All I see is Geovision Information Here

[rory 0]

Also they started to crash after about 3 or 4 months use (by then we had installed quite a few) & their tech support was useless. This put us in a difficult position & we replaced all the units with Geo models.

 

Should have bought some DM's or StoreSafes )

Whoops. alost forgot im in the PC based forum here, ill switch back now ...

 

actually, while im here, anyone used Digivue PC DVR?? Im switching this out for a GE StoreSafe, I dont think I have seen anything quite as bad as that thing before being used for security .... besides bad wiring! Ofcourse maybe it was the fact that it was being used as a DVR and a PC for other stuff....

[baywatch 1]

Also they started to crash after about 3 or 4 months use (by then we had installed quite a few) & their tech support was useless. This put us in a difficult position & we replaced all the units with Geo models.

 

Should have bought some DM's or StoreSafes )

Whoops. alost forgot im in the PC based forum here, ill switch back now ...

 

I'm going back 3 to 4 years & the systems you mentioned didn't exist (at reasonable prices) this side of the water then.

[rory 0]

no prob, i was only kidding .... Prices like you say make a difference for the average user .. DM must be kind of cheap over there though? Its expensive on this side though cause they have to import it I guess ..

 

Thats gotta suck though, changing all those out ....

[Thomas 0]

There are a couple of things about IP cameras that still need to be worked out in my mind.

 

1. Standard API/Port/stream access. Software can capture and record the streams from IP cameras but you're reinventing the wheel. Ideally the camera should be putting out a stream that resembles the RAW format used by high end digital cameras but until a realistic bandwith infratructure is in place that simply isn't feasable. Any IP montioring software is at the mercy of the manufacturers. A single firmware change can lock out someones software. I'm not talking about single manufacturer but all IP cameras.

 

2. Maintance. IP cameras are like any embeded device, and embeded devices get firmware updates from time to time. Managing that isn't going to be fun. Ideally the monitoring software should be able to push the updates but that's not going to happen anytime soon.

 

3. Redunancy. I can take an analogue camera and put a T-end on the end of the co-ax and split the signal off to a DVR and a tape back up. In an ideal world, no DVR would ever crash weither it be embeded or not. We don't live in that world. A multi-million dollar location is going to want redunancy. IP cameras don't offer that yet.

 

4. Networks. In a perfect world a network would never have issues. So far the only corprate network I have never seen get infected is ours and I'm sure it will happen once we add staff beyond a certain point. Network traffic can and is slowly becomming a limiting factor in networks. Access to gigabit systems will help but most of the IP cameras I've seen don't support that speed. Nor do they support IPv6.

 

5. Staff. I'm a tech guy, I cut my teeth on a C64, learned Unix by logging into the UConn mainframes from home. (The admins were pretty nice to those of us wanting to explore.) I know quite a bit about computers in general, but as many of the people in this forum can confirm, I'm still learning about cameras. Most of the staff that will have to deal with and maintan the IP cameras will be IT staff who aren't dumb people but have no idea what f-stop to use for what. Or how lens size affects field of view.

 

There are a few other points but they are minor and I expect they will be cleared up soon.

 

My main point is that analogue cameras are a mature techonolgy. All of thier warts are well known by now. IP cameras is a tech that is still in it's infancy. I'm sure they will be the future but I see alot more enthusasm for them from tech guys then I do security staff. Honestly I see mixed groupings of analogue systems and digital systems probley being the future for a while, and then it all becoming transparent.

[IPSecurityPro 0]

Tom,

 

1.) Very good points and definitely something to consider and stay abreast of and keep educated on.

 

2.) Yes, very true and this is a problem. It will improve in the future and, currently no software ISV or ADP pushes out the firmware, but this will transpire in the future.

 

3.) Most high-end IP cameras have both a network connection and a BNC to go out to a DVR or time-lapse, etc. - also. (Sony SNC-CS3N, for example, but there are many others) - so this is the same point that you made.

 

4.) IP Camera Manufacturers will support IPv6 when it becomes prevalent - this is still early.

 

5.) Everything is a work in progress. IT are early adopters of the technology. It is difficult to train "security guys" (LIKE MYSELF), but they are coming along.

 

I am from the "old school" security industry - and I am NOT a tech guy - but, I see the advancing technology and opportunities.

