Scruit

I think I can offer a "budget user" opinion here. For the most part we don't have as much to protect and our exposure in a loss event is much less. It hardly makes sense to exceed the cost your exposure in prevention - might as well just set aside the money and pay the loss out of pocket - you'd be ahead. Yes, there are Fords, BMWs etc out there - and BMW will always make a nicer car (for more money) than ford will. Does that mean that you shouldn't sell Fords? No. it doesn't make sens for me to spend $65-75k on a top of the line BMW because my needs simply don't justify the cost. I know that the features etc are not that great, and I know I'm missing out on some of the cooler stuff - but at the ne dof the day the question is just "Does it do the job" If so, then it's good enough. If not, then chuck it. It's also been my experience that the results you get from this equipment is very much dependent on selecting the right camera and lens for the shot. Cheap equipment expertly installed is going to give better results than expensive equipment poorly installed. The problem comes when you get cheap equipment poorly installed... As far as cheap equipment goes... I have a 4channel DVR by a company calling themselves "All About Image Recognition and Processing". Anyoen know who manufactures this DVR? I bought it from ebay about 5 years ago and the thing still works great. I'm using it as a backup DVR, looping the 4 most important channels from my old CPCam 9channel DVR. It hasn't missed a beat in all that time - even though I used it as a mobile DVR for over a year! For mye, I simply cannot justity a $3k DVR. It won't happen. If the only DVR you sell is $3k then you won't get a sale from me. If I owned a shop or a business where the risk of theft and the level of financial exposure was greater then yeah, it makes sense. But not for my application.

That's my next project... DVR in the saddle bag. A friend of mine broke his shoulder when a cager brushed him off the freeway and never looked back... He's got his x-rays on the wall at the office. Pretty scary looking. He arm was immobilised for 6 or 8 weeks, which made it pretty tough for him to work (IT guy).

If Turks & Caicos is anything to go by, they drive onthe British side of the road, but in American cars becuase it's cheaper to get them from Florida than from England.

Nah really... Even the police only have front cameras. For me it more about the hobby of setting up cameras than the end result - as evidenced by the fact that I never quit 'improving' the system. If all i wanted was evidence in a crash then I've have a single camera and no GPS. I'm just glad to hear from someone else who put a dashcam in their ca - I'm not the only freak in the world! I now know I belong to a *very* exclusive club of freaks. We need our own forum! Or at least a subforum. Or maybe a padded cell? I like the SD card solution. I'm having a problem with my DVR right now because it has a temp sensor and won't spin up the hard drive below freezing (most HDs are only spec'd down to freezing). I'm working on a solution with the manufacturer and we've discussed using a camera heater or maybe modifying the firmware to allow a dedicated cold-weather hard drive to be used. Your SD card DVR definitely wins points in the K.I.S.S. category. Mind you, I always get interesting video every time I get out on the road. Every day is an adventure. Always someone doing something stupid. God forbid one of the idiots causes an accident in front of my camera, hopefully I can provide video evidence to help the victim. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKYNIKx4v0Q

Are you dissin' my setup? Why I oughta.... But seriously... To each his own. Did someone say "Close calls in a parking lot"?

I have audio... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASIlM5TtgbM

Funny thing is many folks who see my camera ask if I'm a cop or PI. I'm like; "Dude, I drive a subaru. How many subaru police cruisers do you see?" Yeah, here is my "police car".

Here's an example of the value of the driver and rear cams. While pulling away from a burger king drive-thru I glanced over my shoulder to make sure it was clear then set off - only to get in a near-accident with a passing car. I had no clue why I didn't see the car before I set off, and if it *had* resulted in an accident then I'd probably have been blamed, and maybe even would have believed myself to be at fault. But then I replayed the video. In the top two pics you can see me glancing over my shoulder, and no moving cars behind me. In the bottom two pics you can see I've already set off moving as the car comes around the corner very quickly - quick enough to nearly hit me. If I really needed to I could figure out his speed from from the camera. Also, the driver cam is about to get a fisheye lens that will show the entire inside of the car - and I'm going to connect the power controller trigger to the car's interior light controller (has an output that I can use that will tell me if any door or the trunk or hood is opened). Anyone who breaks into my car will be filmed - just hope they don't find the DVR behing the false panel in the trunk.

