jhonovich

Sure, you can sell adds to resellers. Or you can do like NetworkWebCams does with its tests, offer the products for sale yourself. The problem is that advertisers (whether it is the manufacturer or re-sellers) do not want to pay for ads around content that is negative. For example, you do a test of Cam ABC and conclude that the image quality is poor and the software is buggy. Why would a re-seller pay for an ad around that test? Why would an end user click on the ad to buy that product?

Matt, The OP asked about starting a site, doing ISO testing with software analysis and selling advertising around it. I am just providing my knowledge of that market approach. There's obviously significant value about knowing how well a camera works before using it on a job site. Publishing camera tests for lead generation is a very expensive way to get leads. If anyone wants to post public results of ISO testing, software analysis and 'objective' tests, that's great. I'll happy link to them. My gut feel is that anyone who takes this approach will quickly realize that it's a lot of work and not enough matching return to justify continued effort.

The cost of doing the test (i.e., the labor) is generally the most significant. I am assuming that the tester is an experienced integrator who expects to be paid a fair market price and is not simply doing this as a hobby. In such a case, even a short test is going to be minimally $500. The big issue is that even if you give this test away for free you might get 500 page views (more for well known cameras, more if you have a big following). Max reads is going to be in the thousands. The problem is who pays for this? For general Internet advertising the ad rates for 1,000 views runs in the tens of dollars (and that's for a good niche site). The only way I can see covering costs directly from ads is to get the manufacturers you test to sponsor your tests. I think many will gladly do it so they can influence the test results.

selling advertising around camera tests is unlikely to come anywhere close to covering costs e.g., this is why most trade magazines depend on republishing articles from manufacturers as it is too expensive to create original reporting also, once you sell advertising, the manufacturers will push hard to influence your tests and you'll need to be careful not to offend your advertisers in your test results

Here's a legal review from Harvard examining trademark issues and exemptions for media: http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/what-trademark-covers

As long as you are providing information and not selling products, you should have no problem using manufacturer logos. You would be covered as media.

How well will using megapixel cameras with IR illuminators work? It looks like Mobotix markets a solution for this. Are they the best? Can anyone share their experiences with this scenario? Thanks.

I spoke with Geovision. They say they now support PSIA and are working on ONVIF. They did not answer why no VMS currently supports them with a direct integration.

As I said originally, I asked this question to a Geovision employee in person at a show. I just sent an email to a Geovision contact asking for clarification/confirmation. It makes no sense that Geovision is wide open for 3rd party VMS support and that every VMS manufacturer is refusing to integrate with them. I could understand that some would but not even 1? I think we've both made our points. If I hear anything back from Geovision, I will post their reply. Please do the same if you get any additional information.

Embedding an activeX control is not the same as integrating with a VMS. You may be able to access it from some software programs but most users want to be able to connect to the stream from their VMS/DVR/NVR - that's still not possible.

So every VMS manufacturer has decided to block Geovision? Why? And why just Geovision and not also block ACTi, Vivotek, Sony, Panasonic, Mobotix and every other vendor who sells cameras and recorders?

Rory, Are you implying that Geovision's IP cameras are open and that all the other VMS manufacturers have shut Geovision out? I am a little confused about your comment that it's not Geovision's fault.

I asked Geovision this question directly at a show and they told me that they did not. Maybe I am confused or misunderstood them. However, I just looked at Milestone's, NUUO's and QNAP's 3rd party IP compatability docs and none list Geovision - http://www.milestonesys.com/support/technical+support/supported+hardware/supported_hardware/enterprise_pro_basis_plus http://www.nuuo.com/product.php?id=12&sub=3 http://www.qnapsecurity.com/pro_compatibility_camera.asp If Geovision IP cameras do have 3rd party support, it appears to be very limited

With those criteria, there are many cameras that fit. From our Camera Finder, we found 56 matching. Of those, 20 are under $500. This is all using online pricing. Note some models ship with lens, some do not - depends on manufacturer policy. With your specs, there's quite a lot of good products available. The biggest 'brand' included is Sony but ACTi and Vivotek both fit as well as a number of other commonly used manufacturers. Btw, my understanding is that Geovision IP cameras can only be used with Geovision VMS/recorders. Someone let me know if I am wrong about this.