 

Hybrid installations are the most prevalent and will be for some time to come, but I can name about 30 installation that are entirely IP.....that I've dealt with in just the past month - from banks to Hospitals to School Districts to the Army. It's is a wave that is building!

 

DVR_Expert_Australia,

 

Is a cost of $1200-1500.00 (US) per (10) cameras that expensive. Most packages are in this range. (or $120-150.00 per channel as you DVR guys say )

 

"More functionality and inherrent intelligence" - how you ask...

 

...by putting a lot more of the computing at the camera level you are freeing up your server to do different more intensive processing. IP Cameras will improve and will offer facial recognition features (in the future), auto-PTZ and object tracking, etc. - freeing up the server to perform pre and post processing like querying a database of the faces, etc. The more that is done at the camera level - the more power the NVR (or DVR) will have. The IP Cameras and NVR system becom true IP devices on a network and are remotely configurable, manageable, etc. No need to clip and paste and say DVRs do this too. We know, but can they do it through IE in one common interface/browser - NO - it is usually a remote dial-in module...not an integrated solution.

 

Software thrown on a PC/server and sold as a "black box" is now a DVR. We are on the same page, yet have different opinions.

[IPSecurityPro 0]

One more point. Bosch - for example - has an auto-track feature on their analog cameras that is built into their firmware that works with their Bosch cameras.

 

DVR modules (like auto PTZ or object tracking or facial recognition) usually work with specific cameras (usually the Manufacturers own) not all cameras on the market. IP Security Video Software is open and non-proprietary, in nature and works with all IP cameras and CCTV cameras. Granted, not all software is non-proprietary - some companies sell their own encoder/decoders, servers and cameras. Others just sell software that suppors all of the Manufacturers products. This is powerful to not be in bed with ONE specific Manufacturer and be a network device that can interface with any IP device on any network.

 

Anyway....you get the point.

[XXX 0]

Guys...there are tons of other applications out there:

 

D3Data's (Network Video Management (NETVM) product)

Milestone's XProtect product line

IPConfigure

Livewave

Broadware

INETCam, and on and on and on...

 

research some other alternatives.

 

What is the best option for an existing company to generate recurring revenue through "hosting" video for clients? Does this exist yet?

[XXX 0]

Software has come a long way and continues to improve daily. I have seen Wizards intuitive enough for novice users to interact with. Price is comparable to a DVR with more functionality and inherrent intelligence.

 

Remote Verification of alarm signals and video monitoring is the power also. Software can easily integrate video servers and every current ISV or ADP of the major players (like Axis, Sony, Panasonic, IPIX, IQinVision, Acti, Vivotek, Toshiba, etc.) supports all of their video server models, as well as IP cameras so that you can cross pollinate systems and installations with multiple Manufacturer's products. Video Monitoring can easily be pushed in any country - no Central Station is doing it properly, however, they are using proprietary equipment and it is ridiculous with some of the technologies out there. A mint is there to be made from just a recurring revenue standpoint - just like the mass marketing progrmas in the alarm industry that spurred-up in the late 80s early 90s - yet, with the power to reduce false alarms to almost nil.

 

I am familiar with some of the video monitoring available currently using ozvision product. Not very impressed. Are you knowledgeable on what it would take to do monitoring for clients? We are currently putting together a national campaign for security dealers who want to get into surveillance. I'm obviously very interested in the possibilities.

PM me if you have any leads on further information or contacts in this area.

[Thomas 0]

Anything you can do on your NVR is already implimented in DVR software.

 

1. PTZ protocols are pretty easy to get. With the exception Kalatel, they all have been eager to give out thier protocols. The Bosch auto-track works with any DVR's, just a matter of turning it on.

 

Again, you're citing propritary stuff but so far you haven't managed a single example.

[rory 0]

if you need the PTZ commands for Kalatel, they are normally located at the end of the DVR/Mux Manual actually.

 

Rory

[IPSecurityPro 0]

You integrate your DVR with Dedicated Micros DVIP and then speak to me. Only three companies have gotten an SDK for DMs DVRs prior to the DVIP. This is what you call PROPRIETARY. And there is a HUGE difference between a network VIEWER and a network based application. I've managed many examples, but you haven't been open minded enough to truly "listen". As I have said NUMEROUS times - DVRs have their place and application - and always will, in my humble opinion - but, NVRs have their place, as well and are gaining true market share daily. Just wait until the 1st mass marketed approach hits the streets on a National level (in the United States) and you may see the differences between IP devices and your DVRs.

