tesc_cctvpro

I think it worth repeating! No solution is a best fit solution in ALL Cases. The only motivation behind trying to play one technology against the other could be for commercial gain. From a technicians view the more tools, the more solutions available - the better. Analog, IP, HDcctv are all tools in the box. Each can be used where appropriate. We should never try to force fit a technology to a specific application. Let the application define the solution. Hddctv is no easier to install than existing systems, which will still be around for a long time. The DIY market represents 25% of the total market in the US. The UK has moved to regulate CCTV, the USA has a well evolved system of certification for VSS Technicians. Of course anybody can install a cctv system - but not anybody can do it right! Just as anybody can service an automobile in their backyard. If the only criteria a customer is using is "price" then the customer is not educated. Customer education is a very significant part of "marketing". If the situation is as bad as you describe - then the industry is not succeeding in customer education. Consider students who attend CCTV training - they have been doing installs for years, but after the training they meet with frustration. Frustration arises because they suddenly realize that they cannot do the Job properly - they suddenly realize that they don't have the necessary tools to do a proper Job. Oscillators, probes, etc. Before the training they where getting by without those because they where not doing it right! It is necessary to focus on the foreseeable trends, but prudence demands consideration be given to the thousands or millions of existing installs running on coax. The IP explosion has been somewhat delayed due to hesitance by many existing customers to underake the "forklift upgrade" - there is a huge market represented by the number of existing installs.

Your supplier would be correct. The ultimate displayed resolution would depend on the entire system. Camera, DVR and Display Unit. At this point 4CIF is about the highest capacity DVR, and only until very recently have we started to see HD capable monitors outside the professional CCTV arena. If you are purchasing anything above 480TVL for use with DIY or consumer grade hardware, you are likely wasting your money. I am confident that when placing a 480TVL and 580TVL camera alongside one another on your DVR you will see no perceivable difference between the two - because the system will max out at 480TVL - if you are even getting true 480TVL.

I am posting with sensitivity , as i hope not to appear promotional. The question directly asked for a chinese card. (1) Hikvision (2) Hanbang (3) Dahua The Hikvision card is well reputed and used worldwide, in fact I think they have offices in the US. Hanbang has been developing DVR cards for close on 16 years. I represent dahua, which is better know for their standalone DVR's, but of late have developed a nice Hardware Compression card. Incidentally we prefer using it with the digivision/netvision software mentioned by another poster here. I personally would not look beyond these manufacturers for DVR cards. I would like to mention that the entire Chinese Miracle from the 80's through to very recently where all built on Chinese Technology - in a market that was virtually inaccessible to western companies. Once you start looking beyond the top 3-4 players in any Chinese industry though, you may be looking for trouble.

Of course after rereading your position survtech, I would agree 100% My stance is consistently that of "no one size fit's all". While it is not viable to have one megapixel camera covering multiple gaming tables, there are obvious benefits to having one megapixel camera replace one analog camera. But indeed - Megapixel, wether HDcctv or IPcctv will not be a best fit in ALL Cases. I do not envisage the total demise of analog for some time to come.

Thanks for the views survtec. I think the situation applies in ALL Cases - as it's purely mathematical. A proper response to your question would demand a brief mention of the classification of surveillance goals. viz - - General Observation - Forensic - High Detail. Regardless of what camera you are using - for general observation you will need about 60pixels per meter of horizontal area, for forensic detail 120pixels, and 240pixels for high detail - as would be required at a gaming table. The pixel requirement doesn't change. So from a factual point of view a camera with 320 horizontal measure is going to cover less horizontal field of view than a camera with 1080 horizontal measure. Thats pure maths. one 1080H camera will cover the same area as approximately 4 cameras if we are looking at general surveillance. Make the necessary adjustment for Forensic or High Detail - but it's all purely maths. A 1080H sensor will have a far wider field of view than a 320H camera in ALL CASES.

Indeed video splitters can be used. Make sure to get an amplified one if the distance is of concern.

