cctvexpert

there is nothing a "good" non-pc based can't do that a pc can do. If the embedded unit uses reprogrammable DSP's then it can be virtually upgraded. The sole difference is the number of channels of support on a single chasis. Although on a PC-Based once u get past 16-channels if you use high resolution recording you run into problems with transfer rate on the hard drive as well as limitations on the PCI bus.

The big difference is the lux rating on the CMOS cameras which is quite high. But if you compare them to a CCD using a Sharp sensor its not that much different. If you compare it to a Sony CCD then its night and day. CMOS cameras from the orient start at $10 believe it or not and some decent ones for about $20+. But again never to be compared with the better CCD.

I strongly believe he is wrong about the comparison. First of all H264 attributes are well documented in numerous industry whitepapers. First of all the video quality is superior in every regard, especially when dealing with fast motion where with traditional mpeg4 you will get artifacts and mosaic. Next this is all hardware compression and with hardware compression you can run the limit of the pc as far as the pci or pci-x limitations and the cpu usage will be nil. With respect to audio it is truly a perfectly sync'd audio because it runs the audio through the DSP. All the core functions are run on the DSP. Anyone in the video codec side of the business will tell you there is no comparison and is the reason that development of the H264 (MPEG4 Part 10) standard was adopted by both ISO and ITU and the other standards were dropped. Further the codec has error correcting protocol and in regard to I-frame/P-frame issues is incredibly efficient. In my opinion, there is no comparison as Geo or the others are not in the same league. The downside is you need a powerful video card to run it properly. Therefore, computers that are just a couple of years old will have trouble running the remote client.

you should also know that just because the PTZ supports Pelco protocol does not mean it will work. Geo has a list if you ask of all of the cameras it has problems with even using Pelco protocol and the list is quite long.

Agreed that fingerprint scanning provides much more advantages. With the better systems they have livescan so you cannot fool the system.

It really depends if you are going traditional or biometrics. Biometrics has become more popular these days as the units can do fingerprint, PIN or prox. The problem always becomes the outdoor units since weather is an issue and a biology problem not necessarily hardware. Also some systems have a better FRR than others, which is the big things. The software side we have seen a lot of DSX which interfaces with many of the systems out there including software house. On the biometric side we see alot of Bio-Guard and BioScrypt.

The big thing on the cheapo systems is what they don't tell you is that if you have it recording full time you run out of hard drive space in a day or two. If you set it for motion detection it maxes out after a not very great number of events.

The only ones capable of 3G are the ones using h.264. This MPEG4 Part 10 video codec allows for adjustable bit rates and can stream audio and video across a cell phone. It is presently available on Symbian OS.

License Plate recognition is incredibly difficult at night. The only way that we have found it to be successful is first the vehicle must almost be still. If moving at a fast pace we have had cameras with cut filtering and the use of IR's that will pick up the plates but not always. Extreme is supposed to be coming out with some new cameras to handle this situation. They say they are showing it at ISC next month. We will see.

I like the fingerprint units better. Usually a little cheaper and have been more reliable and a heck of a lot smaller. The hand scanners are just too big. The reason they don't use hand scanners for access control is they are eye sores. Would like to know who made the outdoor housing unit i have been looking for one for the biometric fingerprint units i use. No one seems to have any and the manufacturers keep saying there is no market for them.

try www.royalsystems.com Their main office is in NY but i think they have an outlet down south - not sure. But they do carry all the lines you mentioned and prices are good.

Hikvision comes with SDK for their embedded units also. We have used that before but it is expensive.

H.264 is still best codec local and remote. Look at the ITU/ISO tests. It is clearly better.

That is the first time i have ever heard anyone say that siamese is cheaper. The prices you are quoting on cat5 and baluns are beyond even the highest retail prices. Also you should look at the statistics of quality of video on unstructured twisted pair vs. coax. You can also run a lot longer on Cat5 and if there is a problem with "leakage" or anything else which if you pull correctly is not an issue, you always have a spare pair.

Speco imports from the same factories in China and Taiwan. So there is no difference from that respect. The issue with the foreign manufacturers is: Are you really getting a Sony sensor and not a Sharp or Panasonic Is the CCD really a 480 line and not a 380 line (a game often played) Then it comes down to quality control - just because the spec says it has certain components doesn't mean it is any good. I have imported from Asia from some manufacturers and had virtually no DOA's and others in the past where as much as 20% were DOA. You should also know that Sony makes 2 CCD's in each category and one is more expensive than the other.

Simple solution. What you need is not an encoding function but a decoding function. In essence a matrix switch capability where you can call up a particular camera to a particular monitor. You can either do this with an older type matrix switcher with 4inputs 4outputs or you can buy a 4-input virtual matrix and run it IP. The IP route is better because you have more control. As far as cabling look into running Cat5E 350MHz with Video Baluns. You can get longer runs than with coax and less signal loss. If you run Cat5 make sure you run video and power in two separate cables. Since you have 4-pair in a Cat5 you can run multiple runs but do not mix power and video on same cable.

I can answer questions about fingerprint biometrics if anyone needs

Aventura Technologies is the dealer www.hikvisionusa.com

Those are retail prices and meant to protect the dealers. Alot more affordable than you think

not a matter of independently asking away but having specific times where the group can quiz.

The guys repping Hik in America can supply SDK for Windows or Linux with demo applications or you can get complete software for encoding and decoding. They even have SDK for the embedded units and both the embedded and PC based communicate.

Charts are just that, charts. You have to use the products. There are too many factors that go into these hard drive calculators. Just saying X frames per second and this is the file size is misleading. What is the bitrate, etc. Many factors that can turn a packet from 0.5k to 15k. Then is it I frame or P frame or average frame. How much motion is there since more motion will skew the numbers and lack of motion will show almost nothing on P frame.

We should try to get someone to sponsor a test comparing all the different cards but since they are so disimilar might be a tall order. As far as the standards MJPEG, MPEG2, MPEG4, Wavelet, H.264 most of that is common knowledge with respect to their codec abilities. Maybe try to get the manufacturers involved somehow to try to show us their virtues but most i guess would be afraid of a forum unless it was "tape delayed." In the IT space many companies have a Q&A session live at set times to discuss their product. Why not do that here? Any suggestions? Invite them to speak and answer questions.

You need to get software and license keys. They sell that separately. Also be careful because the chinese cards will not interoperate with the International (English) cards. So if that is a grey market card will not work with international software from what i am being told.

More interesting reading on the new standards. http://www.hikvisionusa.com/technology/ http://www.hikvisionusa.com/manuals/h264_overview.pdf great white paper. The 264 is the new ITU/ISO standard and it is DSP not ASIC. Therefore all the processing is done at chip level. So all encoding is done without intervention of the CPU. Do not see MPEG4 (Part 2) competing with this standard. That is how they can do 64 channels in real time at 30 frames per second with fully sync audio and you can have multiple channels of D1 (4CIF). This is used by the major videoconferencing companies. Also since it is DSP there are no mosaic issues as you don't bang the processor.