I'd love to see a shot from that camera when the sun is visible. The bigger camera I have is purely because it does a better job of handling lighting extremes. The main reason I have mine is because out of 9 accidents I've had some involvement in (4x as a party ot the accident and 5x as a witness) every single one involved at least one driver lying to the police - except one, when I was at fault and I told the truth. When the accident is impossible to prove (ie both drivers accuse each other of drifting out of their respective lanes) you are relying on the at-fault drive to be honest - and faced with a potentially significant financial loss the vast majority of drivers will say anything to avoid liability.

Camera is a Supercircuits PC-23C. Current lens is a Computar 60mm (aiming at cars 60' away). It has a 850nm IR Pass filter and a seperate Panvigor 850nm Illuminator. I have an auto-iris lens on the way to try to improve the capture ratio under extreme lighting conditions. This is a worst-case scenario - at night, car facing the camer with hi-beams on.

There is a window just a couple of inches out of shot above the housing that I can open and either step out onto the roof, or just lean out and work on it. The window is low enough that I can kneel on the floor inside the room, lean out of the window, open the housing cover and access the camera and all of the wiring easily. The siding is not very strong - the 3 bolts go through the siding, through the plywood side of the house and are the type that expand on the back as you tighten them. The arm flexes about 1/2" on the end if I try to push it sideways. The edges and screw holes of the mount arm and the junction box are sealed with silicone. The inside of the house has a blank plate in the drywall were the wiring comes in and allows access for repair etc. From there the wire goes down through the inside of the stud wall into the garage and the makes it's way to the DVR. There is no exposed wiring inside the house (apart from across the garage ceiling. The wiring outside is protected using liquid-tight conduit (that includes a drip loop). I'd have preferred a less conspicuous location - but the image from here is much better for license plate capture.

Looks like the cameras are fixed apart from the two center front cameras. Maybe a survey van for a roads department?

Another thing to consider: If someone comes to the door and presses the doorbell for one of your neighbors - does your screen activate? (probably not). Can you active the screen yourself to see who's calling your neighbor? Both of these should help answer the question is "Does the coax still have a video signal even if the screen doesn't activate". It may be that you can force the camera to activate by providing power to it directly etc but does the system broadcast the video signal through the whole building on the same coax or does it send the signal only to the phone that they called? Check the +S "Privacy" connection.

I'm not an expert, but... Does the video phone have only the one 'channel' image? ie can youswith over and look at a different camera, dofferent door etc? That would suggest the image is modulated using RF. Othewise it's likely to be just a simple image that can be piped into an RCA connector on your TV/vcr/DVR I woudl test it with a cheap device that you don't care about damaging first - ie an older VCR using the LINE IN video port. For a permanent install I'd probably run it into a $20 video distribution amplifier (about the size of a cellphone) and use one of the two outputs for the phone, one for the DVR. If you use a passive splitter then you may find the image gets darker or loses quality. If other folks notice the signal quality loss then they may call a tech to check it out. Is the video screen always on? Or can you turn it on whenever you want? Or does it only turn on when someone call you directly? Just wondering if that coax is always carrying the signal.

No it didn't. Looks like it on the pic, but the sun was peeking between clouds.

You know, I'm actually pretty happy with the final image above. You can see my lane position and the location of other cars, and that's all that really matters. I'm not looking to identify cars by license plate etc. In the first image my lane position was simply not visible. In the second it was kinda visible. in the 3rd image the lane marker is right under the 'ray' from the sun - watching the video makes my lane positon clear. This is only the first time in 2 months with this camera that the sun was bright enough to make the rest of the image dark. For the most part IF the sun is visible then the image is still perfectly clear. Was just trying to make the point that the cost of the camera / name brand etc DOES make a huge difference even when the specs like TVL / pixels are exactly the same.

Fair enough. Doesn't bother me any - I don't really care who the domain was registered to. I don't know who Hermin Sanchez is and I don't care why his name appeared to be on your domain, no do I know why anyone should care. Peace.

The domain version history show 4 versions of cctvkings.com 12/30/2007 12/31/2007 01/03/2008 01/05/2008. Securitymaster: Is there anything you would like to clarify, or should we take a look at the contact information from the domain history held by http://domain-history.domaintools.com/ ?

