must perform very complex analysis in order to recognize a face, and that analysis is influenced by a number of factors. Obviously, if the test subject is known to the viewer, then that subject will be MUCH more readily, positively, and quickly identified than if the subject is a total stranger. Also, it is well-known (at least among those whom are intellectually honest) that people are better able to identify members of their same race. While I agree that human subject testing is very useful for comparing CCTV systems, it is not as objective as using a test target. I think license plates tend to provide a useful metric, at least for outdoor cams, as they are standard in size and composition (within a country) and they are universally available. Specifically talking about the night shots here, no matter what camera, and for all the fiddling, it's the difference between setting it up for a good picture or setting it up for the best shot at ID'ing, imo. I'd simply walk out to those cars and act like I'm lurking and looking in them. Pull on the door handles. Walk around them just as someone would do who might be looking to bust into them. What you see [or don't see] would tell you where your lighting deficiencies are, that's all. I don't discount myself from this either. My analog camera pictures aren't all perfect for ID'ing yet either. But all too often I see noodling to dial in good pictures. How well that picture catches a thief could be another story. Dial in settings for the targets is all I'm suggesting. Btw- I think the panisonic day shot was very good but the night shot was not good at all. I would have liked to see what that camera produced with a little fussing. The Axis is fantastic in the day shot and good at night. What anyone would look like when they peer into the passenger window at 3am with their backs to the lawn lamp remains to be seen though. Damn lamps are tough to deal with. I deal with one too. I've tried to just keep it out of the frame for the time being, but something will have to be done in the end.

To me, if you're comparing differences without a person in different spots in sample picures, you're only comparing how nice a picture looks- especially at night. I'd guess a good MP cam would provide an improved ID shot at night as well, provided the lighting is appropriate. But that's only a guess. I only ever see pictures comparing scenic views, not what any one camera will provide for ID'ing purposes. That requires humans photograped by the cameras at different points in the field.

My two remote views do completely different things when it comes to sizing pics, pics snapped from within the apps. Web viewer, window of channel full size, but not full monitor screen size, just the window expanded bigger- It's not elongated like that in the web viewer, it's squared off appropriately. MCS software, channel window small- MCS software, channel window full size, which is actually full monitor screen size- Perhaps there's a difference too when imgage linking as opposed to uploading a file here, I don't know. The default sizing seems to follow whatever either app decides to pump out. I never gave it much thought really. A pic is a pic. Make it bigger, make it smaller- whatever is gonna provide the clearest ID shot, and it better at least be clear by default or making it bigger is only gonna kill it. Shrinking pics will generally make them look better. But again, it's pictures. And it's REMOTE pictures. These pics I posted are with the apps set to LAN, which helps to sharpen them up. Set to WAN, they get more soft- less sharp. And I find that for me, settings such as resolution, bitrate, framerate, and internet bandwidth really come into play big time when viewing remotely- and capturing pictures. Exporting directly from the dvr should be a different, more accurate story- for video and pics. Although, I don't know if my dvr exports pics. I've never tried it. I monitor my system 99% of the time remotely.

I've been eyeing lots of ptz's lately, but I never push the button to buy. What did you get? And I hope you post lots of shots of video of that, day & night.

Define blah. What don't you like about it?

I know you'll get it straight, perhaps with the help of others. I don't know what the problem is but I'll offer some quick advice for the future with this. In general, don't fix what ain't broke. Of all that needs attention in your system, this camera looked great and didn't need anything changed. When you get a camera looking great, don't pick at it. Leave it alone and noodle with something that really needs it. Good luck with the fix.

What model camera is that?

Edit never mind. The answer lies within.

Maybe the back of the mind actually knows better. This was still cool Sean. Thanks for doing it.

Well, the resounding chorus of crickets has provided the answer to this one! Oh well!

I would suggest if possible moving the camera 60' closer to what you want to see, rather than stretching the zoom all that way. Last year the installers put up an eyeball with IR for a wide shot of the warehouse where I work. Lights off, it provided nothing usable. I had to request the guys leave the center row of lights on overnight so I could at least see the inside of the place on camera. Works fine for that, but the wide overview isn't much of a help past just seeing if someone is in there- ID not possible beyond 6' in front of the camera. My opinion, of waste of the install, the view, and the electricity to have the lights on all night. But, you just can't tell some people. Moral- don't make a good view go bad over a completely wrong FOV in there, in the dark to boot. Get the cameras close to where you need them and provide real light if possible, rather than IR. Warehouses are typically large areas. Aim/light accordingly or it's a waste. My opinion- cameras tight to people doors in/out and loading bay doors in/out. Leave the rest of the warehouse blind or if you must stick up a camera for a wide shot. Choke points in such a large area equals better, imo.

Almost a year into having cameras up, this is the only interesting thing- LvigejLKkow Tell you the truth, I'd rather have uneventful stuff anyway. Calm and boring- a good thing to find on your cameras.

