What would you choose?

[khye 0]

Just wondering what side of the fence people stand on when it comes to the increasing range of CCTV technologies available.

 

What would you consider the ideal way to connect a cluster of 15 -20 cameras back to one central location.

 

The location would be a small town for example, where you have PTZ domes scattered around the town in various locations.

 

Bearing in mind that there are newer technologies available now such as wireless, IP networks, remote access etc what would you use to transmit the video and how would you also have PTZ access to each camera?

 

I know its a pretty broad question , but what would be the most common (or most preferred) method in use today?

 

I have my own ideas but would be interested in hearing other peoples points of view.

 

Cheers!

[Soundy 1]

Seems to me IP would reduce your initial infrastructure costs, assuming there is no existing wiring in place to feed the cameras back to your central location, as it would allow you to use existing internet connections - even from different ISPs - close to each location. The main drawback of this idea would be the varying, and probably often limited, bandwidth available in the different locations.

 

Wireless (RF video, no WiFi) still tends to be quite expensive for good quality, and may have limitations on locations and positioning - you may need repeater antennas in some cases, which would further increase the cost.

 

More "typical" camera systems would have the disadvantage, again, of requiring the cabling be installed, which depending on the area could be a major capital expense.

 

As for which is "preferable", that would really depend more on the exact location and situation... you'd very likely be looking at more of a hybrid system using a variety of the discussed technologies, and quite possibly multiple DVR/server locations.

 

It's hard to say much else, though, based on what you've given - generic questions can only receive generic responses.

[jeromephone 6]

I think the main thing is to keep an open mind. If fiber is avaliable us it if you have to do part of the project with wireless and part with hardwired tec look into the hybrid type of solution. we are looking at adding some cameras to a system and we are encouraging the customer to wait as they are planning on running a fiber backbone down the street in the next year.

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

Wireless (RF video, no WiFi) still tends to be quite expensive for good quality, and may have limitations on locations and positioning - you may need repeater antennas in some cases, which would further increase the cost.

.

 

Though significantly less expensive than trenching generally.

 

Mesh networks such as Azalea Networks also offer additional advantages to city deployments such as wifi connectivity for emergancy personnel like Police, EMTs, and Fire. Gives the cities some additional return on investment and a good upsale for integrators.

 

Take a look at www.azaleanet.com.