[IPSecurityPro 0]

XXX - OzVision is another example of Proprietary - in my opinion - you have to use their equipment to accomplish the task. It is definitely not the only option out there. Yes I know of a few products that could be OEM or Distributed or re-sold. Look forward to speaking with you.

 

You could re-sell an existing hosted service where an IP camera is put into a location (small, residential or retail) and the images are FTP to a data center or Monitoring Station (off-site - obviously) and stored remotely. The customer access these images via a browser and gets X amount of storage for a monthly fee (recurring revenue model). Simple, easy to administrate and effect. Accomplish the goal for the consumer and is low cost for the individual/small business. You could even package the bandwidth sale and "lease" the cameras or have a year or two "ownership" clause built into the customer agreement. And on and on...

 

It does exist...but is not "effective", yet.

[XXX 0]

XXX - OzVision is another example of Proprietary - in my opinion - you have to use their equipment to accomplish the task. It is definitely not the only option out there. Yes I know of a few products that could be OEM or Distributed or re-sold. Look forward to speaking with you.

 

You could re-sell an existing hosted service where an IP camera is put into a location (small, residential or retail) and the images are FTP to a data center or Monitoring Station (off-site - obviously) and stored remotely. The customer access these images via a browser and gets X amount of storage for a monthly fee (recurring revenue model). Simple, easy to administrate and effect. Accomplish the goal for the consumer and is low cost for the individual/small business. You could even package the bandwidth sale and "lease" the cameras or have a year or two "ownership" clause built into the customer agreement. And on and on...

 

It does exist...but is not "effective", yet.

 

I agree, the Ozvision is in my opinion a bad implementation of a good idea. I have to give them credit for getting thier product online with some of the larger monitoring stations though.

[IPSecurityPro 0]

Yeah, but any decent idea can work with enough money dumped behind it and enough marketing. They do have some participating Central Stations, but when another "open" solution comes out they will lose the market share they have been trying to gain. We shall see.

[rory 0]

arent they only dial up?? I just never could see OzVision as a product for a video monitoring station, for personal use yes, but in the US, there are other telco alternatives like the kalatel RSM-1600/2000 for example, which I have installed for clients that didnt want internet connection, like 3 years ago, now its just gotta be broadband. Or am I missing something, does Ozvision have Internet now ..? Also, are they still made in Israel?

 

Rory

[cctv_down_under 0]

Ideally the camera should be putting out a stream that resembles the RAW format used by high end digital cameras but until a realistic bandwith infratructure is in place that simply isn't feasable

 

Agreed!!

 

 

i also agree with our learned friend mr IP, but the fact remains most of those features you speak of are already prevalant on some very good PC DVR's one thing to rememebr is that no matter what features, no matter what scale, no matter what abilities, the end result is the systrem must be able to provide evidence, i still feel I.P cams are more succeptable, I am confused with your pricing is that a pricing for software or hardware, most I.P cams...the good ones..not cheap crapola that I haev seen are at least $600 US Minimum, then you have to pay per input for software, ...why when you can build a DVR for under $2000, US and then pay $420 US for a good cam and lens combo and the extra $30 US if you really need a web server, This is why i call it hype because there is a wave growing and I.P is being sold as the latest and greatest..yet there is very little it can dot hat DVR cant, object tracking is already available as well as licence plate recognition, and you dont even have to pay eny extra for the tracking.

 

Also Bosch sells a box that deos motion tracking with any PTZ and is reads it fromt he screen pixel changes.

 

I am familiar with some of the video monitoring available currently using ozvision product. Not very impressed. Are you knowledgeable on what it would take to do monitoring for clients? We are currently putting together a national campaign for security dealers who want to get into surveillance. I'm obviously very interested in the possibilities.

PM me if you have any leads on further information or contacts in this area.

 

Geovision has the best model I have ever seen for control room software around, but limiting it only to Geo is an error.

