Stanislav

Consumed electric power and beam angle must be the same for proper comparison. But I made more strict tests using the CCTVCAD Lab Toolkit.

Rory, I don't agree here. As I wrote above, IR LED illumination is less in power efficiency in 50-100 times than discharge lamps of visible light. Thus to get the same equivalent light flux for a camera in IR we should spend in 50-100 times more electric power than using discharge lamp of visible light. Is is a real fact confirmed in theory and practice. But this fact is not obvious. Each camera needs 12V*0.2=2.4W for IR. Although IR flux is less in sum but it is used economically for illuminating camera FOV only, therefore we can't get this benefits in practice. But using visible light LEDs instead of IR we can spend in 10-20 times less electric power to get the same image quality. Visible light LEDs has worse light efficiency than discharge lamp therefore we get 10-20 times difference instead of 50-100 times. I made such tests. I made such calculations. I even made Software and methodology. It is 100% true fact. You could get different result becouse of many factors such as working current, voltage drop, beam angle, LED type... But strict test gives visible LED advantage.

I am really impressed, Rory. IR has many fields of application. Visible light can deter from crime, but it can also attract undesirable people and bother in many cases. It is necessary to think carefully, which illumination type is preferable in each case.

IR provides hidden surveillance. It is like using pin-hole cameras. In some cases we can catch on camera much more when a surveillance subject would not know about control. In short hidden surveillance can be useful to detect crime. But if you need to prevent crime when visible light is much preferable.

It is insignificant. In reality it is almost impossible to detect on image from a camera 10% difference in IR power flux . Discharge lamps degrade too. And video sensors degrade.

Cameras with IR LEDs need more power than cameras without IR in several times. It is necessary to calculate power supply wiring while designing CCTV using Ohm's law. After proper calculating voltage drop on each section of wires and choosing right cables and power supply locations there must be no problem with 12VDC. 24 VAC allows to use cheaper cables with less section area, but it has own limits too. The calculation is needed to make right choose. As a rule I used 12VDC or 220VAC (in long distances) in my CCTV designs. 24VAC I used just several times.

I have IR LEDs in the field for over 10 years, power is as strong as ever, only a few bulbs out of several hundred have blown. It depends of their quality. If LEDs are broken one by one, it looks as drop off in efficency in every month. LEDs working temperature and heat radiator have great influence. There is also drop in efficiency while warming up during first minutes after powered. Generally IR LED illumination is less in power efficiency in 50-100 times than discharge lamps of visible light. Thus to get the same equivalent light flux for a camera in IR we should spend in 50-100 times more electric power than using discharge lamp of visible light. However IR LEDs have directional round symmetric radiation which allows to form a narrow beam in long distance.

Try the Axis Design Tool. It has examples of video for different settings and detailed instructions.

If an electric socket (220v) near to the camera is impossible, I recommend to lead 220VAC by separated power cable of 0.75mm2 and place the power supply of 12VDC near to the camera. To return color try to use better twisted pair active transmitter and receiver with adjusting correction.

Power cable of 800 meters is too long for UTP 0.5mm2 and camera consumption 0.75A/12VDC Voltage drop will be U=0.75*(800*0.035*2)=42 Volt! Even 20 twisted pairs in parallel don't solve this problem. You should place the power supply next to the camera. Maximal length of UTP cable equals 20meters with voltage drop = 1 volt. But losing colour can be a separated problem caused by losing colour subcarrier.

Black and white image can be caused by two reasons: 1. Low light. Camera is switсhed to black and white mode. You should increase light. 2. Loss of color subcarrier in the videosignal because of falling hight frequencies on the UTP amplitude-frequency characteristic. To correct this you should adjust correction on your balun or use other more advanced twisted pair transmitter/receiver. Changing cable, Camera, Monitor, DVR can correct this or not.

No problem, Norman. Thank you for saving my time. Good luck!

Thank you for your opinion. Hope you compared current VideoCAD Starter version. It is much easier than Lite and Professional. However there are many people who need more powerful tools, and have time to learn them. In other case the progress would be stopped. Reality is not simple.

Norman, you active promote JVSG simultaneously on several forums word for word. Great job:) As to unvisible new JVSG version, don't worry, we'll release better and cheaper. In any case our customers will get only benefits. I wrote about CURRENT JVSG and VideoCAD Starter versions. Anybody can see my post above. Current JVSG can't use 3D models from SketchUp at all. It would be fair to compare only existing available to purchase versions. Comparing future promises is not fair. There are no problem to correct any price or open locked tools from VideoCAD Lite or Prof versions to keep the existing advantage of VideoCAD Starter. In addition VideoCAD8 is active developed, a lot of new original ideas already implemented. But I don't like to promise, I like to make. As to IP Camera CCTV Calculator ($48)- it is much more powerful tool than JVSG calculator, it can import camera data, calculate up to three digital flows, use pattern and has other advantages. If you need the Calculator, you should compare $195 (JVSG) against $85+$48=$133 (VideoCAD Starter+Calculator). However, we don't force to pay $48 for the Calculator if you don't need it, VideoCAD Starter version for $85 is available. There are very good free calculators which excels JVSG. Axis Design Tool is the best. It can be offline now. This bombastic allegation requires detailed objective confirmation. Norman, could you bring it?