Mike, I am told that perhaps 50% of the exam was on Axis's products and that the test was heavily Axis centric. If you are looking to study Axis products and the Axis 'way', it's probably a good idea. Otherwise not so much. We did a PRO member update on this.

I wouldn't recommend "open source stand alone nvr" Sony offers, I believe, 16 channel VMS for free with their own cameras, much like other IP camera suppliers. That's the cheapest way to go. Also, Luxriot and Milestone Essential are paid but cheap options. I've been pretty impressed with Sony's low cost options.

There's not a lot of outdoor megapixel cameras that are inexpensive (say under $500). In our finder, we only have 6 matches (out of 550 or so cameras). Of those 6, only 1 is a bullet (the Vivotek you mentioned). See: http://tinyurl.com/outdoor-mp-cams For bullets, I don't see anything close. The ACTI ACM-1231 is closest (but significantly more expensive, MPEG-4 only, 8 fps max). If you can consider a dome, GVI has new one that is quite inexpensive, see: http://ipvideomarket.info/camera/gvnc102do

Rory, thanks for the reference to the Dahua DVR0404. That makes sense. I also agree with the challenges with building your own NVR (including the cost of one's time). Have you looked at the Dahua NVR0404? http://www.dahuasecurity.com/product_det.aspx?ID=548&p=cpyzc&p_kind=3&c_kind=285&c_kind2=&c_kind3= It seems to be the NVR counterpart to the DVR model you mentioned. Do you know how the pricing or features compare?

Rory, what kind of "4 channel DVR for $130" can you get? What's the specs on it? hard drive? resolution, frame rate, etc? Can you link or cite a specific product? I am with you that 4 channel DVRs are cheaper but $130 seems too low.

I agree that NVRs are more expensive than DVRs. It's easy to find 4 channel DVRs for under $300 but I can't find any NVRs under $400 (synology being the cheapest I found). This is a plus for using analog/DVRs.

@jhlz, if you are considering megapixel, our camera finder shows that there are 6 MP IP cameras that are rated IP66 or IP67 for outdoor use and are relatively inexpensive of those the only 1 with built-in IR is the Vivotek IP8332 (this might be useful for the back yard) three of these cameras should cost about $1500 total (maybe slightly less) Hope this helps and let me know if you have feedback or questions.

Does the setup work without the immervision lens? In other words, does the audio and video synch without using the immervision lens? I am trying to understand what the source of the issue is - immervision or the VMS.

Who is selling them for 300$ and is that dealer or MSRP? I would be surprised if that was MSRP.

On average, how long does a DVR usually last? 2,4,6 years, more, less? I know it depends on a lot of factors including the manufacturer, quality of the DVR, location of the DVR, etc. However, I was hoping to hear different people's experiences. In my experience, I've seen a lot of DVRs last 5-7 years. Indeed, most of the DVRs I deployed in the 2005-2005 frame are still in service. Is that an outlier?

On the future 300m distance, according to a presentation from Gennum (the chip manufacturer driving this), the greater distance depends on the development of a new Long Reach CODEC that reduces the bandwidth from camera to recorder from 1.485 Gb/s to 270 Mb/s. They plan to use a 'visually lossless CODEC' to accomplish. When and how they will do this still remains to be seen. Also, the cost increase will be important to consider as one of the selling points was that not encoding significantly reduced the cost and complexity of the HDcctv camera. As for the price, we have tracked the price for 2 providers with released or imminent products - SGI Digital and Speco - both HDcctv box cameras are over $1000 MSRP. The recorders are pretty expensive as well. The HDcctv group maintains that prices will come down with volume and scale. Until then, the pricing is not terribly attractive. IPVM members can read the details and a discussion with Todd at: http://ipvideomarket.info/updates/687