Just wait until the 1st mass marketed approach hits the streets on a National level (in the United States) and you may see the differences between IP devices and your DVRs.

 

Agreed, but you havent mentioned anything that is available that DVR can not do and yes...the majority from a browser interface, i think you must have loked at some poor quality DVR products, there will be many advancements, I must say the Biderictional link that Bosch has is awesome, how cool to back focus the cameras over a network, but how long will it be till some DVR mob writes that in as well... truth is that anything available in I.P is already available in good DVR products, but without the succeptablility to bandwidth or network failure.

 

You could re-sell an existing hosted service where an IP camera is put into a location (small, residential or retail) and the images are FTP to a data center or Monitoring Station (off-site - obviously) and stored remotely. The customer access these images via a browser and gets X amount of storage for a monthly fee (recurring revenue model). Simple, easy to administrate and effect. Accomplish the goal for the consumer and is low cost for the individual/small business. You could even package the bandwidth sale and "lease" the cameras or have a year or two "ownership" clause built into the customer agreement. And on and on...

 

Agreed, but this is already available and has been for some time, once again you rely on the network connection for the result, Epic did this and so did many other companies, but why when there ar products that will conect to you, yourself, and when they do they simply SMS you to let you know that video was stored at the remote server, hell a cash sale transation can send video to rmeote control room software, there are many control rooms out there now that use the Geo and allow for video files to be transmitted on....lost objects, left objects, POS data, wired relay etc etc, this technolgy already exists.

 

i like the geo because it has despatch server that can send to another control room on network failure and because its a DVR it can buffer, it can also check the link between all DVR's using a heart beat.. but this is the one point that IP should have been making....it ONLY works with Geo.. htis is where I.P will be strong...with these packages, but they still need refinement..and the people who sell them still need to inform the customer of the inherant limitations.

[XXX 0]

arent they only dial up?? I just never could see OzVision as a product for a video monitoring station, for personal use yes, but in the US, there are other telco alternatives like the kalatel RSM-1600/2000 for example, which I have installed for clients that didnt want internet connection, like 3 years ago, now its just gotta be broadband. Or am I missing something, does Ozvision have Internet now ..? Also, are they still made in Israel?

 

Rory

 

The deal with Ozvision is you could tie it together with your alarm system so that in an event the monitoring station would receive burg signals from the alarm account and then a video popup would show video from the video account at the same time. Needs two phone lines to work properly. Must have a participating monitoring station to use it that way.

Not sure if they have internet. Don't think so. FYI, they are integrating modules into some DSC panels.

[XXX 0]

DVR, tell us more about how the Geovision monitoring station stuff works and is working. Do you have any examples of companies that are offering it?

[XXX 0]

I see ezcctv is doing something along those lines.

[cctv_down_under 0]

It is quite complicated indeed, i will give you a brief outline, but like I said I.P should have been arguing this point...Geo is proprietory, so only works with Geo.

 

 

Each system can be linked to a montioring station or software, there are many out there, and although many companies offer live video feeds Geo is very different, it uses two other programs, 1/ Desptch server.. this is the link before it feeds to a monitoring station, it is like the buffer station, it decides which control room is closest and determones if it is indeed online, therefore if one station is down it can send to another one. 2/ Heartbeat, this is the link between all Geo syetems, it polls each one to make sure it is active and it can decide what data is sent to the control room.

 

Each time a person registers on the Geo control room his details are entered into the system, therfore the controller can see vital information as to the system link as well as things like cameras that fail end reports etc etc.

 

Upon events that are features in the Geovision or upon actual circuit closure like alarms the Geo can send the video to the despatch server and then to the control room.. the advantage of the Geo is it not purely driven by closure of circuit or motion (although it can be) it can be also set to send video on certain features.. for example, you may wish to mark your safe as a non moveable item, so if it moves then video is fed to the control room, the operator of this control room then through direct automation generates an sms message through the SMS serevr to notify the owner that the safe has either been accessed or removed, the operator can speak directly to the site and scare off intrudors or can move any cameras with protcols to get a closer look, the main thing is that any damage done to the dvr will not affect your offsite recording leading up to this event.

 

The major advantage of the Geo is that it is not limited to this singular event, it can be set for the following events..

