survtech

No, that's why I can't recommend an inexpensive system that meets his needs. I don't think he wants to spend on the order of $1,500-$2,000 per channel, not including cameras...

Why? 960H imagers don't demonstrate any benefits when coupled with 4CIF/D1 recorders.

I'm surprised no one has stepped up with equipment recommendations. I would try to help but the subject is out of my specialty (casino surveillance), where cost is basically no object.

You are perfectly OK as long as no camera sees into the neighbor's property. If the police are asking you to put it back online, they must have some suspicion about the neighbor. The constant traffic you mention suggests a drug operation.

720p Day/Night cameras with IR would do the trick. And you really wouldn't need that much storage. A simple IP system with 1TB would offer more than enough storage to record 4 cameras at 6Mb/s for around 12 hours or 8 cameras for at least 6 hours. There are a number of fairly inexpensive recording solutions (VMS) you could use on a reasonably fast computer. An inexpensive POE switch would power the cameras and tie the system together. The only caveat would be that the switch would have to be POE Class 3. Class 2 typically can't power IR cameras. Otherwise, you could use POE power inserters and any switch but that would make the system a bit more complex.

Unistrut and beam clamps. You can mount some cameras directly to the unistrut. For other cameras, mount an electrical box to the unistrut.

Oh well, your bad. We do it all of the time. Caveat - we are 100% Pelco.

???????? If you replace like-for-like camera modules, it is simple as pie - same mounting holes, same firmware, etc. Also, most brand-for-brand replacement modules utilize the same mounting; just swap a couple of brackets. And if you decide to get a different model of camera module, we've found that Time Lapse Supply will tell you which modules are compatible and, if firmware updates are required, can supply them too. Except for the oddball PTZs, repair is a snap for anyone with a few technical skills. Other than replacing cameras, most of the rest of the repairs are even simpler. PC Boards are typically easy to change, mechanical parts not too difficult, etc. and the savings can be substantial. For instance, a Pelco Spectra IV SL 23x in-ceiling mount indoor dome will set you back $1,100.00 or more. The cost to repair a Spectra III dome drive is rarely more than 1/3 of that. Big difference!

OK. Avigilon couldn't explain the communication problems or the joystick run-on. When they were first setting the system up, the encoders couldn't control our Pelco PTZs at all, except when we brought our test setup into our Control Room and hooked its very short control line up. When they told us we should perform our PTZ tests with that setup, we balked. What good is a PTZ test in a small (20x24 foot) room? After much "fiddling", we provided a KTD-83. After they hooked it up, control was enabled but the run-on was very apparent. They think it may be an issue with the encoder not sending stop commands. Not our problem, though. One thing we didn't try (and they didn't suggest) was to change the communication parameters. We use 9600 baud. It's possible their encoders don't like that speed.

Define "issues". Have you tried following a moving vehicle? A person running? 500ms latency is nearly impossible to overcome. For instance, a vehicle traveling 25mph moves over 18 feet in 500ms. A person running at 10mph moves over 7 feet in 500ms. Tough to follow, especially when you zoom in. When you add the PTZ "run-on", which Avigilon couldn't explain at all, it makes for poor control.

The other oddity was that their encoder's RS422/485 output couldn't control our Pelco Spectra PTZs directly unless they were in the same room (test PTZ). For our "working" PTZs with a total control cable length of ~200 ft. and ~1,200 ft., we had to add a Kalatel KTD-83 in the line to buffer the control signal.

We just completed evaluation of an Avigilon system. Latency was disappointing (>500ms) and the Avigilon joystick even more so. And it was v4.12. I asked the Avigilon engineers about the latency and was told that their encoders buffer 6 frames. That's 200ms alone, without including basic encode/decode latency. No wonder total latency was so high. The joystick was a joke. Jog shuttle worked well but the button legends are impossible to read and the joystick had around a second of run-on. By that I mean that when you release the joystick instead of stopping, the PTZ continues for nearly a full second. Tested by "tapping" the joystick. On the matrix, that results in a brief movement of the PTZ. On Avigilon, that results in ~1 second of PTZ movement.