Just for accuracy. VideoCAD Starter version excels current JVSG in many aspects and costs $85 agains $195.

It is out-dated information. Recently we release VideoCAD Starter - easy and low cost version of VideoCAD. We also offer Lite version. But the most of customers still prefer Professional version as it has many unique powerful tools. As to suggestions, we have our forum for them. Unfortunately a lot of my messages are deleted on this forum.

Fully functional trial of VideoCAD does not exist. There are demo versions and full versions without restrictions. VideoCAD Starter 7.06 demo allows to change lens focal length and image sensor format, but doesn't allow to save project. Thus the VideoCAD Starter demo can be used in not complicated real projects. Lite and Professional demo versions don't allow to change lens focal length. VideoCAD Lite and VideoCAD Professional can import AutoCAD (*.DWG and *.DXF files) and export to AutoCAD (*.DXF).

Three years ago I made several calculations and practical experiments with IR LED Illuminators and cameras with different image sensors. In power efficiency for B/W CCD sensors( taking into account IR spectrum and CCD spectral sensitivity) 920nm IR LED worse than even incandescent lamp in 4-5 times. For example, taking into account about 50% light loss in spotlight's armature, 25Watt 920nm IR Illuminator and 10 Watt spotlight with the same angle of radiation with incandescent lamp produce approximately the same images from B/W CCD camera. 850nm IR LED worse than incandescent lamp in 2-3 times. White LED is better than incandescent lamp for B/W sensors in 1.5-3 times, for Color sensors in 3-5 times. http://www.cctvcad.com/videocad_help/prim18_irmes.htm

This declaration probably means that the IR illuminator distributes different power of radiation in dependence on the vertical angle. Thus when this IR illuminator is installed horizontally it radiates big power in the distance (upwards direction) but low power near to the illuminator (downwards direction).

Lux meter with possibility of connecting lens would be an useful device. But it must have feature to enter lens F-number and scene reflection factor. In addition, to get correct lux, its sensor must have CIE spectral response curve like an human eye. On the other hand in CCTV spectral response curve like silicon sensor is more preferable, but it will be no lux meter. It would necessary to take into account difference in spectral response between clear silicon sensor, sensor with color filters, IR filter, ExView sensor.... It is much easier to take a real camera which is planned to use and get real pictures But how to get expected image having known illuminance in lux and camera sensitivity? How to include F number, shutter speed, AGC, sensor spectral response, light source spectrum and scene reflection ? VideoCAD offers real tools for this http://cctvcad.com/Files/the_principles_of_cctv_design_in_videocad_part4.pdf Lux meter is necessary for independent measuring camera sensitivity. It is very good practice to know real camera capabilities. Here is a technique http://www.cctvcad.com/videocad_help/prim10_.htm

See some basic principles here: "The principles of CCTV design in VideoCAD. Part 4. Illumination and camera sensitivity in CCTV"

VideoCAD is the most multifunctional. http://cctvcad.com/ As to working with Google Earth, it is enough to use BMP and JPG files as background for camera placing. VideoCAD can use also WMF. EMF, DXF, DWG (AutoCAD) files. Import and export.

See also CCTVCAD Calculator. This calculator uses adjustable patterns based on result of practical measuring traffic for different equipment, compressions, scenes, frame rates, numbers of pixels etc. Thus using it you can systematize practical experience and achieve maximal possible accuracy. In addition the CCTVCAD calculator takes into account up to 3 parallel video streams of each camera (Viewing, Recording, Alarm recording) with different setting. It can import camera data from VideoCAD, can export and print and has many other advanced features. http://www.cctvcad.com/CCTVCAD_Calculator.html

Here is the best calculator. Axis Design Tool http://www.axis.com/products/video/design_tool/calculator.htm It seems engineers of Axis Communications made great job with measuring and analysing real video data from real cameras. This video is available as examples. First of all click User's guide on the top of page.

VideoCAD is a good tool only and its efficiency depends on designer. Don't demand too much from it. I know, there are supporters and opponents of using VideoCAD. As a rule opponents are skilled specialists relying on their experience only. They spent a lot of time and money to get the experience during field work and doesn't wish to spend additional time and money for studying new product. All opponents never tried to use VideoCAD seriously. It is important. May be they didn't meet such tasks. As a rule, specialists-practitioners, who has studied VideoCAD and used it successfully, become supporters. Especially professionals who make very complicated CCTV designs with many cameras. VideoCAD is considerable assistance to them irrespective of their previous experience. During his life, VideoCAD imbibes experience of these specialists. Many thanks to them. Another supporters are beginners in CCTV design, who have not much time and money for getting experienced through practice work. Who needs good result during short time. And they can get the good professional result. See also an article As to CCTV Design Tool (one from ) , the guys try to copy only basic VideoCAD ideas and features. But they are little cunning when write 'CCTV Design Tool is way more easy to use than VideoCad'. It is 'more easy to use ' as well as MS Paint is 'more easy to use ' than AutoCAD .