fa chris

Any IP camera can be wireless if you connect it to an access point sitting next to it. You'll need to put a power supply at each camera location though, along with getting 120vac to the power supply and the access point. By the time you get 120vac to each camera location (will be required regardless of which wireless camera you find), it might be cheaper/easier just to pull some cat5e/6 and use PoE cameras. Is the 4-7k just for the cameras and equipment or the full install?

A balun over cat5 should do 600' for the video signal easy.

Says on the voltage calculator: HubWay products supply camera power utilizing two (2) paralelled pairs of the 24AWG wires within a CAT-5 cable. Checked the installation sheet for the HubWayAc/Dv/Dvi combiners and it tells the pin out. Also has a really good diagram on the architecture of the thing.. Looks like you can only have 2 HubSat4D's max on each system, and you need two cat5's running to each one if you want PTZ control. Nothing specifically states the distance it can be ran, the calculator doesn't look very good but it's the only documentation you have to go by from what I can find.

Still applies. Says to use their hubsat4d to provide local power for longer runs.

http://www.altronix.com/index.php?pid=2&model_num=HubWayLD162CD There's a voltage drop calculator at the bottom to give you an idea of how far the runs can be depending on your power requirements for the camera. No personal experience with the unit, but have always had good luck with altronix.

Sounds like he's on a corporate network and only wants one gateway to the outside world, ie: the head end server. Having the local recorders only stream what's requested to the head end server at certain times will also save on bandwidth and storage space (at the HQ nvr) compared to having it all on all the time.

Thanks, but I'm into asset protection, event and perimeter security. You can keep the voyeurism.

Make sure it's not overheating, check to make sure the fans are running and blow out any dust in the case. Next, unplug everything connected to the computer except for the keyboard, and try to boot. If it boots fine that time, start plugging things in one at a time. Next, run memtest (google it) to make sure none of your ram is bad.

I'm not anti-cctv at all, but I believe there's a lot of ethics involved in our industry which some people appear to ignore in order to make a dollar.

I know it was a private camera, I only make those connections because the point was brought up in this thread that people think a massive cctv system monitoring all public places to catch criminals is a good idea (and I whole heartedly disagree). I'm in the CCTV business, no issues with private cameras or cameras used for useful purposes. Just don't think we need to spend money on surveillance to take the general public one step closer to a police state. I think there's some ethics involved when placing cameras, largely including what their purpose is. I could care less if my neighbor puts up 30 cameras watching every inch of his property, our shared fence, his driveway, even his mailbox in front of my house. I'm going to have an issue if he points one at my backdoor though. (This is just an example, I don't actually have a neighbor with a massive cctv system.)

How did they catch the guy in the story above then? If you install a system with the intent of catching criminals, you're going to have a method to track down the people otherwise the whole system serves no purpose other than, like I said before, voyeurism. Primary purpose of traffic cameras are to monitor... traffic. They have a purpose other than monitoring people, if they catch something or someone in the act of a crime, that's fine by me. Stuff caught incidentally by systems purposed for other reasons I have no problem with. Spending billions with the specific intent to watch free citizens wherever they are... I watch traffic cameras in my city too, they don't have enough detail to identify one vehicle from another. The ones mounted on traffic lights on the other hand you can watch for specific vehicles if you want too.

I'm well aware of the story. So the knee jerk reaction is to spend billions in a massive CCTV system to catch these one off situations that occur every once in a great while? What if the slaughter had been captured on tape and was now available on youtube thanks to a CCTV system being hacked? We ended up with the TSA and homeland security thanks to these same types of half assed attempts to "feel" secure without actually being secure. If we all had our GPS bracelets they could've found the kid immediately before he was harmed... we all put a different value on privacy. Don't try to blame me for a kid's death because I'm against a CCTV system monitoring all public areas.

It's not csi yet. CCTV has come a looooooong ways in the past 10 years. Who knows where it'll be in 10 more years. CCTV definitely has it's uses, but having it everywhere is costly, and constantly watching everything everyone does anywhere in public would be an invasion of civil liberties. To the extreme, it's similar to having a cop escort you everywhere. So no one's against random checkpoints? No ones against GPS tracking devices? The biggest "pros" I've seen in this thread have been retribution against criminals and making $ for installing the thing. To me personally, the cons outweigh this, but to each his own.

Some guy doesn't have to be watching. Just need some video analytics. Cost verse benefit just isn't there and trying to sell it as a means of "security" and "safety" is bull. Just like our fabulous TSA and homeland security... and like my point has always been, constant surveillance is the start. If you want to sacrifice all your liberties, I can find a guy on craigslist to rubber glove your family before they enter your house to make sure they aren't hiding anything that could hurt you if you want.

If two readers wouldn't work, that'd make me think it's a ground issue or something with the power or one of the devices connected. Try removing the reader, connecting 12vdc somewhere else, and seeing if it works then. If it works when connected to a new power source with no devices attached, then start looking at the rest of the installation for the prolem.

