fa chris

Have been running across these in drop ceilings lately with a few switches and patch panels: http://www.panduit.com/groups/MPM-BR/documents/InstallationInstruction/110317.pdf I'm sure it could be adapted for a house. Would work out great in a small business or convenience store set up though, a DVR and rack mount power supply should fit into it easily. Of course, its panduit, so it'll probably cost more than the DVR.

I see what he did there... what's sad is it looks like a really nice install outside of the one minor little detail...

back then roy was actually selling top of the line stuff. (yea, in 2004 GE was top of the line... been a looooooong fall for them).

There's a flush mount back box JK-DVF which might help. I would probably mount it in on a pedestal, or at least a pedestal hood. Something like this: http://www.chasesec.com/hod101253.htm They're available from a number of places, maybe even aiphone direct. Just can't think of any off the top of my head right now.

I had already guessed it was family before you mentioned his brother. Typical c-store installation.

What determines the 100mb network? The router/switch? Thanks again The switches, how they are linked, and the network cards. Multiple 24port 10/100 switches need to be linked together with gigabit ports if possible.

It's less of a factor for smaller installations but can still potentially play a huge role, especially when putting the cameras on the owners network instead of a dedicated CCTV network. Some cameras can require 30mbps or more depending on what they are streaming. Connect a few of these to a 100mb network and you have issues.

From my experience the whole "analog is better at night" thing only applies to 1st generation and low end MP cameras, and is way overplayed. These are some great comparison shots.

Depends on the site and how close the cameras are to each other. I recommend 24 or 48 port switches with gigabit uplink ports though, connect the switches to each other using fiber. You can add more switches to this configuration when you add more cameras.

rear-view camera idea is probably the easiest box solution you can just purchase and install. the bums at radioshack or any other similar chain should be able to get you a 12vdc adapter. this is probably the cheapest way to go too, but the reverse image might be an image as stated above. a lot of cctv cameras come with a bnc-out you can plug directly into a tv monitor. you see these in use at convenience stores usually when you walk in, look up at a monitor and wave to yourself.

Something like this: http://www.ditekcorp.com/product-details.asp?ProdKey=59

I like the first one unless you plan on expanding and using the uplink ports.

Didn't know you could get cheaper than AiPhone

What's a potcake? Saw 2 foxes outside our office not to long ago. Unfortunately, not on camera. Foxes and Deer aren't uncommon here at all. A mountain lion was hit on a major highway a few years ago. (DNR still claims we don't have mountain lions in our state though)

In the US street lights are normally over 400 volts, good chance you'll run into something similar over there. You'll need it stepped down to 220vac in order for you to plug in a cctv power supply. Have the school get the electrical work done by an electrical contractor for you, just specify what you need. No need to roll the high voltage work up under you. The light poles also need to be set up properly in order to mount cameras on them, they need a sleeve or some type barrier in them to separate your cat5 from the high volt lighting power. The poles with real cameras on them should be set up fine, the ones with dummy cams may not be. How are the current cameras powered? Are they run on coax? Mounting on a building is a lot easier than messing with poles.

No markings because it's custom made, check out the major manufacturers of custom consoles and see if their styles match up. Many manufactures probably have similar lines to what you have, but they have also probably been updated so finding a perfect match will be tough. Winsted has similar consoles, but not identical. http://www.winsted.com/l3_rackmountconsoles_sys85video.htm

There's a debate over whether or not farnsworth or zworykin invented the TV. Even though Zworykin ended up with all the credit, Farnsworth eventually got the patent. Farnsworth had a working invention patented in 1928. Zworykin filed his original application in the early 1920s but the original patent design wouldn't work and when it was finally awarded sometime in the 1930's it had been revised to match Farnsworth's working design, but it still had his original patent filing date on it, all of this was of course pushed by RCA so they can claim they invented TV. The whole history is debated. People witnessed Farnsworth's invention, there were plenty of lab notes, it can be reproduced. No witnesses, notes, or anything on Zworykin's invention outside of him claiming 10 years after the fact (and years after Farnsworth) he managed to build a device and transmit an image. Zyworkin and RCA can definitly be credited with taking farnsworth's ideas and turning them into mass marketed TV's though (and they did so, by paying for use of Farnsworth's patents...) As for Farnsworth-Beard, all that can be sure is Beard's project was dropped and his company moved to acquire access to all of Farnsworth's patents and ideas. I read a real interesting article on this not to long ago (hence why the details are fresh in my head!), but can't seem to come up with it now.