What does you old supplier suggest? Edit- oops- I see they are out of business. Sorry. Do you mean true domes, or eyeball style domes?

You put in another 16 cams for a total of 20 and that WILL be a full time security guard!

While my qsee boxed set didn't provide the cameras I wanted, I do like the 408 dvr and it did provide cables that I have in use still. But what I have concluded is that for a residential system, buy at the very least an eight channel dvr. There's tons of info and recommendations about dvr's here to consider. The dvr is somewhat the easier part of the system to decide on. Cameras are tough. You don't need to spend mortgage payments on expensive cameras, but super cheap cameras should be avoided as well. And there are TONS of suggestions and many demo pictures now as well here. There is no need to buy boxed sets. All the pieces to give you a good, tailored system for your home can be bought separately with no trouble at all- and will likely save you money in the long run. The boxed sets are really nothing more than impulse buys when you're at the stores. A decent system will take more than a convenience package.

The cnb on cam 7 looks great. The other two back there are just inferior cameras compared, unless a bright light was on in the cnb picture and it's a pitch black in the other two shots. What can be said except to consider upgrading all them to cnb's as well. In the back there, keep in mind that the wider shots will never do all too well for ID purposes. Someone fairly close in front of the cameras, yes. But much past 6' in front of the cameras, no. If all you want is wide overviews, fine. Get cameras that provide the best picture for those wide shots. Far as all your other locations, you really need to balance out your exterior lighting situation. Your front door needs a light by it, your driveway needs a light on it. The sides of your house could use lights- perhaps even motion lights if you don't want lights on all the time there. But your exterior lighting is out of whack. Balance that out and you'll help the cameras help you. You mention ID'ing being the thing. Rightly so. For every picture you take for assessment, you should be in the shot. You can't judge ID or consider the job being done with just nice looking pictures. The only way to know how it looks for ID is to have a person in every shot, walking around the entire field of view. Then you look at that footage and see what you have. That's usually when you realize that for all the pretty pictures, you've ignored the best field of view for the location to cover. So get your exterior lighting better placed to help the cameras give you better looking shots, and then be certain about the field of view that each camera is providing and know that the ones giving you wide shots will mostly miss the mark for ID'ing. A balance between wide overviews and tighter shots on specific areas is usually how it works out for residential. Good luck.

Is this outside in back or inside? Cheapest and probably most effective solution no matter WHAT camera you put in that spot- provide more light. Cameras like it, bad guys hate it.

Huh- not sure about that camera. Maybe you don't have it setup really? Maybe a quick demo in a temporary spot? Looks good in natural light, terrible with interior lights on, not great with IR's on.

I'd lose both of them and go with whatever is on channel 4- install one on all four channels.

What does TDN have to do with anything?

If they must, why not get an IR camera where you can adjust the IR strength? Or, a smart IR camera. At the very least, I'd only go with a smart IR camera. Certainly not one with IR rated for 100'! But I'd opt for a nightlight/no IR myself, mostly because it'd give a better picture- if the camera is decent. Far as IR being harmful, all I can say is that babies and infants don't fixate on ANYTHING for longer than a couple of seconds- even their toys! They are head bobblers! It's doubtful a baby would stare at IR for extended periods just because, and since they are human, light that's bothersome will make them look away regardless. Babies are far from dumb, and quick studies about what makes them feel good or bad.

Btw- in the cheaper 50 buck category, I'd try the GS907CM. All nice specs, but no OSD. In the cheaper range, you're not gonna get those controls. But with TDN and smart IR, I'd say that's a winner for your 'must have now on the cheap'.

Well, great pictures can come from many different cameras. No one camera stands alone. The GS830SM is probably the one you'd want. It has it all and I'd think it's very much worth the bucks. If you score one, please let us see how it performs. Good luck. Dan

Curious- what model ptz is it?

I know you need cheap in a hurry, but those ebay cams. Ummmmm The cameras I have are featured both day and night in my signature link vids- the one on my front door at that time. It has since been replaced. It's also featured in more than one position in my video review of the qsee package I got. Look for that video on my same youtube channel. I gave the camera more credit than it deserved at the time. LOL! But they did do well for me at the time, before upgrading all my cameras. And I think they'll actually last better than that ebay crap because bottom line, the bullet shell is more hardy and will hold up much better. Take 'em, leave 'em. I'm not pushing a sale. It's just they are sitting doing nothing. Better if they can be put to use is all. Spec wise- 400 tlv cmos 1/3" with I believe 27 leds for IR. These are discontinued qsee cameras. They only offer CCD cams now. Oh I actually found it on amazon- the pics are mine- http://www.amazon.com/Peripheral-Solutions-QSM1424W-Q-See-Security/dp/B003YGME6A/ref=sr_1_cc_1?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1330914688&sr=1-1-catcorr