PeteCress

Yeah, I finally stumbled into Configuration | Systems | [MySystemName] | System | System. Ran though your review, but nada. Went to Configuration | Systems | [MySystemName] | System | Schedule and tried changing the current hours on the cam's schedule from "Motion" to "Free Run" which I assume is Exacq's techspeak for continuous recording. Still don't seem tb getting any recording. My money is on recordings being there, but Yours Truly not making the right magic to see them:

I managed to get an "exacqVision demo key" from their site, although it's not clear whether the key applies to their server, client, or both. The email bearing it said to download from http://downloads.exacq.com/reseller/exacqVision.exe . But, for me at least, that link wants a UserID/PW. It's gotta just be me, right? Anybody been here?

I think so. Seems to look pretty much like yours: I wonder if recording is actually being done but I'm just not looking in the right place to see it. I'm looking in [Drive]\2012\19\ and seeing a 2kb .psi file and a like-sized .ps file. Doubleclicking on the .ps opens up something called "exacqVision Media Player", but its TreeView says "No Available Cameras": . Is there a directory or a file whose size I can check to see if recordings are being saved?

Got the PW from Exacq's reply to my email. Downloaded and installed the app - even managed to add 1 camera. But now I think I need to apply that "4-camera" key they sent me.... and I don't have a clue. Googled a little, tried the app's Help facility, but no joy. Tried copying the key file to the parent program dir and each of the subdirs... but still no... Anybody know how to apply that key?

First off, this is totally-gratuitous, non-functional, blue-sky BS... But it's started bouncing around in my head... My vehicle has a rooftop box on it. Just for grins, I've thought about putting 4 cams and a PC inside said box: one each facing forward, backward, and each side just to record what goes on around here on a typical day.... maybe create clips of some of the crazier stuff. Seems to me like the successor to the LogiTech "Pro 9000" USB-connected webcam I use on my desktop would be up to the job - and the price is right at about $70 a pop. That leaves an automobile-specific PC - something that could live up there in the box and run headless on 12v...... the joker in the deck being the need for a half-dozen USB ports (one each for the cams, one for a wireless keyboard/mouse, and one just for GPs).... I can even see a monitor in the cab: basically a small TV screen connected via a WiFi adapter.... And once the thrill wears off, I could dedicate that PC to the remote site where my muy-expensivo VAIO laptop is now doing duty as a Blue Iris server. Bottom Line: I'm guessing there's a whole little subculture devoted to in-car PCs... but maybe not where I'm thinking about taking it. Does anybody know of anything?

Needless-to-say we eagerly await a summary once it's up and running...

Is that to say that if bandwidth and disc space are not a consideration that MJPEG is a better choice - and H.264 is more for maximizing limited bandwidth and saving disc space?

Apologies in advance if I misunderstand the question bc I'm pretty much clueless when it comes to IP cams. Having said that... I'm using BlueIris for a couple of remote cameras (as in 90 miles away). The BI server is near one of the cams and is pretty-much continually recording clips. BI has an "FTP" option. I install an FTP server on my home PC, then I tell BI to que the clips for FTP-ing to my home PC/server and I wind up with a mirror of the clips at the remote site. Alternatively, I can connect directly to the remote cams from my home PC and have BI record there - thus eliminating the need for FTP. The downside there is bandwidth: the motion in the clips is not limited by how many FPS can be sent from the remote cam to my home PC. OTOH, when using the remote BI server, the motion of clips from cams on the server's LAN is not limited. The keys being is the bandwidth between the camera and the local server and whether the bandwidth between that local server (remote relative to the home PC) and the home PC will support the mirroring process well enough. Seems like if the action is 24-7 it would not... OTOH, if it's something significantly less than 24 hours/day, the non-recording hours could buffer the transmission of the clips... i.e. you wouldn't have realtime, but after enough hours you'd be caught up.

I'm currently using an EdiMax 3030 POE here: http://ExtremeSurfCam.DynDNS.org:8080 (it's the one labeled "Extreme Beach"). For eighty bucks, I can't complain: it's doing 100% of the job I want done given non-PTZ. It's installed in the cupola atop a gazebo behind a hotel on the bay: http://tinyurl.com/9dgm6ng DIY IP-66 consists of an old photographic skylight filter tub-caulked over the lens opening, a plastic bag, and liberal application of electrical tape. Believe-it-or-not, it's been through one local hurricane-type storm that caused major damage in the area and at least a dozen serious squalls and it's still tickin'. However my expectation is that the chances of it's making it through the winter are between zero and none.... To that end, I'm shopping. ACTi's 4200 looked promising, but then it dawned on me that it lacks POE. Can anybody suggest something in the ACTi line that's megapixel, under two-hundred bucks, and POE? Where I'm going with this is that my other cam at that site is an ACTi KCM-5311E and if I can replace the EdiMax with an ACTi it seems like maybe I could get away with a much smaller/cheaper PC as the server since a lot of the heavy lifting can be delegated to the camera in ACTi's scheme of things.

An all-ACTi environment is starting to appeal to me for that reason. But before I go and blow a bundle on a new cam, can anybody list the other NVRs that can react to different make/model camera motion-sense events instead of doing all the heavy lifting themselves? Seems like somebody mentioned one in another thread but observed that particular one was new and not quite up to speed.

It's not that bad with supplemental visible illumination. Although, as before, that's totally moot bc this one is going down to the shore for strictly daytime duty. Here's a clip from last nite: I will be interested to see how the clips look when I swap out the Sony at the shore and mount it on the side of the shed - so it's facing in the same direction as one of the floods.

