Cooperman

It might be worth seeing if you can pick up a reasonable DC:DC convertor, perhaps 12v input with 5v output, to be fitted locally at each camera position. At least with a regulated output, your cameras should be reasonably safe.

griffonsystems, If you begin to feel sick whilst watching the monitor, it's a fair bet the anti vibration technique isn't working properly Hope it goes o.k. and keep us posted,

If the camera is designed for manual iris lenses only, why does the picture show an auto iris lens .... With the electronic iris enabled, and a decent lens fitted, if you have sufficient lighting to enable the aperture to be stopped down one or two stops, you should get a very good picture.

Cold Feet, My initial reaction to your requirements were, it shouldn't be a problem to set up within your budget. Having thought about it a bit more, I now think it is going to be a problem. You indicated that you need facial recognition up to 20 feet, and the logic of that argument suggests that with a conventional 1/3" CCTV camera, you'd need a 12mm focal length lens just to achieve a full picture height image of a six footer; in other words, at that distance the 'face' will only occupy approx. 15% of your picture height. At 20 feet distance from the camera with a relatively narrow coverage lens fitted, you would then need an awful lot of cameras to achieve a full 360 degree coverage. Looking at the problem from the other direction, the fewer cameras you use, the wider the lens needs to be, and the smaller an individual will therefore appear at your target distance. The only practical way would be to consider using a smaller number of megapixel cameras, and that is probably going to push the cost up considerably.

In the past I've had to mount a range of cameras on industrial process machinery with both high and low frequency vibrations (also 3 > 5G impacts on some). You could make up a clamp "sandwich" with a 1- 2" thick piece of high density polyethelyne between the mounting bracket and the vibrating surface. If the camera is fitted into a weatherproof housing, the addition of a further piece of HDPE or similar (perhaps LDPE) between the camera and the support plate will further damp out some of the vibration. As no two situations are ever quite the same, you will need to experiment a bit to see what works best for you.

Hey paranoid, The reason that the "All spiders will be shot" sign didn't work is possibly because you didn't follow the 'pc' route and provide it in fifteen different languages Going back to an earlier posting where I mentioned Silicone Grease, I used to supply systems to researchers and biologists, and insect monitoring was actually a fairly common application. The way they contain small insects (such as spiders) in the observation area, is to use a very thin film of grease to set up a boundary (the little bug***s won't attempt to cross the film because they know they'll get stuck). You could try applying a very thin film to the underside of the sunshield, and the area each side or around the housings window. You can get silicone grease from a plumbers merchant or possibly somewhere like B&Q warehouse. If it works, you'll probably need to remove and replace it every 2 - 4 months during the summer. Generally, the problem will reduce anyway as the temperatures drop over the next few weeks. Here in the U.K., arachnids usually hibernate from November through till spring (no food for them).

You probably don't realise it rory, but you've just very succinctly summarised the over riding reason why the average Town Centre CCTV system installed here in the U.K., and costing perhaps the equivalent of US$ 900k, is an almost total waste of money. Everyone thinks that if the camera doesn't move, then it's no practical use, and yet nothing could be further from the truth. We may have the unenviable reputation of being the CCTV capital of the world, but it's going to be years yet before the industry gets even the fundamental basics right.

Without wishing to state the obvious, the measure of a cameras resolution is a pretty academic exercise, unless you also take account of the lens fitted. If you fit a rubbish lens on a high resolution camera, it may actually look worse than a medium resolution camera fitted with quality optics. I think the main reason that good quality high res. bullets are so few and far between, is that the mass produced barrel lenses just aren't up to the job.

As they have a system working in a Liposuction clinic, I was tempted to make a crude reference to Fat files, but I'll resist the temptation. I think they've got a U.K. office, but I've never come across them 'on site'.

Hey rory, how you doin? I've been up to my proverbial wotsits at the moment. Never enough minutes in a week! Question for you Who makes the bounciest cameras Ever come across this one? http://www.remingtontd.com/products.htm

I'm a bit late picking up on your thread utvols, but for what it's worth, here are a few suggestions. If you're using a camera for whelping, the ideal set up would be for a high resolution camera with a good quality ultra wide lens, but with a couple of proviso's. For your breed, the size of room is quite generous, so depending on what (little) you have in the room, try and position the camera in a corner, wall mounted at about five feet from the ground (only higher if you think the b***h can jump up to it ). Place the dog 'nest' in the corner directly below the camera. That way, when she's ready to do her stuff, she will more than likely retire to the nest and you can watch in comfort without disturbing her. Colour is not necessary, unless you absolutely must. If you go for a 1/3" 'box' 560> 580 lines resolution Black and White camera (12v DC power supply, with Electronic Iris), fit a 2.8mm ultra wide manual iris lens, after focussing close the aperture to approx f4 and switch on the EI function. If you can restrict the area of the room still further, you could go for perhaps a 3.7mm lens which would provide an even better image. If possible use a single tungsten bulb as an uplighter ( perhaps a 40 watt bulb, bouncing the light off the ceiling). This will provide a low and comfortable light level for the expectant one, whilst providing an Infra Red rich light source which the camera will like. Hope it all works out o.k., and let us know how many pups she delivers.