Camera phones aren't surveillance, wal mart is private property and used mainly for asset protection (most are dummy cameras anyways in my experience). Two completely different beasts... cameras in public paid for by you and me with the sole intent of finding us breaking some random law nobody even knew existed or tracking us in order for the gov't to make a buck is a problem. I'm fine with cameras on cop cars too because again, it's for asset protection (mainly preventing costly lawsuits). When the gov't starts spending money with the specific intent to invade my privacy but claim it's for public safety... then I have a problem.

The impression of other people in the area is it's a "bad" neighborhood. Reality is I could walking at midnight and never have a single issue... peoples perceptions vs the reality are two different things. Police will roll up in no time, most crime is property theft, very little violent crime and that's almost always against people who know each other, yet the gated community people have fear driven into their head from news reports. To each his own I guess, I had the same mentality before I moved here. Like I said before, cameras are mainly for asset protection, not violent crime prevention.

What freedom have I given up by allowing CCTV in a public place? What's next though? I already pointed out the wire taps. So next up? Checkpoints right? I mean, if you aren't breaking the law what freedoms are you giving up for a few checkpoints? Getting frisked, checked over, making sure you're a nice proper legal citizen. Then we can all start wearing GPS tracking devices so law enforcement can verify our whereabouts whenever a crime occurs. I'm not even taking it to the extreme here, it's stuff they already do with DUI checkpoints and people under house arrest. CCTV in itself isn't intrusive (you're only giving up a lot of tax dollars), but in my opinion constant surveillance is towards the beginning of the slippery slope. Really, why do you want to be a prisoner in your own country? Even better, you get to fund it.

Check out Genetec Omnicast Enterprise: http://www.genetec.com/Products/Omnicast/Pages/omnicast-enterprise-en.aspx Not sure if it will be cost prohibitive or not, but it should do what you're looking for. The architecture is simple, there's a gateway server that controls everything at a single location (your HQ? or 1&1), then you'll put an archiver at each site and the cameras will record directly to the local archiver. Any client can connect to the gateway (which is connected to the archivers) and pull recorded video or stream live video from any archiver. Omnicast is just a software package, the servers can be anything. They have a pretty wide list of cameras they support. Also has a web interface I think. You should also check into Avigilon Control Center: http://www.avigilon.com/products/controlcenter/ I'm not sure Avigilon does everything above but I know it at least comes close and I'm a big fan of the interface and ease of use.

More and more legislation... that doesn't work because ultimately nobody in the government is responsible. Look how much Homeland Security in the US has abused wire tapping laws. All legislation has loopholes, "oh we had reason to believe they were involved in terrorist activities. No, we cannot reveal those reasons, it might hurt national security". Someone will abuse the systems, and at the cost versus the potential for abuse and what they will actually accomplish... just not worth it. Never give up your freedoms in the name of being "safe", when you do, the criminals win.

We have very little crime. Most of it's victimless or white collar, and the violent crime we do have tends to be between people who know each other. The 'gang warfare' image in the media is about as accurate as thinking all Americans are gun toting cowboys (the reality is almost no one carries a gun everywhere, and probably only half of all Americans even own a gun - and even then it's for hunting or target shooting only). I live in a "bad" neighborhood and have zero issues. Most of my buddy's won't even come here at night though because of the reputation. We also have very good law enforcement.

Maybe we need to stop people from turning to crime in the first place. There's no excuse for punishing all citizens for the crimes of a few, we've already given up enough freedoms in the name of 'security'. When constant surveillance in public places becomes ok and crime still exists, what's next? Checkpoints? Rory, I'm not sure were you're located, but it's outside of the US correct? I'm assuming the situation between here and there is very different, random violent crimes here though are very low in most areas, and people simply avoid the high crime areas. The potential for the abuse of cctv systems in public is much higher than the potential for a violent crime to be captured on camera.

I don't plan on being a victim, and if I am, I honestly don't care about what happens to the guys after the fact. Will have other things to deal with at that point. The answer isn't spend billions to record everything, and our cameras aren't infallible. Plenty of criminals are caught on camera but never ID'd, captured, and charged. What little government surveillance we do in public places is purely for profit (ie: red light cameras), not for safety. Everything else is for asset protection. People on here don't install security cameras in hopes of catching someone assaulting them on tape. They do it to catch someone messing with their property. A sign that says "security system installed" is more prevention then a few cameras.

Private property is different, it's protecting assets and it's on the owners dime (not mine). I don't expect privacy in public, but at the same time I don't expect constant surveillance. When do we start putting mics everywhere, including video analytics to read lips, etc. to farther intrude on honest peoples lives in order to catch a few bad seeds? It's voyeuristic and sick in nature. If we all had GPS tracking devices installed in us we would know who was at that exact location whenever a violent crime occurred so the person can be put away... doesn't make it a good idea. And the whole "if you don't like it, simply move somewhere else" defense is crap and we all know it. If you don't like having no cameras, move into a compound somewhere with video everywhere so you'll always be watched. In our business there's a fine line between security and a giant candid camera/paparazzi gig. Massive amounts of cameras in random public places fall into the latter in my opinion.

It's not prevention, it's not keeping honest people honest, it's big brother looking for a reason to throw you in jail or issue you another pointless citation and using your own tax money to do it. Someone watching a violent crime after the fact doesn't help anyone at all. Only true prevention here would be having a conceal & carry permit.