survtech

Has anyone else seen a demo of the OnSSI Ocularis open architecture system? We just had a demo at our facility and were blown away!

My wife would tell you that you need to trim your fingernails.

We had the same problem with Pelconet encoders/decoders connected through a Motorola Canopy system. We tried to work with the integrator and Pelco tech support without success - the encoders and decoders kept losing contact with each other and had to be rebooted regularly. We finally assumed the Canopy system was the problem, moved the DVR to the remote site and shut off the Canopy system. We use ACTi encoders at another site and have had relatively few problems.

If the interference is from the AM radio station, more than likely you would be able to see the modulation of the signal. It would probably appear as a change in the pattern of the interference with the varying volume of the signal. Try tuning the station in on an AM radio while watching a camera and see if there is any correlation between the interference and the sound.

There shouldn't be. We commonly run UTP video, 24VAC power and PTZ control side-by-side in the same conduit with no problems.

Which basically means, unless I'm interpreting your post incorrectly John, that IndigoVision will not be compatible with any IP cameras other than their own for quite a long time. That is, of course, unless they change their tune regarding support for other manufacturers' IP cameras.

"Is going to be"... Are the cameras IndigoVision is selling right now compliant with either standard? Is IndigoVision Control Center currently compliant with either standard? There is no indication on IndigoVision's website that either their cameras or Control Center are currently compliant with either standard so my facts are perfectly up to date! Apparently, you are getting ahead of youself. Not necessarily. Both committees contain IP camera manufacturers pretty much exclusively. There are very few end-user participants in either committee and there are other competing entities - SIA (Security Industry Association) and IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force). SIA has been around for far longer than either ONVIF or PSIA and is far more open in its membership. And then you have China, the huge force that prefers to set its own standards and is loath to pay licensing fees to anyone. By the way, you still haven't answered my question: what entity exclusively "formally approved" IndigoVision for casino applications?

There is no standard for IP video yet. There are two proposed standards: The Open Network Video Interface Forum (ONVIF) and the Physical Security Interoperability Alliance (PSIA). The two standards are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but each group is jockeying to become the only standard. This brings to mind the VHS vs. Beta and Blu-Ray vs. HD DVD battles, which raged on for years. Meanwhile, there are no products being produced to either standard so essentially, buyers of IndigoVision NVR systems have only one choice for non-analog cameras: IndigoVision. And guess what? IndigoVision's cameras do not meet either standard, so you argument is completely flawed!

You wouldn't, by chance, work for them or someone who sells/integrates them? We demo'd the Indigovision product and it was "OK", but far from perfect. We disliked that the IndigoVision system can only use the IndigoVision IP cameras - a serious shortcoming. We also were unimpressed with the user interface. You say that they are the only IP product formally approved for casino applications. By which authority - the Nevada Gaming Control Board? Under which regulation? I don't find any mention of IndigoVision on their website. Even if that is true, you do know, of course that Native American casinos, New Jersey, Mississippi and many other states have their own set of rules! I take those kind of statements with a very large grain of salt. IndigoVision would be far from the first or the last company to claim exclusive approval in Nevada. And Nevada, despite having their noses in the air about these sorts of things, is far from the last word on technical matters. In point of fact, Nevada is far behind tribal casinos in many technical areas. One example - there are still a relatively large number of Nevada casinos using VCR's. Another point: although 8000 cameras sounds like a lot. It is miniscule when you take into account that we alone have over 1000 cameras in our one casino, and we are far from the largest. I believe Foxwoods has more than 3000 cameras.

You missed: Veracity HIGHWIRE IP over coax * Up to 300 meters 100BaseT on RG-59 Nitek IPQuikLinks IP over coax and single twisted-pair * Network data through a single coaxial cable or single twisted-pair for distances up to 2500 feet. Also, Vigitron is preparing to release equivalent products.

Has Arecont solved their connection problems? We tested an AV3100 about a year ago and it kept dropping off the network. That, plus at any resolution, we could only get 14.5fps out of it. We abandoned testing at that time because of the dropouts and the low frame rate. Unfortunately, our NVR (Honeywell Enterprise) only accomodates Arecont and Axis cameras without upgrading our licenses - something not in our budget this year.

