cctvfan

I believe it's made by a Canadian manufacturer. The DVMS is developed by their own R&D software development team: http://www.i3dvr.ca/

My understanding is the zoom ratio iteslf (i.e. 25x or 18x) won't tell. For example, a 25x motorized zoom lens' focal length may vary between 3.5mm (wide) and 87.5mm (tele). But a different lens that varies between 4.75mm and 118.75mm is still considered 25x ! So you need to first figure out the absolute focal length (at the telephoto end) of your PTZ, i.e. whether its 87.5mm or 118.75mm or sth else. Then the standard lens calculator should tell you what object size (W/H) can be covered at any given distance (of course another input to the calculator is the CCD format, i.e. 1/3 or 1/4, or even 1/2 given the high-end stuff you're using most of the time

Thanks loop & Cooperman. I used to think dead pixels are only FACTORY DEFECTS, and didn't know they may develop over time. Let me amend my earlier claim: "I've been lucky enough not getting any dead pixels on cams, AT THE TIME OF INSTALLATION. "

I've been lucky enough not getting any dead pixels on cams. But many encounters with LCD displays. Not necessarily "always white". Can be always black (off) as well. Or in fact any primary color being always on (or off) ..... like a RED DOT on my old VAIO notebook. The sales at Best Buy explained as long as the # of dead pixels per ?? square inches isless than ??, it passes Sony's QC. But he replaced a new one for me anyway.

Great! So one no longer needs to use four 1404HS cards to build a 16-ch / 480fps system, just one card is good enough. BTW, I saw two cards in the picture -- guess one must be for split screen live display generatiion?? I understand the 14XXX series only supports sequential/rotated channels in the video out, but not split screen.

That's true Rory. I hate passive baluns too, and active ones with fancy compensation are expensive. So I would try using a proper video isolation transformer to see if it helps, and forget about baluns.....

Sounds like a ground loop problem (tho not 100% sure about your case) ---- that happens when two grounded devices are connected together, and yet drawing power from separate 110VAC outlets which do not share a single grounding point. The minute potential differneces (i.e. resistances) between the two devices' "ground" would cause interference which, in the case of audio hookup, manifests itself as an annoying "audio hum" (50Hz & its harmonics). For video setup, the problem takes the form of "video hum", i.e. white horizontal bands that travel down the screen (slowly), then starts from top of screen again. Using a video isolator transformer may solve the problem (BTW, if you use a passive balun pair & UTP, you would achieve the same effect too, as the transmission becomes "balanced" and there is no more a common ground between the video generation and receiver ends.

Rory, thanks for pointing out the differences between embedded XP and other RTOS. Never realized that.

Howard, Thanks. In my past (LIMITED) experience finding a cam is less a challenge. Although brands like Sony only produce progress-scan CCDs for industrial cameras (for CAM), I did come across a much more affordable progressive scanning camera (some "unknown" brand using Hitachi CCD) that was only about the price of other expensive 2:1 interlaced cams. Very tempting. But then finding the right DVR that records at 4xCIF (the second part of your tip) AND also gives all-round satisfactory performance/features needs more patience

Thanks for the tips. Absolutely agreed. Should focus on the real strengths of DVR, and set the right expectation for the customer.

Yes, too bad most DVRs dump one of the even/odd fields, i.e. recording only at say, 640x240 instead of 640x480, just to avoid the feather-line motion defects. Those DVRs' assumption [that most NTSC cams are interlaced] is correct 98% of the time, but what if I am using a progressive CCTV camera (with non-interlaced CCD transfer), then I would want to have the flexibility switching to use the FULL 525 lines for recording. The embarassment is that videos normally show nice/okay to our customers during live monitoring, but all square pixels start showing up once we put it in playback mode (and we were criticizing their old VCR system during sales)

Thanks Thomas. Will learn more about Partnership from your web before sending you a PM.

Q1. For setups with IP cameras only, is there a product offering with the capture board excluded? I understand we still need the Video Server license (in addition to the IP server) to run, but how about the capture card itself (would be nice if we can save some $$, esp the customer needs to spend on IP cams.) So far I don't have any customer who wants all IP-cameras, with no NTSC cam, but I don't mind knowing the options we have. Q2. Any chance we can sample MPEG4 demos prior to itsrelease date ( June 05)? Thanks.