Are ACTi cams noted for sub-par IR? I had been burning in my 5311 next to a FosCam with both cams aimed at the same place - so I suspect I never noticed that the ACTi was mainly working off of the FosCam's IR. The other day, I accidentally nudged the test bed so they were pointing in different enough directions that it became obvious that the ACTi's IR was very weak. I can see the emitters glowing, so they're on... but the amount of illumination is very, very low - virtually useless. This is moot for the camera's application, which will be 100% daylight use... but I have to wonder. Is it just me?

How I see it: Setup | System | Save & Reboot Never did that. Not even one time... Probably explains the cam's reverting to full rez and losing the zoom presets. I think I've seen at least one other thread where the owner said his 5311 was "Resetting"... and I bet that's the explaination. Thanks !!!!

Thanks. I had a vague recollection that somebody, somewhere commented on short IR range, but could not dredge up the detail. As you observe, moot for my case. It's just that the cam seems to have spontaneously reset it's resolution a few times so far and I had to wonder if something larger was afoot.

Thanks for that one. I thought it was just me. My KCM-5311E has reset to factory at least three times so far since I started burning it in on 8/7.

The link is http://www.schooners.com/multimedia/sunsetcam.htm Screen snap at http://tinyurl.com/8fhdhkn What is conspicuous about it for me: In spite of the progress bar at the bottom, it is a live feed. . The motion is very very good. I have several links with apparently-identical presentations and all of them are really good. e.g. http://www.surfchex.com/nags-head-web-cam.php http://www.surfchex.com/topsail-island-web-cam.php My agenda is a couple of surf cams I'm running via Blue Iris. My hope (however faint...) is that there's something besides humongous bandwidth behind the cam cited above.... Maybe something that I can implement without going to a very high monthly IP bill.

This is just idle curiosity, but I keep wondering why all surveillance cams with IR seem to use visible vs invisible IR. I know invisible is possible bc I have a game camera that uses it. Seems to me like that little ring of glowing red dots is just screaming "Steal Me!" to every passing crackhead. What am I missing?

That one made it to my "Keepers" file... exactly what I was trolling for. The bad part is that the guy paying for these cams is living on the edge and $100/month is out of the question. Geeze, I couldn't even get him to pony up $50 month for a Comcast IP service instead of 45kB/s DSL... and we wound up hosting from a friendly person in the vicinity that already had Comcast. The good part is that it seems like the pitiful motion and time-to-connect on my cams (as compared to those I cited) is no longer on me - and now I know what it takes... Thanks again.

I'm about to move my new 5311 into "Production", looking out over a bay from somebody's second-story lanai. The current view is as in the righthand window in this screen snap: http://tinyurl.com/8skawhu I intend to zoom the new cam so that the green flag is on the right side of the frame and the hotel in the distance is still on the left. The problem I'm expecting is that those two phone poles are going to confuse AutoFocus. The Question: Should I look for some way to map the area AutoFocus works with - like one can map motion sensing? Or should I just turn AutoFocus off, focus the thing, and leave it?

I've got an IP cam here: http://xcam.zapto.org:8080/image/cam3 (that's just a single still frame...) The purpose is to allow windsurfers to see if other sailors are planing or not. Right now, it's kind if iffey.... needs tb zoomed some more. Current cam supports zooming and is zoomed to 9mm. I'm shopping for another cam: one with fewer features, but replaceable lens. I would like to restrict the frame to the area between the hotel on the left and the green flag in the middle of the frame. Eyeballing it, that seems like a 50% reduction in field. I'm guessing a 20mm lens would do it, but want tb able to experiment if it does not. Does not have tb IP-66 bc I'm willing to put it into an enclosure. Recommendations?

That certainly seems like the best approach: "Divide and Conquer"... using all those cam's CPUs instead of the server's processor. It sounds like most cams that have motion detection send a notification out along with the stream. Have I got that part right? If so, maybe I'll pony up the sixty bucks and give Exacq Start a shot if it has a remote web presentation.

I didn't even go there. Just installed IE-8 and the Acti client came up no problem. My own stubborness bit me again.... everybody everywhere says that IE-6 is totally obsolete and snb used.... but I just dug my heels in.... One more question: am I trying to fool Mother Nature by trying to get the Acti server to recognize a FosCam? I note that the "Brand" dropdown has a line for 'Non-Brand'... but when that is selected, the "Model" dropdown remains enabled and the choices there are obviously nothing to do with non-ACTi cams. Edit 2012 08-08 1639: Oops... I see the answer already in another thread: (viewtopic.php?f=19&t=30319) "...but you can use any camera as long as it's made by ACTi." I call that a deal breaker. As much as I am impressed by the ACTi cam I have, and as much as I would like to have all ACTi cams... I also have to deal with a few other brands at the moment. Shortsighted, IMHO, for ACTi. I think if they allowed foreign cams - even without motion sensing - they'd expand the pool of people using the NVR product. And, if I'm using the NVR product; even though I might have a few foreign cams online, when it came time to buy another cam, I would be reminded that NVR would work better with if that cam were an ACTi cam.... As it is, I'd be using BlueIris, and when new cam time rolls around, I'm not thinking so much "ACTi" as "Lets Google around and see what's out there..." But that's just me...

I have not been able to find an ACTi-specific forum yet, so I'll just blurt this out here in hopes.... Has anybody had the Workstation app throw "Line: 54 Error:"XMLHttpRequest" is undefined"? FWIW, the service seems tb running. IE 6.0 is the only IE version installed on this box.... and that would be my first suspicion...

I'm beginning the installs now. "Workstation", then is the client... right?

Got it. But there are two installs in that .ZIP file. Do I want to install "Server" or "Workstation"?