survtech

And you would have a heck of a ride on a windy day!

You could also run a standard resolution camera at CIF or maybe 2CIF; which would only show the odd or even fields and would have less motion "jaggies". A fast shutter speed would also help if there is enough light.

Most are, but that doesn't mean you're going to write in that format, and many NVR's will decode the stream to run motion detection then re-encode. Damn waste of processing power, if you ask me. It is also likely to produce exponential coding errors into the video. Processing should be done in the camera. It just proves my contention that IP is not quite ready for prime time.

From my experience, that's the software, not the computer.

What encoder? Aren't megapixel camera outputs already encoded?

The spec says 512x492? I'm not even sure that works out to 420TVL. Every analog camera we use states 768x494, but the resolution rating varies from 470TVL to 540TVL, depending on the manufacturer. We never worry about the TVL rating of any cameras we use. We've found that there is little, if any, difference in resolution between brands and models that have 768x494 pixels. Except for a very few situations where we do choose lower resolution cameras, that is all we buy. We evaluate each camera's ability to handle specific tasks and lighting situations. We often test cameras in multiple applications: over table games, the reels of slot machines, overviews of gaming areas, entrance doorways where there is a high amount of back lighting and dark areas to see how well the AGC performs. We also have other specific criteria: size is one; all of our indoor cameras are integrated domes or installed in domes. Since we have Pelco DF-5 in-ceiling and pendant domes in many areas, we can't use a standard-size box camera. We use either mini box cameras like the Pelco C10CH series or their predecessors (CCC13xx series) or cubes like the Ikegami ICD-505. In new installations, we often install integrated domes like the Ganz ZC-D5000 series. It depends on the application. Some applications require defeatable AGC and the Ganz domes don't have a switch so we go back to the DF-5's with a seperate camera. Every so often a manufacturer, distributor or integrator approaches us with a new and/or unique camera and we will obtain a demo and put it through its paces. If it works better than what we currently use and is cost-effective, we will buy the new product. Believe me, that doesn't happen very often!

What protocols will they handle?

We have switched completely to compression fittings for mini-coax but still use standard 3-piece crimp fittings for RG-59. The compression fittings we use for mini-coax are West Penn CN-CSBNC-25 and they cost less than $2.25 each; not $10.00. The tools were a little pricey - $75, but well worth the cost. We have found that compression fittings hold the cable much better on mini-coax. Standard 3-piece fittings pulled off too easily. As far as we are concerned, twist-on fittings suck.

No camera system works as well as the human eye and probably won't in our lifetime. That said, I don't see a serious problem with the picture you posted. Perhaps you are just being too picky? Outdoors areas are notoriously difficult to get optimum pictures under every lighting condition because there are just too many variables like dynamic range (the difference between the lightest and darkest areas), reflections, etc. This is a problem that we run into often in the casino and before, when I worked for an integrator. Customers often expect to see video like they see on TV shows. That's just not possible because we don't use $100,000 cameras and can't control the lighting like they do in production situations.

The wind loads would be a serious problem. Most domes are not able to handle them. It would be the equivalent of a Category 4 hurricane.

That's probably about the best you can get. We have experimented with a number of cameras trying to get a decent picture under high backlight conditions and there doesn't appear to be a happy medium with any of them. We tried the Panasonic WV-CP484 and a Dallmeier, among others, and the results were unspectacular. I don't think any camera can handle that wide a range of light and dark areas well.

Sorry for the confusion, there is something wrong with the post. It keeps putting extra words in.

Darned if I know but the picture is stretched horizontally. Does it look that way on your DVR's monitor? Maybe you have to run your computer on a standard resolution like 1280x1024 or 1024x768.

Turn off the wide screen. The aspect ratio of the picture is wrong, causing the subject to look short and fat. Note the sample image is 16:9 when it should be 4:3.

I think your biggest problems would be finding a camera that would be able to withstand the wind load of the aircraft in flight and getting the installation certified by regulatory authorities (FAA in the U.S.).