Great speed & quality! Can't see any MPEG4 defects even with fast-changing contents. (In fact comparable to some good H.264 demos seen before). Yes, pricing info would be appreciated.

They share the same addres as this one: http://www.surveillance-video.com/contact.html i.e. 387 Canal St. NYC Thought they are run by the same group, but I'm seeing different prices on a few items (11% diff on one cam).

This is the only Canadian site I found: http://www.monitormaster.com/products.htm MiniMicro Canada 416-321-8898 x2235 Not sure about pricing though. You may have to call. I believe CP-404HS is the model you're looking for (first card right at top of page).

Hello...... on one of the 16 channels, I need high recording rate (at least half-real-time or 15 pps) AND high recording resolution (at least 640x480, because 640x240 still gives us blocky pixels during playback). All the remaining 15 channels can be at a lower fps and/or resolution. We don't care. The problems is: 1. Most DVRs that offer, say 720x480 display resolution only record half the scan lines, at 720x240. 2. The only exeptions I found, like Nuvico's NVXG-16000, can be set to record in 720x480, but only if I'm willing to step down the gross rate to 60pps (from 240pps). These are the recording rate/res taken from their spec: http://www.nuvico.com/product_images/XG%20series%20DVR.16.pdf 240pps @ 320x240 120pps @ 720x240 60pps @720x480 ----- damn! Well, at least it gives me the 720x480 option. But the frame rate penalty (60pps) is not acceptable in our app. Are there DVRs which allow me to record at 720x480 and "half-real-time" on at least one channel (please!!!), and only penalize the other 15 channels? Thanks in advance! Installation "done" but customer unhappy

Let me back up.... It' OK to be a poor installer, but the real problem is my customers are even more so (time to move our business to the Bahamas?)

Cool screenshots!! GE double the price? Fact is to a poor installer like me Nuvico XG doesn't sound cheap at all

Hi Rory, I like I-View too. But as mentioned above (3rd posting from top) it doesn't allow me to "donate" fps between channels. So for a 240fps setup, 15fps is always the highest speed I can see in the recording speed pick list. I tried reducing the fps on many channels, but all pick lists are still static / unchanged.

One more thought... If we compare GE standalones with Nuvico XG series .... both support 60pps at 720x480, but you see how big a difference dynamic fps assignment can make. I hope this feature will be supported in more DVRs.

Oh, I don't even need 2, just 1 cam is good enough. Looks like it's meeting my requirement. So you sound like all GE standalones support dynamic fps assignment. COOL!! (I'm now feeling a strong force pulling back into the embeddeds arena.....

Thanks Thomas for the encoraging info. But I just found this FAQ at your site. "R11. What resolution is available in recording? Each camera can be set at 320x240 and 640x480. 240fps is only possible when the resolution is set at 320x240." My question: Since fps is dynamically and freely assigned to individual channels, what does the 240fps part mean? Does it say I can still record at 640x480 as long as the total fps added up on all channels is below 240fps (e.g. 220fps summed?) More specifically, can I have JUST ONE channel recording at 640x480 **and** at 30fps (which is all I need)? As long as I set all the other channels to 5fps, then I still haven't reached the 240 limit spec'd in the FAQ. Or have I? Please correct me if necessary. Thanks.

I'm thrilled after taking a closer look at Video Insight. Too bad didn't pay enough attention to it before, although I read about it in other threads. I like their approach to integrating analog and IP cams. Hope the IP server license won't cost a a lot more. Anyway, will find out. VST_Man, its flexible fps assignment will likely solve my problem. Thanks. Since I like the product (so much & so far , I'm now tempted to relax on that 640x480 REC requirement. Recording rate is more important, when a guy is gone, he's gone. On the other hand, hopefully I can do something about image quality, e.g. if I zoom in the camera further, perhaps can live with some blocky pixels... thanks

Thanks. Will take a look at Video Insight. I suppose you mean at that rate, it's also supporting 640x480 too? As mentioend, I found 640x240 quality a bit bothering due to the stair-casing with edges (at least in the vertical dimension; horiz. res. is fine). The cam is for an entrance, catching the faces of everyone entering the building. It's turning doors so people tend to "walk very fast" while following the momentum/speed of the rotating doors. Worst still the doors block people's face and only reveal them in the "last minute", when people emerge from it, but the next second the guys are already gone in most cases. I could have widen the camera coverage but then can't see details of faces.