Nice lens ranber, The correct auto iris wiring for all Pentax (Cosmicar) lenses is:- Red = + 12v DC supply. White = Video. Black = 0v Gnd. The green, yellow and brown conductors are normally used in some lenses for remote iris operation (controlling either 'ALC' or 'Level' pots), but as I've yet to meet anyone that has actually used them, its best to individually insulate them away. The lens drive cable is normally:- White = Common Green = Focus or Zoom Blue = Zoom or Focus Seems that those two colours are reversed on some lenses, so you'll have to test it to find out which is which.

Hey bedece, There are a wide range of Infra Red illuminators in the global market place, and whilst quality and costs vary enormously, they are all ultimately intended to do the same thing, but in varying degrees (excuse the pun). If you are monitoring industrial locations, the first option is low level maintained visible lighting. As VST_Man has suggested, a good second option might be triggered visible lighting, although both of these options may be less than ideal if there are neighbouring residential properties. The correct way to use Infra Red would be as you suggested, to concentrate on illuminating the area under observation, which is not necessarily the same as strapping the IR lamps to the camera itself. The further away the illuminator, the greater the light output required to produce a useable picture. If you have a preferred camera (colour only cameras excluded), you will need to look at the spectral response, to see how sensitive the CCD imager is at different IR frequencies. Most commercial premises will use 715nM > 850nM filters on the lamps, and most IR sensitive cameras will require about 1.5x > 2x more light output at 830nM than 715nM, just to get the equivalent level of illumination to produce a similar quality of picture. If you need completely covert, then between 900Nm > 1000nM will do it, but very few cameras have decent sensitivity at these frequencies to allow anything more than short range monitoring. Incidentally, whatever lamp you use, you will need to set up the lens for a degree of "focus shift" between daylight and the higher IR frequencies, unless you go for more expensive IR corrected optics.

A camera we can't remember???

If you use a weatherproof houring with a rating of IP 65 or better, then it should be impossible for dust to gain access. It is likely that there would be some minimal air movement with variations in temperature, particularly past the cable gland sleeves, but this would not result in large amounts of dust being drawn inside the housing. A pressurised housing would be something of a luxury, particularly where conventional housing designs should in theory be more than adequate for the job.

Crikey, every time I spend a few days away from the forum, things begin to get ... interesting I've also been getting spammed a lot recently, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it isn't as a result of being a member, but if we consider the practicalities of controlling contact information, if the present arrangement is changed, a spammer would only need to register as a member, to gain access to the same details already in the public domain. Whatever our opinions as to what is the best thing for us personally, we all knew the score when we joined, and if you join a club you play by the rules. Larry has provided a unique facility and our thanks are due to him for that; whatever our personal opinions, we should respect what's been achieved by admin., mods. and members so far. If specific areas are set up as restricted access, that shouldn't be a problem. I'm not currently registered for access to the dealer section, and I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over it. The basis of providing a platform for the open exchange of information and ideas, is precisely what makes this forum so successful and long may it continue as such.

The TV news reports over here are just appalling, and perhaps the only thing more heartbreaking than the scale of the disaster, is the apparent lack of any tangible rescue and relief operation by the authorities. UK journalists who have quickly arrived in the disaster zone are reporting no noticeable aid or assistance for those most affected; which beggars the question, if a handful of journalists working on their own initiative can get through, how is it that the richest and most powerful country in the world, which has one of the most sophisticated military machines at its disposal, has managed to fail so miserably at supporting their citizens, in their greatest hour of need? Our thoughts and prayers go out to all those affected.

I was always told not to get blood on the fibre

Oh dear chewingyu, problems indeed. First off, cast your mind back to when the system was originally installed - did it work o.k. then, or has there always been problems with the cabling? From what you've described so far, and obviously without the benefit of more detailed information, it would as Data suggested, have been far better if you had gone the slightly more expensive 'fibre' route from the outset. If the cable joints had been done correctly, it is unlikely to have been any less "lossy" than if in-line connectors had been used instead. The obvious problem is that the RG cables are not really suitable for such lengthy unamplified runs, particularly where each cable joint may be the equivalent of an extra 50 - 75 feet of cable, in terms of signal loss. "Sweating" joints is a fairly standard technique for establishing whether a joint is "dry" and therefore not making a proper contact, but the bottom line is, if it had been done properly in the first place, you may get the odd connection failure over a period of many years, but not to the extent you are reporting. Incidentally, using an engineers freezer spray is also a solid technique for cooling (and identifying) dry joints. It is possible that if the cables have sustained minor damage over the years, damp may have got into the cables and either caused the copper to oxidise, or introduced an effective barrier to proper signal propogation, but the fact that the contractor is resoldering the joints with varying effects suggests this may not be the problem. If you can spare the down time and cost to have individual cables isolated and tested particularly at joint locations (both for cable resistance and also signal display), you may be able to look at existing cables or groups of cables, being (re-) routed to a common point where single channel amplifiers can then be used to beef up the signal transmission. In practice, you need to pick a single cable, have it properly tested, and then try a quality amplifier to see if the technique is appropriate for the remaining problem cables. Failing, that, as has already been suggested you're looking at a limited number of expensive but unavoidable options. Incidentally rory, 300 metres is a bit under 1000 feet.