1/ Any camera cable that is cut can transmit a failure to the control room

2/ Any failure to arm the system can set an alert and you can then arm the system remotely

3/ It can be latched to any other output so a brake in in another state can set of alarms at your head office.

4/it also has features that allow it to detect certain scenarious of when to send the video, like a suitcase left at a site or a particular transaction that occurs on a premise..

 

hay everyone knows i love Geo, but I dont think there is anyone in this forum that believes I do not also sing praise of any other good products so althought I sell geo it is indeed the best and most detailed unit on the current market, but as soon as another product comes along that is indeed better I will be the first to sing its praise.. I have been a very successfull manager in my time and a lot of it has come down to my ability to ascertain good products from bad but also from my honesty...luckily I distribute some of the best products on the market, but even if I were selling caropola I would admit it freely, the lucky thing at the moment is that I am not!

Edited January 17, 2005 by Guest

[Thomas 0]

You integrate your DVR with Dedicated Micros DVIP and then speak to me. Only three companies have gotten an SDK for DMs DVRs prior to the DVIP. This is what you call PROPRIETARY. And there is a HUGE difference between a network VIEWER and a network based application. I've managed many examples, but you haven't been open minded enough to truly "listen". As I have said NUMEROUS times - DVRs have their place and application - and always will, in my humble opinion - but, NVRs have their place, as well and are gaining true market share daily. Just wait until the 1st mass marketed approach hits the streets on a National level (in the United States) and you may see the differences between IP devices and your DVRs.

 

We are listening. Now please listen to us.

 

1. I won't speak to Geovision but I will speak to our product. We are a network based app. We were designed to be a network based app. Multiple units connect to each other, SQL runs to store and transfer info. IIS handles web page (and if you want SMTP and FTP). What more does one need to have a network based app?

 

2. The example you cite is an NVR system.

 

3. The tech will be there one day. The question is, how is what an NVR does differant then a well designed DVR? Every proposal I've seen has just been moving it to a black box on a network.

[cctv_down_under 0]

Tom, I have to agree with you there.. NVR or DVR it is all the same, they can have the same features and abilities etc..the only advantages I can see with a NVR is...

 

1/ If a control room exists that supports many I.P cam types, that is a massive advantage over having to use one brand of control room.

 

2/ If you have the bandwidth.....HIGHLY unlikely then you can simply plug them into an existing network infrastructure.

 

3/ For small jobs like single camera installs it is actually cheaper than using a DVR.

 

4/ Cameras are more easily upgraded with Firmware...but a webserver can do this as well.

 

The Disadvantages

 

1/ The HYPE factor has kept the pricing up on these units making them insanely expensive.

 

2/ The is a large risk of network failure and this results in the loss of recordings. (this is pretty crucial)

 

3/ Bandwidth does not allow for high quality images from all cameras (in most situations)

 

4/ I.P cameras are more expensive

 

5/ There is nothing you cant do with a DVR that you can do with I.P.cams

 

6/ I.P. cams can not buffer as much as the DVR can.

 

 

I dont mind I.P's points and to be honest I think we all relaise it will head this way in the future, but in reality they should not sprout off that it si so much better than DVR until they find a way to convince me as to what exactly a NVR does that a DVR cant..as they are both in reality the same beasts.. you just take the transmition to another area, from the cameras instead of the DVR and you run it over ethernet instead of coax...

 

What will happen as these units get better and price comes down is that I guess all I.p. cams will have a HDD inside them, they can then always buffer, web serve and handle remote requests and then if the network fails it will still record... this I see as the future of the security industry, having these cameras with either a HDD or by that time flash memory of a large size and solar power as well as encrypted wireless networking will result in such an amazing beast...the only problem is by the time that arrives..they will sell them in KMART

[rory 0]

Actually, when it comes to video monitoring central station, I have to jump in here, as I actually want to do this on a large scale.

 

Im not going to install PCs or use the users PC for the video monitoring of their cameras, if its a business I could get away with it, but for this application I will have to stick to network server boxes. The idea of the monitoring station would be to install video servers, stand alone little boxes, in the users home, and connect their existing or new analog cameras to them, they may be able to afford just cheap $50 cameras, some will be able to afford the higher end ones, and some may want a DVR locally as well or have all this already.