Supposedly, HDcctv and HD-SDI should have no issues with 200 feet of RG6. That said, did you use proper RG6? By that, I mean solid copper center conductor and 95% or better braided copper shield? It is my understanding that, like analog, the use of CATV (antenna) cable with copper clad steel center conductor and foil/aluminum shield severely shortens the transport distance. Also, HDcctv/HD-SDI supposedly requires BNC connectors which are specially made for the signals. You could try swapping cameras at some point. If another camera exhibits the same symptoms in that location, the culprit is likely cable or connectors.

Brent, sounds like a good plan and who knows, you just might be happy with the substantial improvement 4CIF/D1 recording will give you over CIF. Bear in mind that 4CIF requires approximately 4 times the bitrate (4x the pixels/lines) as CIF so you should increase storage by the same factor to get the same retention time. That's all else being equal...

Brent, one more thing you should know is that camera manufacturers are notorious for overstating resolution. One example - most SD cameras have 768 horizontal pixels. While pixel count doesn't directly relate to resolution lines, let's say for giggles that they do. Since resolution lines are only supposed to be measured over 3/4 of the display width on a 4:3 display, that translates to 576 pixels (768/4*3). Even if pixels-to-lines translated on a one-to-one basis, the most an analog camera should be capable of is that 576 lines/pixels. Manufacturers who state their resolution is 600 or more lines are basically "fudging" the numbers by disregarding the NTSC spec which calls for measuring a square section of the frame and counting the entire width.

Actually, most 450+ line analog cameras are 768x494 pixels, which equals .38MP, but who's counting? There is no real direct relationship between pixels and lines of resolution. Resolution lines are measured on a 3:3 section of the monitor where the second 3 is the full height. So 500 lines of resolution means the ability to differentiate between 250 alternating vertical black and white lines before they become a grey blur. Looking at the picture below, the point on the chart where the lines become a blur would be the camera's horizontal resolution if you aimed a camera at the chart from a specific distance, etc. Most testers point the camera at something like the chart below and zoom in or move the camera towards or away from the chart until it fills the screen, then look at the chart's vertical lines to read horizontal resolution.

Brent, We've all tried to give you good information, other than recommending what DVR to buy (which I won't do). I'll reiterate: If your current DVR is only capable of CIF recording and monitoring (something I'm not certain has been disclosed for certain), upgrading to a 4CIF/D1 DVR will definitely improve the recorded and monitored resolution. The difference will be more obvious if your cameras are higher resolution to begin with (500+ lines vs. 330-lines), but there will be a difference in any case. It is up to you to decide if you want to go the extra mile with 960H or megapixel resolutions. Something to keep in mind, as I explained previously, is that you would need to change out both the cameras and the DVR to see the benefits from either 960H or megapixel. MP cameras will not work on analog DVRs. 960H cameras will give you no better resolution on 4CIF/D1 DVRs. Also keep in mind that megapixel cameras often don't work as well in low light as the analog equivalents.

Sorry, you don't want my opinion on that subject.

Thanks, Mister Know-it-all!

Brent, I think you have you look at it from both perspectives. 470 to 600(+) line cameras will have better resolution than 330-line cameras but your DVR also needs to have full 4CIF/D1 resolution to fully take advantage of it. CIF is CIF and if that's what you are recording/monitoring at, increasing the cameras' resolution will not make any real difference. Increasing the DVR resolution will likely improve the images a bit more with 330-line cameras than increasing the cameras' resolution while retaining CIF recording/monitoring. For best results, both resolutions should be increased. 960H is a red herring in your case. As I said before, when viewed on a full resolution analog system or a 4CIF/D1 recording system, there will likely be no noticeable difference in the resolution of high quality cameras, whether they are rated 470, 500, 540, 600, 650, 700 or whatever lines of resolution. There will be differences in respect to how different cameras handle low light, back light, etc., though. 960H cameras require 960H or better recording and monitoring to demonstrate any improvement. As others have mentioned, there are other factors that come into play. Even going to megapixel does not guarantee you'll get satisfactory results. Camera location, lens selection, day/night capabilities and WDR all can play a part in obtaining usable images.

I've seen the same results on analog matrices with both high-quality CRT and LCD monitors, standalone DVRs and a full-featured NVR/VMS with D1-capable encoders.

Darned if I know. Do you? I'm not the one that started talking about 1000+ camera systems....... Yes but you're the one who started talking about 960H when the OP was asking about D1. Since you changed the subject, so did I.

Darned if I know. Do you?

Not too many 960H DVRs on the market that integrate with a 1,000+ camera system. I could count them on the fingers of one amputated hand....