That is not recommended. It is not good practice to run low voltage copper and high voltage wiring together in the same conduit. In many places it is illegal per building code and otherwise, it is dangerous and can expose users to electric shock hazards. The only cable that can be safely run in the same conduit as high voltage is fiber. Possible, but not likely. Street lighting is often quite high voltage, 440-480VAC and you would have trouble finding a camera power supply that would handle that input voltage. Also, some street lighting is switched by a common photocell controller that runs multiple lights. Your cameras would then turn on and off with the lights.

It depends on your definition of "Intensifier Technology". That name is actually a misnomer since it infers the camera uses an image intensifier like the starlight scopes the military uses. That is not the case. But there is at least one company that does and its camera does not suffer the lower frame rates. Darned expensive, though! http://www.toshibasecurity.com/products/prod_camera_detail_ik1000.jsp# Toshiba IK-1000 Starlight Color Video Camera MSRP: $10,500.00 "The IK-1000 achieves sensitivity and dynamic range in excess of current generation night-vision cameras and provides full color at 30 FPS in near total darkness. " * .00025 lux minimum illumination - Reproduces full color, full motion images in starlight conditions * 50 dB signal-to-noise ratio - Provides industry-leading sharpness in all light conditions * Electron Multiplying CCD (EMCCD) - Generates new electronics dramatically increasing sensitivity at very fast speeds without the common readout noise of traditional CCDs * Adaptive recursive noise reduction - Reduces CCD output buffer noise in low light conditions * Peltier cooled CCD - Maintains constant temperature of CCD to maximize low light performance * Unlimited distance range * Compact and maintenance free design

This whole argument is entirely moot! 470/480TVL, 520TVL, 540TVL or 550TVL, the point is they are essentially the same and the slight extra resolution won't make one bit of difference in the recorded or monitored picture. I defy anyone to demonstrate a difference in either a recorded picture or a monitor's picture between them. We've tried them all and have yet to be able to clearly identify the suits of cards on a table! That's not to say there are no differences between cameras of different manufacturers but all else being equal, the differences between the four resolutions is essentially undetectable. Now if you want to bring megapixel into the equation, then there is a difference.

Sorry, I can't find it through any of my connections (no pun intended). I suggest contacting a CCTV camera manufacturer for specs.

Please clarify what you want. Do you want the plug that attaches to the lens cable or the socket that is part of the camera?

Or not, if you buy certain brands like NVT.

Not the best design for many elevators since it appears to require a fairly large hole in the ceiling.

The company only has to comply with the "Data Protection Act" if they are located in Great Britain. Other areas of the world have different laws. In most of the U.S., it is not even necessary to post a sign saying that cameras are being recorded unless the audio is also being recorded. "The US First Circuit Court of Appeals held that video surveillance cameras do not violate employees' right to privacy if they are not concealed. Workers should not reasonably expect to have privacy from supervision by superiors if they work in an open area. Video surveillance systems that do not record sound do not violate the first amendment. The National Labor Relations Board concluded that hidden cameras should be included in labor negotiations because they involve privacy issues." - Monthly Labor Review, July, 1997 "The federal law prohibits anyone from recording images of an individual's "private areas" without consent when that individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Every state in the U.S. now has some legal prohibition of video voyeurism or invasion of privacy, except Iowa and Washington D.C. About half of these statutes actually make this kind of video recording a felony. Many have an even harsher punishment for distributing such videos." - Video Voyeurism and Surveillance Laws in the Workplace by Sharon MacDonald So basically, video cameras that do not record audio are legal almost anywhere in the U.S. except in bathrooms, changing rooms and a few other areas where people would expect privacy; and even there, may be legal if the video itself is not used for illegal purposes.

B&H Photo Video has them: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=search&A=search&Q=&ci=0&sb=ps&sq=desc&sortDrop=Relevance&ac=&bsi=&bhs=t&shs=Infrared+filter&ci=131&basicSubmit=Submit+Query

That is not the best way to do it since power requires both a "hot" line and a return line to make a complete circuit. The advantage of running 3 conductor cable would be that each camera is on its own fuse, since most power supplies have a common ground for the outputs, but separate fuses for the "hot" wire. The disadvantages would be that you couldn't use 3 wires if the power supply has isolated outputs for each camera and that the common wire still would have to handle the current for both cameras. That means the distance limits for the power wire would have to factor in the current draw for both cameras.