hundleton1 The symptoms you are describing sound like classic 'earth loop hum' (ELH), and if the building was originally two seperate properties, the chances are very likely that they were earthed at different points. If the cameras are 24v AC or AC mains powered, then that is indeed the likeliest explanation. If you use a short test lead between a 'problem' camera and a locally powered monitor, the problem should disappear if it is ELH. If you haven't got a test lead, try running a mains extension lead from the camera part of the building, and plug the monitor into that; then test with the video cable from a single problem camera. If it is ELH, you could use isolation transformers on the camera cables, or alternatively, as it's a relatively short cable run, you could install a new earth lead for the cameras, taken from the 'monitoring' building.

I have in the past come across some cameras where the plug polarity is reversed, so it's better (and cheaper) not to assume if you're not absolutely sure. Some cameras will provide a small connector pin i.d. icon next to the input, and certainly the majority do use the central conductor for +12v DC. If not sure, you can always use a multimeter to test continuity between the pins and the outer case (if metal), or visible screws are often fixed directly to the camera chassis which is grounded (0v DC). As a further safety step, it's good practice to use a small diode (IN 4001/2 or similar) on the +ve supply. This should protect the camera against accidental reverse polarity, and any possible future failures caused by damage to the cameras power supply cable, or the power supply itself. Some cameras already have reverse polarity protection on their internal power supply board, but it's generally better not to have to find out the hard way

cctvfan, you really shouldn't believe everything you read in a magazine It was actually quite unusual to use a 'scope' in the field, after all, how would you monitor test points when the camera is twenty feet up the side of a wall. To be honest, I tended to use my scope more for fault finding on the bench, rather than at the clients premises. In those days, there were no silicon chips or SMT (surface mount technology), so circuit boards were a mass of discreet components, any one of which could go belly up, and dry solder joints were quite common particularly in the power supply section. Oscilloscopes were essentially used for checking the presence of signals at various test and component points, so repairs then were at individual component level, rather than complete board replacement as we do today. Checking colour bursts wasn't really an option .... we didn't have any colour cameras! Just to make you really jealous, I can't even remember how many old magazines and equipment brochures I've still got stored away. Maybe we should start an online museum Metz, we've all got at least one company in our past that leaves a nasty taste, and I'm pleased to say that one of my least favourite went under not so long ago, but hey as they say, life's too short. When I first started out, we didn't have to worry about marketing hype, you could get honest answers from almost everyone in the industry, and nobody ever asked for orders to be confirmed in writing. Vidicon cameras were the norm, and recalibrating or re-tubing cameras was a daily occurence. As it happens domes were'nt really in use here until much later, simply because the techniques for blowing plastic to a reasonable optical standard, simply hadn't been developed yet. As you say, then is then and now is a completely different ball game, but I still constantly see bad practices which were well understood thirty years ago, but more recently seem to have been overlooked by many with less experience. Such is life

Oh dear Metz, I'm beginning to wish I hadn't asked. Maybe that's one genie you'd rather have left in the bottle. I promise not to mention the 'P' word, ever again. The good thing about old dogs, is they tend to have long forgotten more than can ever be remembered, which means lots of this CCTV stuff appears new and exciting, when we've probably seen it a hundred times before and... the memory is just not what it used to be The late '70's would probably have had you using RCA 1" Silicon Vidicons, or possibly Cohu cameras? (I hope you haven't had problems with them in the past). Ever come across a company called the Reticon Corporation? In those days, the only chip in sight was usually on the paintwork

Hey Metz, I think AVCONSULTING was actually being rather helpful by offering an explanation on the workings of analogue splitters, for the benefit of those on this forum who don't know anything about them. After all, you have to be of a certain age to have heard of them, much less used one. Just a guess, but I suppose the Pelco rep. is not on your christmas card list this year Being a major U.S. manufacturer, I'd have thought you would have had a good opinion of them. Anything you can elaborate on, or is it best left to the dealer forum? Just curious.

The manufacturers don't have to install CCTV cameras in the real world They could use a meter, an oscilloscope, or more likely just stick to the Test Chart method you suggested rory.