cctv_down_under

i agree with everything you just stated except the above statement...PC's are much mre advanced in this area and I like the thought of moving a control room with one cable but remember everything that I.P can do so can DVr, so you would not need to move the DVR's the control room can be run on internet or ethernet so same scenario when moving. one thing I forgot to mention is that I.P cameras (that I have seen) lack video quality and are not made as well as standard cameras.

Sounds like either interference or a ground loop, try disconnecting all other cams but that one and plug it into a power pack on its own, also could be an overloaded powersupply, but my gues is a ground loop. Strange that it goes away by moving it but more likely you are earthing it while touching it.

Well Rory it seems 99 percent of DVR manufactorers of PC Cards disagree with you. Also the more popular the O/S the more prople will try to make worms for it. You could use a firewall and isolate the DVR then it has no problems does it! Rory that is hogwash about ME.. infact i think ther was not many service packs but several patches, ME is basically a dressed up bloated 95 and lacks hyperthreading technology amongst other things.

Bullet cameras are usually not adjustable in size but you could buy one with the right angles needed but it would be harder to find, I think your on the right track with bullet cameras even though they do not handle extreme light conditions well, take into consideration the vehicle, as you will have outside lighting streaming in and the lighting will surely change when the vehicle moves around, so white balance and auto iris are things that you may need to look for but they are rarely available in bullet cameras. As for the DVR, stear clear of anything PC made excepting those that have been tested for the conditions in which you are talking about.. I think that even if someone told you it would be ok it would not, because shock on a PC is a big issue, I looked into shock proof cases for some of the boats that our customers put DVR's on but it really is not a true solution, laptop HDD's work better in these conditions if you do wish to persist down this path. There are many vehicle DVR's on the market but few actually are as shock proof as they state, I have heard that the Dallmier vehicle DVR is pretty rock solid and I know that they stated that this DVR had passed certain certifications for shock and vibration. Even a standalone really will not cut it, if you only wanted pictures you could go for something that captures onto roms, this would be rock solid for you but to record video streams you would need a HDD and no matter what you do one big bump and the HDD will park it's heads causing problems for the drive. A wireless webserver may suit you if the vehicle is on a race track etc and will not be travelling so far away as there will be much less moving parts to consider. Cameras really are not an issue, buy bullets they are cheap as chips and you can replace them easilly if they do start to fail, but unl;ess rated and perhaps spring mounted I would stear well clear of anything that has a HDD ..even standalones. Make sure what ever you do that you get whoever makes it to Guarentee it will not fail and explain what you plan to do or make sure it has passed certain standards, I do think these standards actually exist but I have never read them. I hope this helps,

Unless wireless or run on fiber optics I think it is not viable for I.P cameras. With fibre though you can make a second network very easily, and there fore you do not affect the traffic as much. Rory is right there really is not as much of an advantage unless the old infrastructure is to be replaced and you can utilize the bandwidth, but if you are going to do that then most times new cables are required anyhow. But wirelss is another matter and indeed in my humble opinion we will all be using I.P. cameras in the near future, better compressions are coming out all of the time but I do not think that I.P cams will rule the roost. I think web servers with built in HDD's will be the main stream and will allow for the ability to avoid networking bottle necks. I.P cameras have advanced further than most think, in fact GUI and full control are available in most high end models already, the problems remain the same, you need to store it, there fore you still need the recording device anyway, and you really can not go over an existing network without killing the bandwidth unless you have plenty to spare on a large thoroughfare network set up. I would bet money that in less than 2 Years we will all be using web servers.. as for static I.P's I do not think this is required as you can connect a I.P camera to a network internally and map it through a router for an internal forwarding from ports, you probably just set an internal address and then have a port for each camera through the router so you could have many cameras connected. I.P cameras have a massive cost saving when used with many many cameras.. for example 64 cameras onto DVR is 4 machines.. that is a lot of cost and you have to cable them all, if you laid fibre then you could have almost endless I.P cameras all recording to one server, the cost cuts would be similar now because I.P technology is so expensive but webservers are very cheap, some probably have built in routers for connecting many I.P cameras to.. therefore I.P cameras can be a similar price if it is a major installation and they can also be a cost saving device when only one is used as one camera does not affect bandwidth too much. Well thats my opinion but I still have a lot to learn about them but until prices drop and it becomes more viable I am not going to look into it. I hope this helps,

you can only use one Geo card at a time as they are Keypro (Dongle) protected.. actually you can use two but I am not about to list how to do that on here as I am a Geo distributor!

If your after Geo and are on this forum just PM (Personal Message) me and I will email you prices..as for ME...it's a crock and the 30 hot fixes are for security loopholes not to make it run properly. No one really makes DVR for those operating systems and I bet the problem you have is not your resolution but infact the lack of the Ligos Indeo codec which was not released until XP. If you wer to change the drivers and make alater card run on ME then you would find about a 20% drop in frame rate becuase of the structure of the OS (being that it is less powewrfull and much less efficient).. however i will go as far as to say that running lite 95 can not be beaten for dos programs and lite programming but the more modern stuff requires the power of XP. ME can not be bought anymore (thank god) and from a computer user that knows.. it was the worst of the OS's that MS ever relaeased it even crashed when gates went to Debut it live for the first time.. I will say that XP is full of crud that is not needed but you can indeed shell it out and you can even buy an Embedded (not really embedded) version that has all the extra LAZY features cut out of it and this is the best to run your DVR on.

