Kiwi

I've never found this confusing. The "oldest" 8GB of data changes every time it fills up - it's not the same 8GB - it's the "current" oldest data not the "original" oldest data. My AVTech 782 DVR has been on overwrite for months and I can play back a recording made 8 days ago, approximately the time period my 60GB disk can record 4 channels continuously at 7 IPS.

But it does - it erases 8GB of the oldest data at a time, as needed.

Thanks for that info. That last image was just done quickly on a tripod and so is not optimally aimed, but I'm much happier with the result. Most of the muddiness is gone and it's now acceptable for the task. I need to build a new outdoor housing for this configuration as the one I have is too short. As another point of reference to those interested, below is a link to an IQeye 755 5 MP camera aimed at Mt Taranaki, located elsewhere on this island. If you are familiar with the commands you can fool around a bit with the image request parameters. http://taranakivista.gotdns.com/still.html?ds=2?width=2400?height=1600?mode=0?from=appletvid.html Thanks all to those who posted comments and suggestions!

Yeah, I looked closer at the lens construction and the entire assembly of elements moves when you change front focus, so in effect it *is* changing the backfocus, so adding shims is not any different. These lenses have no infinity marking or stop - they are simply adjustable over a fairly long range. For those not familiar with the Arecont 3130 camera there is no built-in adjustable backfocus which makes it a PIA for setting up conventional lenses. They provide only a single .5mm shim and 5mm C-mount adapter for each of the day and night lens mounts. I've installed a pair of 16mm machine vision lenses, these are high-quality and have a manual iris but are not "megapixel." They both needed 1mm worth of shiming to get the focus infinity setting focused, leading me to believe Arecont intentionally set the CS flange face 1mm under the spec of 12.52mm. I'll take it up to the house today and test it and post the results later. EDIT: Here's the latest image. 16mm lens, f5.6 at 2048x1536 http://tinyurl.com/2wckan

Thanks for taking the time to comment. Actually the current use of this camera will be for a webcam as I don't have a suitable security application at the moment and can't resist taking advantage of the view at my parent's house. The only other lenses I have for it are 16mm with manual iris - a bit too long for the view. As the two lenses mount adjacent to each other, there is a limit to overall diameter and there is not an auto iris output on the camera. This was Arecont's response: I guess he wasn't familiar with the lens they sold me (no iris) and it seemed like a generic answer. However, based on this and what securitysys mentioned, I've installed the 0.5mm-thick shims and will have the unit back in service tomorrow. I'm hopeful that perhaps the backfocus on this lens is critical to matching visible with IR focus. I'll post results when available, meanwhile I've taken a photo with my Canon 3MP p+s camera for reference. http://tinyurl.com/32vfyf EDIT: Here is the latest live image with shims. There is a definite improvement. http://tinyurl.com/2ew5ug

As it happens these particular 4mm Arecont CS lenses have lots of focusing range and so don't need the shims. I certainly agree however, all other CS lenses I've tried will not reach infinity without the shims. I can approach the correct focus from either side so I'm sure that's not the problem. Also you can see in the image many objects are in focus, just IR-rich objects are not, such as trees, white buildings, and the horizon. These lenses have no iris, although in my experience having one helps (via extending depth of field,) but doesn't directly solve the IR focus problem. My feeling is that either these are poor quality lenses with poor IR characteristics, or Arecont have not sufficiently filtered out IR on the color side camera sensor. To some extent I've seen similar effects on some normal color video cameras, but I didn't expect Arecont to sell me a camera and lens system that doesn't work well in daylight. I have sent Arecont support an email - I'll post their response when it arrives. I'll also post the same scene using a normal point-and-shoot camera in a day or two.

Yep, that's the issue on the daylight image. The focus is as best as I can get it. It seems that the daytime IR filtering is not that good, and/or the lens IR focus shift is high. The night image is about what I expect - it's just there for comparison as it has the same lens. The distant lights are out of focus though - same IR focus shift issue. I would have hoped the quality would be as good as I could get with a 3.0 MP point and shoot. Yep, that's Hawkes Bay in New Zealand. Thanks for the posts so far!

The static IP you refer to is the DVR internal address I assume. Clearly if you had a static *internet* IP than you don't need DDNS service. Did you get a router with a DDNS feature? That would almost for sure work, but then disable the DVR DDNS.

Any chance you set up the same DDNS update client in the router? In my case I didn't realize I had both going and as a result the AVtech DVR showed many failed attempts in it's log. If you can't fix it and don't have a local PC to do the job you may have to pay for a static IP, if offered by your ISP.

Yes, I get RTO. I haven't used that parameter before, what does that tell us?

As a reference point, on my 782 the Video Server E application indicates average network speed is about 1860 kbps when viewing live video. A 5 MB download takes 27 seconds, about 1520 kbps. I don't think there is anything wrong with your system. I can't see any reason why the network hardware speed should necessarily be the limiting bottleneck - it could be the DVR processor for example.

I hope I didn't mislead you - 12mm refers to the mount thread not the focal length. The lens that is closest to what you want (as best as I can read it) is: http://tinyurl.com/2ezonz with 150 degree view

Can't you just buy the same lens that other guy used from Range Video? It looks like a standard 12mm mount to me and it should work fine. The problem encountered in the other forum unscrewing the original lens might be caused by glue in the threads that was used to keep the focus from moving. Might take some careful persuasion. Have fun..