Baird came up with some electromechanical device around the same time Philo Farnsworth, a guy from Utah, invented the all electronic television. Five years later Baird showed off his device to Farnsworth, then Farnsworth showed off his device to Baird. Afterwords Baird dropped his project and paid for access to Farnsworth's work.

Manchester code really has nothing to do with CCTV, it's just a method of transmitting digital data. Similar to how your LAN uses ethernet to transmit data, doesn't matter what data it's transmitting. 10mbit ethernet actually uses Manchester encoding as the method of transmitting the 1's and 0's from one device to the next over the actual cable. It's purely the way the electrical signal is sent across the cable. Somewhere along the line someone decided to make a protocol for CCTV which used Manchester code as the method of communication and called it Manchester Control Code... it'd be like me coming up with a protocol for talking to IP cameras and calling it Ethernet Control Code. The name is completely misleading. With everything going to IP, I don't really see a need to replace pelcoD/P, coaxitron, AD manchester, etc. with anything. RS-232/485 will eventually go away so their won't be a need for these types of protocols. ONVIF is already out there trying to standardize the IP world so we won't end up with these types of situations in the future anyways.

Look into something like polycom.

voltage drop calculators use different theoretical resistance for the cables, which is why they vary slightly. the NEC (National Electric Code used in the US) has a table listing how much resistance per 1000 feet of wire each gauge should be. This table seems to change with each release of the code book. if you ever happen to look at a data sheet for a specific type/brand of cable, it'll list it's own resistance per 1000 feet, often times it's lower than the NEC. The calculator uses this figure to calculate how much resistance you should expect from your specific length of cable at a specific gauge. In short, don't worry about the minor differences. Neither calculator is wrong, the actual formula used to calculate the final answer is identical, the resistance variable is slightly different based on what standard numbers they're going off of to guess the cable resistance.

That's just a normal LCD pendent mount adapter, and a normal drop ceiling tile with a very tight hole through it.

Our standard has always been to run rj59 and an 18/2 cable to analog cameras. On the few analog cameras we do anymore, we go ahead and use cat5e and baluns. Power and video aren't always coming from the same place, so we see no need to mess with Siamese. On an exterior camera or a ptz, we usually use a local power supply close to the camera. We can pull the rj59 600' or more back to the head end, and throw a local power supply out there within 100' or so of all the cameras in an area. It's just a lot less cable and a lot cheaper to do it this way. On residential or a small office building where your power and video are in the same place Siamese works just fine. No point in carrying it if you aren't using it all the time though. 18/2 can be used for many other things as well so it's easy to keep in bulk. 22/4 should work too, 24vac isn't going to kill you on voltage drop.

crash override! ACID BURN CRASH AND BURN! a balun is a little transformer you stick on each end of the cable which will let you run analog cameras over cat5e cable, eliminating the need to pull coax. this way you can keep your whole network still cat5, cheaper cable, easier to manage, only one type on site, and future proof for if you want to swap out the analog cameras with IP cameras some day, you'll already have the cat5 there. fiber also isn't needed, you can actually get little devices which extend the range of ethernet for cctv cameras, or as already suggested, try adding a switch in the middle if it makes sense with the building layout. I'd recommend the extra switch if at all possible.

Let us not forget, the majority of crime in poverty stricken areas isn't stolen food. Also I think a lot of us are jaded because of our day to day work.