It's great that we are discussing this. There is no doubt that Megapixel surveillance is the future of VSS. Will it be IP or will it be HDcctv? One thing that we should not forget is that Television is the forebear of CCTV. Closed Circuit Television developed as an offshoot of commercial television. While we where all engaging the transition to IP Surveillance - we overlooked the evolution of the standard television - which has rapidly emerged to HDtv. HDcctv is a natural evolution which would have occurred regardless of IP surveillance. One point worth noting is the recent agreement between the HDcctv alliance and SMTPE. In terms of this agreement - HDcctv has been kickstarted with a highly developed standard set - adopted from the motion picture industry. The kind of resolution we are talking of is nothing new to the motion picture industry. Regarding the challenges facing IP - many are mute points. Megapixel surveillance requires almost 1/3rd the number of cameras to cover a given area than does analog. So we should actually be talking total pixels per system. For example a 4000 pixel requirement at the forensic level would require about 13 analog cameras. 4 Megapixel cameras would get the job done -- but we are still talking about 4000 pixels either way. Indeed the larger image size does increase CPU load, and if we are using H.264 then even more so. The IP surveillance industry has addressed many of these issues though with technologies such as cropping, ePTZ, adaptive mode recording, H.264SVC, Multiple streams and onboard recording. For me there are three core issues which make HDcctv more appealing than IP Surveillance. (1) The ability to re-use the existing cable and power infrastructure when upgrading from analog to Megapixel. (2) The fact that HDcctv will mostly be based on equipment and technologies that we are already familiar with. Many of the network management technologies that have emerged - as cctv is force fitted to IP networks , make the system more complex, more IT in nature. The complexity means numerous more skill sets to be learned by technicians. I don't doubt that some of these technologies may be necessary in the HDcctv field - but generally, i believe - the average technician is going to be more comfortable with HDcctv than IPcctv. (3) Comparing apples with apples, a real time HDcctv camera is already priced up at 1/3rd to 1/5th the price of a comparable Megapixel, realtime IP camera. Of course we also have the benefit of motion picture standards governing more than just pixel counts - but guaranteeing color fidelity, etc. I am not saying that talk of increased bandwidth, storage and cpu processing is undue, just that it should be considered, in relation to the reduction in number of cameras that results, when switching to the wider field of view attained by HD megapixel cameras. The difference between IP megapixel and HDcctv is that IP is expected to handle both encoding and transmission for storage as well as remote access/transmission on the same media. HDcctv will handle storage encoding at a local site and bandwith issues are mostly limited to transmission from the local site when required. IPcctv has tried to address this issue by building onboard storage into the camera itself. This of itself creates additional network and bandwidth issues when we start to look at redundancy. In addition SD card storage doesn't present the same level of usability convenience for live viewing as we would see in a non-network live view of HDcctv. It must also be said that analog will still be a best fit solution for many installs, HDcctv will be a best fit in many cases, and IPcctv is going to be a best fit in others. We need not adopt an either or approach. Brandon Joubert TESC (SA)

The reason for this debate is that for years, US and Japanese manufacturers pushed out 330 & 380 TVL cameras of good quality. Along come the Chinese, Taiwanese, Koreans, etc and start pushing out 420, 540, etc cameras. The simple explanation is that Chinese Manufacturers use "Pixel Resolution" in their specifications. "Pixel Resolution" is not a true resolution measure and only refers to the upper bounds of possible resolution based on the HxV calculation of the CCD. International Convention is that "Pixel Resolution" should not be used to describe the resolution of a camera. One should properly test for "Spatial Resolution" which is device specific, and a very costly test and measures pixels per area e.g. ppi. The key is the number of pixels per given area. (Page, Computer Monitor) Claiming that websites are dishonest based on HxV claculations is erroneous. These sites are quoting 'Pixel resolution". On the common Super Had CCD the effective Pixels are 290K. This equates somewhere between 350TVL and 420TVL (322K pixels) Their figures are mostly correct -- Except that they are quoting maximum possible parameters based on the CCD HxV, which is not the "True Resolution" of a specific camera subsystem. In addition the HxV cannot be used to fault a resolution rating, as DSP technologies such as pixel shift, or "pixel offset" do result in Resolution Boosts. The problem is that we have grown accustomed to a convention -- which uses Spatial Resolution, and we have seen the common adoption of another less accurate measure which uses "Pixel Resolution"

Hope this is not out of line..but we are distributors of the Dahua dvr which was mentioned by another poster. We chose this as a mid to high end offering and suggest you have a look at their website. Mpeg4 vs H.264 , if you're in this debate it's not about image quality. it's a ROI issue regarding quality to storage ratio, and network transmission performance and load. In both these cases h.264 wins. CIF as mentioned will only suffice for "Observation" level surveillance which may be ok for residential or low level purposes. If you at any point will need "Recognition" or "Identification" level then you may want to consider Higher than CIF which is basically a "Pixel Resolution" or just a measure of the image size that can be displayed . Reagrding frame rate which is considered "temporal" resolution you need to strike a balance between the size of image (CIF/4CIF) you need at "real time" with regard to your storage requirement. (4CIF) will result in shorter recording time than CIF, and Network transmission of 4CIF images will place a heavier burden on your network capacity. In the end it comes down to striking the maximum ratio of image size:temporal resolution:Compression Standard:recording time:network capacity for your requirements. Mostly each case will have unique requirements.

I once formed and belonged to a consumer electronics buyers group - we imported directly from eastern factories as a group. Does anybody know if any such group exists for purchasing CCTV equipment from the east. Brandon

I am looking for tips on securing a CCTV system against lightning. embedded DVR, central Power Supply Unit and cameras installed outdoors atop galvanized steel poles. There are many half solutions with no guarantees, is their a definitive , 100% solution?

With regards to bonding....... What in addition to those steps already mentioned is required to be bonded? Also what would you use for earthing equipment, wire or metal straps? Brandon

Thanks Rooney, Exactly what I was hoping for -- examples of what others are doing. Just had another major thunder storm as i am typing here Perhaps third one this week

Thanks Rick -- glad to have found it!