Given the generous space available in the mailbox newspaper slot you could use two true day/night box cams with approx 8mm (varifocal) auto iris lenses. I've had good results with the JVC camera in my sig below and it's only ~US$209. That will fit a budget of about $300 per cam, and give you 24-hr utilization. Otherwise a monochrome box cam will cost 2/3 that but only work at night. Monochrome board cameras could be had for <$80 each but I think are not going to give you the quality you expect. The challenge lies in building these cameras into the mailbox space such that they are well-hidden and also easily adjusted in-situ for precise angle, elevation, focal length, and focus. Depending on whether you care if your neighbors know about your little "project," it's useful if the camera assembly could be quickly installed and removed as a plug-in module. Perhaps others have better ideas but I have used the glass from 35mm SLR camera filters (such as a 55mm neutral density) as a stealthy window. Lastly, you need to be careful to shield glare from the streetlight, and sunlight if applicable. A lip around the window to keep rain off is helpful too. I'm not a pro either - just a home user. Been working on my system casually for years, an interesting and practical hobby.

You could measure the 12 VDC power pin at the hard disk for interest - it should be boosted and regulated from the input voltage to well within .5 V of 12 if the DVR was designed correctly. I'm suspecting the most likely cause for this problem is that the disk platters inside the hard drive are getting a bit of condensation on their surface in the morning which makes the heads stick and therefore the drive is failing to start. I've seen this happen years ago when drives were "big" and I don't think any hard drives have ever been completely sealed - there is always a small vent and any internal desiccant would already be saturated.

Big kudos for documenting the situation so well - really beats the one-line questions often posted! I agree, the mailbox is a great location for a couple of cameras. You could use small monochrome board cameras that will really only work at night but are significantly easier to hide and weatherproof, to say nothing of cheaper. A pair of cameras with 3.6mm lenses under the front overhang of the mailbox will give you about 160 degrees total view into the street. It would be even better to get cameras under the streetlight across the road if possible. You might want another camera or two with longer focal length pointing down the street each way to try and ID a license plate or at least a general shape of the vehicle. For wiring I would use CAT5. With video baluns, each CAT5 run will have enough wires for two cameras. With the street lighting at night the DVR's motion detection may not work so well, so plan on recording continuously.

Again, clearly the DVR has a switching power supply (you can hear it) as every modern device does. There is no internal "voltage drop" to the hard disk, it's all regulated to whatever it needs to be. If the incoming power is within spec, the only thing left is excessive inrush current to the HD. You could try a laptop drive, I'll bet that'll work just fine.

It sounds to me like the DVR's internal switching power supply can't handle the startup current required by the hard disk, that's why it makes that noise. If your 12V supply voltage at the DVR is within spec (whatever that may be) during this startup period then I would suggest trying a different brand of hard disk.

Well, it's not Costco's fault that it's not set up correctly! It will work once you find the right settings. I would first put the DVR on a static IP instead of DHCP, it's just easier: IP: 192.168.1.100 Gateway: 192.168.1.1 (.65 or .254, or whatever it is for the router itself, not clear from your text) Mask: 255.255.255.0 Find the LAN firewall settings in the router and apply the DMZ setting to the host with static IP of 192.168.1.100. That allows any external port to access the DVR once a connection is established. Direct external port 80 to internal 192.168.1.100 port 80 (usually called a virtual server). That allows the initial connection. (Be sure your router does not respond to an external port 80 for getting to the admin interface otherwise you will have a conflict. Normally not a problem.) If you can find your current assigned dynamic internet IP, test from outside your home using that address to prove things so far. Then add the DDNS settings: DNS: 192.168.1.1 (or .65 or .254, your basic router address as above) etc. The server log in Video Server E (general) should soon show that DDNS update was successful. Test again outside your system using the host name you selected. Once it works set a better password on the DVR admin account. Let us know how it goes in case you need further help.

If you buy a normal aspect ratio monitor (4:3 I think,) it should work. Either a 1280 x 1024 or 1024 x 768 native resolution. I don't think the world of PC standards has changed. All IBM-compatible PC's boot at 640 x 480 since VGA was invented in 1987, so the monitors have to deal with that resolution until the 32-bit video driver loads. That isn't the problem, it's the clarity (or lack of) resulting from the monitor up-converting to its native resolution. Borrow a monitor and try it. yep, 8-tracks were even found down here...

Any modern "VGA" monitor should work at 800 x 600, it's a VESA standard resolution. What you might be thinking is that the native resolution of most decent-sized current LCD monitors is greater than that, so it will not be quite as sharp when it re-maps the 800 x 600. However, you should try it. I think it will be fine.

I run an NTSC system at home in a PAL country, the worst of everything but I already had the cameras. 1) there is no connection between supply voltage and video type. Assuming you are monitoring off the TV output you will get a PAL signal so you need a multisystem TV. 2) without doubt, but likely cheaper to buy the multisystem TV, unless you have more than one monitor. Thankfully, all our TV's here are multisystem. 3) the main issue is how you will use the system. If needed can you provide evidence from the DVR as a data file, which normally doesn't care about such things? Oh, I should add that the PAL cameras will need to be internally synced, not off an 24 VAC 60hz line if applicable.

It depends on the configuration of the DSL modem. Usually the modem does the login to the ISP, gets an internet address (which is fixed in your case) and provides router address translation functionality to a separate local area network range like 10.1.1.x or 192.168.1.x. Set the DVR to a static IP in the range and forward the required port(s) (eg 80) to that local DVR IP. Indicate the router and DVR brand if you need more help.

Driver? Are you using "video server E" as a client with the username/password admin/admin pointed at the IP you set for the DVR, and on the same network?

Identifying an unknown individual appearing in a 25-foot wide scene sounds pretty optimistic to me. Total darkness makes it even harder unless you want to blow the whole budget on one camera. Can you not restrict the location of the person to a narrower field? Can you replace the fluorescent light in the second case with a halogen one to make it more useful with a monochrome or true day/night camera? If you expect a reasonably-good playback image of the DVR you need to put in the highest-possible quality video. The lossy compression used in DVR's turns mediocre images into useless images.