Ah. If the burlgars had 2 hours they could remove my DVR lockbox by smashing the drywall off the wall and cutting the studs with a saw. I get you now. There's offsite storage, which is something I cannot adivse on becuase I've never done it (I'm just a home user). Remote viewing is easier and generally most DVRs will wllow you to remote connect via the internet for live viewing. Ensure the DVR offers triplex or pentaplex operation (allows you to playback without having to stop recording) if you want to be able to playback remotely rather that simply view remotely. Broadband internet would likely be required. I also have sensors around the house that will trigger a text message to my phone to prompt me to check the cameras remotely. They are independent of the alarm system. You may want to consider something like this (many DVRs will email on alarm events).

CIF and D1 are approximate image sizes - I say approximate because there is no strict standard that all manufacturers stick to. CIF is approximately 320x240, and D1 is approximately 720x480. Of course the image quality is product of the system as a whole, not just of the DVR - a low res camera will give a low res image even on a hi-res DVR etc. The specs I look for first are framerate by resolution. By this I mean a DVR may quote 480fps over 16 channels, but that's usually CIF only - meaning the low res image. 120fps over 16 channels in D1 seems to be about normal for the lower-end DVRs right now. If a CIF image is good for you then fine. I use CIF in my car Dashcam because I only need to show what cars did, I'm not trying to identify the driver or license plate etc. I need the smooth framerate show show preicesly who moved where and when. For my house I want the opposite - high quality image for identifying a person by face or license plate - and the framerate is less of a concern because if I show someone kicking my door in then that's good enough for a burglary conviction (hopefully!) Even then, you can usually adjust settings to give certain channels a better framerate under alarm/motion conditions. It's all about your application. What crime are you trying to prove? what crime are you trying to prevent? How much $$$ will you lose if that crime occurs. ie Does the cost of the system exceed the sum of "your potential losses in a burglary" and "insurance rate hike after a burglary" and "insurance discount for having CCTV" etc. For a home user their exposure is usually about $500 in deductable then probably 20% of the value of the property in depreciation in the settlement check. The burglary that prompted me to install CCTV cost me about $3100 in actual unreimbursed losses. It makes little sense to spend more than that on a CCTV. This is why I DIY with budget equipment. All-told I'm still less than $3k into the system even after 5 years of evolution. A business owner will likely have a much greater exposure to loss, or may be trying to prove crimes that require very high framerate (ie employee shorting the register). It's all relative. Very few DVRs are "bad" (to me, 'bad' = doesn't work, not low specs). They are just aimed at different user segments. Budget DVRs with lower quality images and/or lower framerates are aimed as home users and generally work out fine. More expensive DVRs are aimed at business users who's exposure is greater and the types of crime they are trying to prevent demand a greater feature set. Why would a home user by a DVR with POS integration? etc For all these reasons, you need an experienced installer to help you weigh the factors.

Depends in the installation I guess. My DVR (home) is installed in a lockbox that I can jump up and down on all day and it won't move - bolted into the wall with 8 bolts right through the studs. Would have to cut the wall away to remove it, or cut the door off with an oxy torch... or I guess they could burn the house down. Not trying to talk you out of offsite storage - just saying that you can protect the device itself against reasonable threats, assuming the burglar is there only for a short period of time and doesn't have time to go searching for the DVR. A burglar alarm with cellular link will help keep them from overstaying.

So *did* you buy the domain from Hermin Sanchez? Else, why was he listed on the whois data for cctvkings last week?

And did they ever sell it for 1499 before they dropped it to 999? Unless they are taking a massive loss at 999 then 1499 was one heck of a markup.

Yeah, I figure anything x240 might as well be CIF. That 240fps live view was weird also - it can record faster than it can display to screen? Really? So does that mean you can't replay the 16x view to a VCR or capture card at 480fps? I dunno. A little light on the spec sheet. Didn't see anyting about pre-event buffer either - that's something that is kicking my butt right now because you can walk right past one of the closer cameras and be in and out of shot in about a second - and by the time the motion sensing picks up you're already almost out of shot. Same problem with the license plate cam - you can drive right through shot if you are quick enough and you won't be captured. I have a second 4ch on the loop-out of the 3 face cameras and the license plate camera - it's motion sensing is faster to respond and it's got abetter framerate but still not great.

No, I mean 720x240. I know that CIF and D1 are not consistent terms between manufacturers, but ???x240 is closer to CIF than D1. I usually assume CIF is ~320x240 and D1 is ~640x480 or 720x480. Of course I'm no expert by any stretch of the imagination. I'll bet you a dollar that 480 is only in Basic.