Hi Everybody, I am new to the forum, and firstly like to congratulate those behind providing the forum. I am from South Africa. We do direct imports of goods from the East as well as installations. South Africa is a terribly price sensitive market. I am passionate about learning everything I can, and have read some good information here from obvious professionals. We mainly install embedded DVR systems from a manufacturer which we represent in South Africa, and use UTP cable for all our installations. PC based systems are not our favourites at all..... South Africa moving headlong into the IP generation, and I would like to learn about this field of installations. Brandon South Africa

Ok, So, following good cabling practice will reduce the risk of damge by X%, is their any definitive measure for this. My point is. The risk factor for lightning damage to a cctv system is X%, if I tell my customer to invest a few more hundred dollars on Lightning rods, earth bars, surge protectors, and they ask "so this will protect my system against damage?" --- I have to answer , "no - it may reduce the risk, but there are no guranatee's" , next question is "what are the chances of my system being damaged by lightning?" So. Everything connected to the mains, comes through a surge protector. All video lines are fitted with an inline surge protector, earthed to a earth bar in the control room. each individual camera is fitted with an inline surge protector, eartherd to ground at the camera location. The power supply is fitted with fuse protection for each individual channel, and each cameras power feed is fitted with an individual surge protector, again connected to earth. My understanding is that the power differential tries to balance first within the camera - despite this, and then tries to feed back down the cable to earth. So in addition to the above, all outdoor cameras should be below a lightning rod which is earthed to ground. To be frank -- If I included this in my estimates , and a lot of the work may only be performed by a qualified electrician, I would not win a single bid. Most of my competitors merely exclude this and put a disclaimer about lightning damage in the estimate. While my contracts also stipulate this disclaimer, I don't enjoy the idea of washing my hands when the system , I have installed is damaged.

at $50.00 it doesn't seem that you're looking to protect mission critical systems. if you just want to observe and playback and are not looking at sophisticated options then some chinese cards may work. The problem with chinese cards is they usually find it easy to copy the hardware, but really battle with the software ...... For low budget systems we have used the wave-p cards successfully, I believe they have a US distributor as well. One problem they have is that they don't do thourough software testing before release and upgrading to the latest software can break the system. If you get a software version that works, stick with it.....don't be too eager to upgrade. Another common problem related to this type of request is that it usually comes from a source which also has a budget PC, something along the lines of a via chipset, amd, etc...and these usually cause all sorts of problems with proper DVR cards.

There is absolutely no value in a 32 channel display. Forcing anybody to watch 32 squares on the screen is as good as not watching anything at all. Many studies have concluded that the human brain is unable to process data effectively from even more than a quad display. Most high security applications have dedicated displays per channel, and assign one operator for every four displays. Of course we can't all afford that - but it does underscore the point. You need heavy hardware investment to get a PC to handle 32 channel recording and display and ultimately there is no reward for that. I would tend towards stacking embedded DVR's and using external hardwired alarms to define which cameras need to be observed at any time.

Agree with previous poster. Firstly -- most cameras coming out of china that are labelled 420TVL are not actually so. Secondly, LCD's tend to look worse than a CRT monitor for example. Regarding the 520TVL camera, these high resolution cameras are only as good as your display device. TV's and LCD monitors are not usually able to reproduce that kind of resolution. I think though that none of this explains why the images are clear on the TV, and poor on the DVR display. I suggest that you connect a CRT monitor to your PC if you are using an LCD monitor. If the image is better on the CRT, then it's probably because you are using an LCD monitor - Lcd's don't always give the best surveillance result. If you want to use LCD's then you need to pay attention to the LCD specifications, such as contrast ratio's, and refresh rates. Nothing beats a proper security monitor though, which can handle 500+ TVL resolutions.

My understanding is that all the HC cards are manufactured by Hikvision. They are not big on software and a lot of their cards have software developed by suppliers. Hikvision is an original equipment manufacturer and probably the leading one in China at that. My current supplier comes in at no.3 , so i am familiar with the Hikvision cards as our number one competitor in the embedded DVR market as well. I am very wary of buying HC denoted cards from anybody other than Hikvision, (not that they sell to anybody other than their national distributors) there are many chinese manufacturers making HC cards - if they don't tell you it's manufacturerd by Hilvision, then it's in all probability a copy.

Your supplier needs to send you a special license file. You then replace the existing file in the directory with the password file. I bought a few of these cards as a sample for potential addition to our import range. I wasn't very impressed , never got one working properly and found that after the first splash screen, you find exactly the same software GUI's as being used by other cards such as the v8008a. I would be interested in your views on the card if you get it working. If it is a SKY card , contact skybest directly and ask them for the license file -- I think one of the ladies there is Eileen.

You guys are fortunate. In South Africa we couldn't charge that much. We use a daily tariff, and estimate the amount of days required. If we estimate wrong - we carry the penalty. On average we are looking at a daily rate of about $250.00, many installers are charging less than that.

Passive or Active? On passive side, I will strongly recommend baluns from xxxxxx... very good product and comes with built in surge protector (unlike many who charge extra for them).. How effective is the built in surge protection - as I don't see any path to ground? I install in South Africa, which has a very high lightning incidence, 4-5 strikes per m2 annually in my city. Other areas as high as 13-15 strikes annually. The built in surge protection devices we have used, have never delivered when the bolt strikes!