You get what you pay for.. for cheap the skyview cards are worth it but not as good as Geo.

Sue you can get Geo just about everywhere, the thing to look out for is the support.. I am the expert on it but I have found that not many US companies know a lot about it. The 650 card is 50 FPS I dont sell many here because we do not sell much below 100FPS (these are PAL speeds NTSC is faster). The 600 card will work on any chipset though SIS VIA or Intel, where anything above that will require Intel only. The reason the speeds sold in the US are so slow is because a lot of the US used to use Standalones and they are limited to these speeds. Because you are part of this forum I can sell you a card from here if you like but you would have to look into shipping costs.. PM me the card your after and I will send you back a price.

You could use a RF modulater and have your tenants tune it into their televisions

one other thing too.. you still need to record it so there is always somewhat of a HDD or DVR needed at the end anyway unless the I.P. camera has a HDD built into it and that would cost the same as making a 1Ch standalone anyway.

Rory has a point... we now sell converters to Cat5 now so the only advantage of I.P (wired) is if the existing infrastructure is already there, but if it is already there then you will have to throttle it from the server which will sacrifice either speed or quality or both, the problem is that if it exists already (wiring) then it is much cheaper and better to do but most of the time you will haev to sacrifice something in order use the existing framework, this is why using spare twisted pairs or better still Fibre is a much better option. Mind you when these I.P cameras take of with Wireless then it will be the best and only option to go for as it will be so easy to install. just my 2 cents worth

1/ I sell the Aver AVC773, the 777 was not very impressive, mind you it is rather cheap. 2/ I also sell the MP 5000 series, it is no where near as good as Geo. 3/ The reason Auto Focus is not in all cameras is beacause it would be more expensive and mostly becasue you never know the lens that is going onto the cam.

I.P is not as good as DVR yet but it sure is getting close

I didnt know that they even sold a linux version...we sell the PC Version but it is not as popular as the Geovision.

What you mean. START!!! I never stopped!

Thanks so much for the forum Larry, this has been an inspirational development and something that I look forward to on a daily basis, I realise that at some time the thing will get to big for you to host it without forking out the Dough, but I think we would all like to help when it came to the crunch.. Anyhows.. my hat goes off to you.

i have seen that sort of thing in the Taxi cabs in Sydney.. not sure who makes it.. next time I am down there I will ask for you..

I think this is the way of the future: Combined Access Control and DVR Integration..... Does anyone know of an existing company that does this already?

Thanks for that guys I will surely look into them....

What is the other web-site?

I doubt it is a new chip, I think we had this argument with someone in another post but the EXView we though overshoots, well my point was that its not so much that the chip is to blame more the controlling electronics.. hence why there are cheap ExViews and expensive ones. Exview was a clever design to focus more light onto the pixels of a sensor and fill the gaps, but controlling that input still needs to be done by the camera. As far as I.R goes I dont know a lot I do know this though.. I only sell the expensive ones, the reasons are that my korean cam has a Built In Photcell to detct I.R and the Japanese ganz (god bless it) has an I.R cut filter.. mind you it is not very cheap. I strongly recommend the later to anyone, because it has the options for digatlly set wide dynamics or for Backlight Compensation for zones.. this is imperative if you want to use such strong backlighting as the camera thinks with an I.R booster like the likes of Extreme. Dont you mean they really know how to UPSELL Actually it is better than having to work it out.. but the kalatel gear is rather exy for what it gives you. Usually you can hear this device move as a motor needs to shift it... Mind you they might just like to do this to show off... I mean you don't need a fat exhaust on your car. but it sure sounds sweet!!

I agree with pat 100%, I.P is not that far away indeed, the quality of the cameras is getting better and like he said the only problems they have is that you can not fully stream uncompressed images yet, the problem is that in a DVR you have to compress the images and the I.P cameras (well at least the good ones) need to do this as well so the cost is the same. The main thing that people overlook though is that Fiber or Ethernet is usually already in place, I think that inexpensive smaller webservers will be the next trend until the I.P cams catch up. When cable is already there it is so much cheaper to implement a system, however the compression needs to be tight so that you do not affect all the other traffic that travels on the backbone of the existing network. The thing is there are so many wireless networks propping up now that I.P cameras will HAVE to be the future, sure it is not a closed circuit yet, but encription methods get better every day and I see this as a major option in the future, think about not having to run wires...realise the bliss when a customer wants to move a camera... how much easier will it be. Lets face it even wirless cameras would be popular if you could get enough frequencies.. there is no doubt in my mind that soon the standalone machine will be king.. but not as we know it now, just a small webserving interface with a HDD (actually probably rom storage), this device will have no moving parts and will webserve through browsers and phones and will recieve I.P cameras.... the biggest draw backs are.... 1/ Not many security people that have been in the game long will survive as they probably do not know I.T. well. 2/ Computer companies will sell more than security companies.. this means sales at bulk with lower margins and less support. 3/ Less will break so there will be less to onsell..only versions and storage will change. 4/ Eventually someone like Microsoft will make a package system that can be part of your PC as a plug in and will sell in your local electronics store. Hay I am not Nostradamus but I bet I am right!!!

sounds like you have an earth loop problem.. the best card by far is Geovision

They sell here for $2,700 Aus which is about $1,900 US for 100FPS model.. they have new software now thats the PDR bit.. looks bloody impressive..wish we could get it..