WirelessEye

Your video stream is just a bunch of packets to the wireless, interference will cause your frame rate to slow or even stop.

True we don't have bandwidth restrictions on our Wireless Network. At the same time however, when I said 360 continuous pan, I mean that there aren't "pan stops" in the Sony. It is a deal breaker for us if it has pan stops because if we are tracking someone or something and we hit a pan stop, we have to swing the camera back the other way to resume tracking. Since the Sony has a slip ring, there aren't any movement restrictions. The Pano I think can only pan 350 degrees and then it hits a pan stop.

Start using solar to power your cameras. You won't buy 24VAC. Although, I must say flex voltage is cool because then if you have to do a building mounted installation (which we are doing more and more) you can switch from 12VDC to 24VAC power supplies and increase your wire run from the power source without using larger guage wiring. But yes Rory, finding a camera you speak of will be difficult... have you seen the Samsung SCC-C9302? It comes close a few of your specs, but I don't know if it's exview or not...

Nice. The picture looks good, POE is nice and auto tracking is a nice feature (if it works better than Bosch's). Unfortunately it can't pan 360 continuosly and the zoom is limited to 22x. The Sony SNC-RX550N can pan 360, has 26x optical and are flex voltage. Rumor has it the next Sony Ipela's will have 36x optical zoom. Yummy.

Nothing against DVR's, but I just don't get why people use them.... You lock yourself into something that is only mildly upgradeable, if at all. Not only that, but the costs are generally outrageous for anything half way decent. So my question is, why would anyone use a DVR when they can use an NVR which can be infinitely expandable in most cases, and for much less money? Again, not wanting to start a flame, I'm just curious.

Unless you have time to take a class on fiber and how to properly handle and terminate it, I'd sub that part of it out and include the cost in with your quote. Can't help you with a DVR, never used one.

Hater

I believe I could probably help you.... PM me.

We've used both. ONSSI is the best. Bar none.

Aside from being 1 step higher on resolution, how is this different from Covi gear?

I hate 24VAC, all I buy is 12VDC

Your DVR's fps is too low for plate capture. You need somewhere around 7-10fps minimum (in my experience) to make sure you get every angle of that plate. One other option is a multi-megapixel setup that allows you to zoom in digitally after the fact into a wider area for plate retreival. Or you can try Covi's HD setup.

I would NOT use wireless in a hospital. Not only will you most likely encounter interference from hospital equipment, but you might also cause problems on the equipment once you turn on the wireless equipment. Lets also not forget that wireless is for all practical purposes: Microwave. I would't want to be responsible for possibly causing problems with pacemakers.

Only if you don't know how...

I agree, 900Mhz would be best for your situation. Try Avalan.

The IP system (generally a video server) will have a serial output on the back of it. Some have 232, some have 485, some have both.

Indeed. That's military-like capability.

Ask and you shall recieve: http://gpmarketingcanada.com/toshiba/IK1000_Motion_Demo.wmv

The resoltion is the tradeoff for 0.00025 lux, and the reason it's only 8 grand.

You can try to use this guy: http://www.toshiba.com/taisisd/security/products/prod_camera_detail_ik1000.jsp With this lens: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&Q=&is=REG&O=productlist&sku=404292 You'd be looking at quite a bit of money, but oh what a combination...

2 different manufacturers have told to me to use Rain-X. They said one application a year would be neccessary.

Chances are that it'll run fine, but at the same time... you can get a 400w power supply for under $10.00

Actually, to trivially remove cameras from the network, you have to get passed the concrete room. Thinking about changing radio settings to disable the association of the camera? Good luck, you got 1 shot at getting the password right before being disconnected and the encryption changing. I do agree that jamming is real threat to wireless, however jammers only come with certain frequency ranges, so the subject would have to have either know what frequency you are using or have multiple jammers going at the same time-- not to mention the fact that jammers for high frequency (that actually work) are very expensive and their range is very limited.

I don't think you understood the point I was making. Of course you try to keep as many people out with encryption as you can. But once they are in, it is important that they have access to nothing. No cameras, no servers, and no settings. You can implement this type of security in wireless, much as you can in wired infrastructures. We incorporate this into our security, and consider it VERY secure. You can run airsnort all day long on us and all it will do is allow you into our "concrete room".

All true. However, the reality is that encryption is only one way of keeping people out or at least making it difficult for most to get in. You can basically relate wireless to a house that you don't want to be broken into. You put up gates, locks, alarms, etc. to try to keep people out, just like wireless uses ecryption to try to keep people out. Obviously, if someone wants in bad enough, they will get in. It's what takes place once they are "in" that is important. Once they notice they are in an empty room with concrete walls and no doors, they are as harmless as someone who never got in, in the first place.