The biggest problem we found is the relative unavailability of direct burial CAT-5. Even when we did find it, the cost of 25-pair was astronomical. Granted, it is considered not absolutely necessary to use direct burial cable in conduit, but we've found that it is. Outside conduit tends to fill up with water, no matter how much care was taken in its installation. Non direct burial cable typically won't last very long in that environment.

Make sure both the DVR and the PTZ are set to the same protocol, bit rate and communications configuration. The most common is Pelco "D" protocol, 2400 or 4800 baud, no parity, 8 data bits and 1 stop bit.

Bosch VDN‑495V03‑10S Pelco IS110 SERIES SURFACE MOUNT, WDR, DAY/NIGHT, HIGH RES Computar/Ganz ZC-DWT4312NHA Outdoor 1/3" Color Super Hi-Res PIXIM WDR Dome, 520 TVL w/3.3-12mm Auto Iris varifocal

Some CAT3 has so few twists you could almost say it has none. The main problem with it is that because of the lack of sufficient twist, it is more prone to noise than CAT5/6/7. You can still transmit video through it but it is much more susceptible to crosstalk from any other signals on adjacent pairs.

IP at the show. The rest rooms are near the entrance.

CCD or CMOS

Yes.

The CQ42 can be obtained for a little over $100 if you find the right source.

There are a few options - you could use a Camera Sequential Switch, like the Pelco VSS5000 series Capable of Operating on 12 VDC for use in Mobile Applications Or you could use a Quad with a built-in sequencer, like the ARM CQ41 or CQ42 http://www.armelectronics.com/page.aspx?p=42 Both have alarm inputs that could be triggered by a microswitch.

Do you mean an elevator? If so, you should check both your local building codes and the elevator manufacturer to protect you a**. Typically, it is frowned upon to add a cable to an elevator unless the cable is approved. It is possible that the "stringer" cable has spare pairs of cables or even a coax cable built in for that purpose but again, especially for liability reasons, you should have the elevator service people do any connections to it.

It is not good practice to passively "split" a video signal. The result will be dark and probably exhibit severe ghosting. Use video distribution amplifier(s).

Tx + on the controller to Rx + on the PTZ. Tx - on the controller to Rx - on the PTZ.

What is the distance from the camera to the table? Our Blackjack tables are typically 6'4" in wide and the surface is 36" from the floor. Our poker tables are approximately 10' by 5' and 30" height. For a 10 foot ceiling height, the lens on a 1/3" camera needs to be approximately 6mm for a blackjack table. We use a 2.8-12 varifocal lens. For the poker tables and a 10' ceiling height the lens needs to be approximately 4.5mm, so we can use the same 2.8-12mm lens. If the ceiling height on the poker table were 8', it would need approximately 2.4mm lens, so we would use a 1.8-3.6mm lens. We use Computar lenses exclusively. 1.8-3.6mm is model number T2Z1816CS (manual iris). 2.8-12mm is model number T4Z2813CS, although they might be discontinued. You could substitute the infrared version: T4Z2813CS-IR. And yes, I agree. A single analog camera on even the smaller blackjack table will have trouble identifying the suits of cards or differentiating a Jack from a King, for instance. Smaller card values are identified by counting the "pips". The problem gets worse on the larger poker tables. Table game cameras have to have defeatable AGC because it needs to be turned "off" or the cards become unidentifiable. We typically use Pelco C10CH-6 cameras in DF-5 back boxes although we are going to try Ikegami ISD-A30 domes. Most domes we have tried have non-defeatable AGC, which limits their use for table games. That includes Sony, Panasonic, Ganz and many other integrated domes. You also have to be careful of the lighting. We typically place the camera directly over the player opposite the dealer so that we can see the dealer's hands and the chips. The lights should be on the same side of the table as the camera so that they don't reflect off the cards back into the camera. When they do reflect, it basically washes out the cards; making it impossible to identify them. I hope that helps.

For that distance, your power cable should be at least 16 gauge. 900 feet is borderline too far for RG-59. You should use either RG-6 or twisted-pair for the video. You'll probably have to get separate cables for power and video because I doubt anyone makes RG-6/16-2 or CAT-5/16-2 outdoor rated cable. At least I can't find a source. Indoor rated in those combinations are available; just not outdoor.