 

None the less, we need scalability for hundreds/thousands of cameras and accounts, otherwise the business is not worth going into. As with alarm systems and monitoring, we want ultimate stability on the client side, and so PCs are out of the question, we dont want to ever have to go back to the users location unless absolutely neccassary. We dont want to have to build and test PCs, and dont want to have to do maintenance on PCs, we will have too much to do as it stands. At our end, using a PC is not an issue as we can control that part of it ourselves, and the proper enviroment and maintanance required can be undertaken by ourselves.

 

Now, I know where everyone is coming from, right now im coming from alarm monitoring central stations and so this is what we want for our thousands of clients. I posted a request for this in the IP section (I think) and provided what would be required to make it work. Hence IP video servers seem like the only and most feasable solution.

 

Most of our existing hundreds/thousands of alarm clients, dont know anything besides MSN, Yahoo, and somehow know how to infect their PCs with everything known to the spyware and worm world to date. Also, a large majority do not have computers to start with, and have no desire to ever use or own one, or only their kids use it for MSN and recieving files ....

 

Business clients I know of do not want to expose their networks to the internet, Firewall or not (Eg. Offshore banks, Jewellery Stores, Banks, Casino, etc, and those that do, use those computers to browse the web and instant message, etc, and will not buy an extra computer unless they can use it. Some will but thats not enough.

 

Time related, we will not have time to build or test PCs, and show the users how to use them, this is a large business so we want to just plug and play, and move on to the next.

 

Price wise, a $400 PC in the US costs an average of $1000 here, and thats just a celeron.

 

So for an alarm & video central station monitoring side of it, for security, stability and scalability, this is why IP solutions are the only feasable way to go, at least in our 3rd world.

 

Edit: I also think the only way to go would be to send video on alarm as well.

 

Rory

[cctv_down_under 0]

None the less, we need scalability for hundreds/thousands of cameras and accounts,

 

Each Control room app can Monitor up to 800 video channels, that doesnt mean you are limited to that amount that is just the total you could run on one application, you can run many applications and then there would be many stations, it is not limited to countries, so if you can not connect to US then you may dump at Australia etc.

 

As with alarm systems and monitoring, we want ultimate stability on the client side, and so PCs are out of the question

 

come on Rory.. dont get me started on this again... you know full well that Standalones are only MARGINALLY more stable than PC's and they do not have uptime reports that PC's do.. Once again... A WELL BUILT PC IS ALMOST 100% AS STABLE AS A STANDALONE AND IS MADE WITH BETTER PARTS.

 

I am first to admit that on average PC's are not built well but that is not my doing... what will you argue when Geo brings out a standalone?

 

Time related, we will not have time to build or test PCs

 

Thats a good point... but you dont have to build them it would be smart to have a distributor that does that for you.

 

Like I said, the strongest past of I.P. is in monitoring stations and I agree with almost all of your points, I think this will be the new future and it beats me why more people are not currently doing this

[rory 0]

 

come on Rory.. dont get me started on this again... you know full well that Standalones are only MARGINALLY more stable than PC's and they do not have uptime reports that PC's do..

 

Im not talking about a DVR, Im talking about a simple little video server box, there is no way a PC is going to be as secure and stable as that, unless it itself is running a windows OS. Same as saying it is as secure and stable as a Cellphone ..! Ever wonder why we use Standalone hardware as recievers for alarms in the central stations? PCs are only there for the GUI part of it. I can agree that linux DVRs are almost as stable as a PC DVR, but to compare it to a kalatel DVR's RTOS and its stability is totally different, as they do not compare, every cheap Linux DVR I have tested has crached, in 3 years i have not had a single Kalatel DVR crash, and I am very good at crashing the linux DVRs ....

 

But either way, lets not get into a discussion on that again please; I want to plug in a small tough little box, like the Axis Servers for example, there are no PCs that size that can accept PCI cards, yet, I have looked around, only the CappuccinoPCs come in at the very small size I want, for a personal computer also, but cant get a PCI card to fit in them.

 

So to be honest I dont care if it is a PC or not, just want a small little device that I can plug and play; hence the video server.

 

As for hardware, Id still have to support the PCs locally, or rely on a local company, which I dont do now, and dont want to do. Relying on other companies is the downfall of most businesses over here, service is just not up to par with you guys in the 1st world .