IP vs. Analog

[dsiadmin 0]

I've been working with a generic analog 16 DVR with 8 cameras running purchased by a long gone admin for several months now.

 

Now I've been tasked to increase our video coverage and after hanging around here and reviewing lots of information, I purchased our first IP camera, a StarDot NetCam SC 5 MP.

 

I've been playing around with it for a day or so and I'm not impressed with the IP realtime image. It has an analog hookup so I tested that on our analog DVR and it looked better than the cheap cameras we have on there now. But on IP with PoE, it's very choppy, even at the lowest resolution.

 

I have a note in to StarDot support to see if I'm doing something wrong.

 

But my questions to the groups infinate wisdom is in general, are analog connections better than IP? And is it a possible bandwidth issue or software configuration that really makes the difference between the two?

 

I have purchase requests on my desk based on setting up an IP video system using various IP cameras with a LuxRiot / Dell PC DVR. I would like to know what I'm getting into before I order more IP cameras. I have to put some cameras on a remote building which would be difficult to run more cable too, but already has ethernet there. Though is does have some dark fiber runs there if that's an option.

 

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

 

Dennis

[jimk816 0]

I had the same situation and opted for the analogue version. We had so many cameras already and I did not have the budget to buy them all over again so stayed with the analogue. You bring up a point, I may reconsider buying IP cameras in the future and use the analogue output until we have the budget to change to a network.

As far as your choppy problem I am not an expert on networking but know bandwith is an issue. The fact that the analogue works better on your camera leads me think its not the camera. I know the frame rate (PPS) and other settings in the DVR can affect this. Did you use the same settings each time ? On our DVR the set up for each camera is in a different menu for IP vs Analogue. Just some ideas - good luck.

[robert 0]

I've been working with a generic analog 16 DVR with 8 cameras running purchased by a long gone admin for several months now.

 

Now I've been tasked to increase our video coverage and after hanging around here and reviewing lots of information, I purchased our first IP camera, a StarDot NetCam SC 5 MP.

 

I've been playing around with it for a day or so and I'm not impressed with the IP realtime image. It has an analog hookup so I tested that on our analog DVR and it looked better than the cheap cameras we have on there now. But on IP with PoE, it's very choppy, even at the lowest resolution.

 

I have a note in to StarDot support to see if I'm doing something wrong.

 

But my questions to the groups infinate wisdom is in general, are analog connections better than IP? And is it a possible bandwidth issue or software configuration that really makes the difference between the two?

 

I have purchase requests on my desk based on setting up an IP video system using various IP cameras with a LuxRiot / Dell PC DVR. I would like to know what I'm getting into before I order more IP cameras. I have to put some cameras on a remote building which would be difficult to run more cable too, but already has ethernet there. Though is does have some dark fiber runs there if that's an option.

 

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

 

Dennis

 

I can tell you one thing for sure - there are only few companies on this planet which make great products - Arecont, IQinvision, Mobotix and a bit of Axis. All other brands - waste of money, crap. Just no point to touch them. These companies are leaders and nobody will make anything better for that money.

 

Trust me - take for example Arecont 3mpix camera AV3105 which is H264 camera and does 15 fps@2048x1536 - you will be amazed and will never buy analog again But dont forget one important rule - DO NOT buy any other lense than Computar, Tamron or Fujinon. With this AV3105 - no bandwidth issues, no storage issues - superb.

 

For a NVR server - do not buy some extra costly Dell systems, just do it yourself. Get for example SuperMicro(http://supermicro.com/) chasis SC828TQ-R1200LPB, chuck in some Western Digital 1TB hard drives(I suggest model number WD1002FBYS, its for RAID), drop in Intel Xeon Quad Core X3360 2.83GHz, FSB1333, 12M, S775 processor, some memory and off you go. Easy mate Good luck.

[bobby1471 0]

In IP Cameras you truely get what you pay for. If you buy cheap IP cameras your going to get cheap quality video. IF you buy mid-grade price your going to get decent quality images, if you buy top cameras (axis) your going to get superb quality. As far as the image goes, its most like that the network side of that camera isn't fully develope as it should be, because typically on a LAN your IP camera will look as good or better than analog.

[dsiadmin 0]

Thanks for all the replies!

 

I did work with StarDot tech support and got the camera working much better. I orginally purchased this model for outdoors and I think it will work fine there.

 

In IP Cameras you truely get what you pay for.

Looking at the cameras robert talked about they seem to come in a wide price range, $500 on up. What do most of you find is the cut off for what you consider as good or better than analog?

 

I just ordered an Axis 209MFD-R at $675.

 

I need to order several more to get good coverage so I'm looking for a price point where I get good cameras and my manager will allow me to buy them.

 

Thanks again for your input!

 

Dennis

[Erron S. 0]

Any camera that ouputs anything higher than 704x480 is better than analog. Analog is the old way, Ip digital is the new way.

 

We sell all of the brands you mentioned and have for years. Why do people pay for the higher end stuff? They -need- the quality. If you are just putting out a system to see when your employees come to work, you don't need to get a license plate, you know all of them and spot them in a crowd. If you are trying to secure a hotel lobby and need face shots on every person, that's a different application. You need to look at what you use the system for and ask yourself, does this system do what I need it to? If the image can't give you the image quality you need for whatever pupose you have, what good is the system? Right?

[normicgander 0]

Any camera that ouputs anything higher than 704x480 is better than analog. Analog is the old way, Ip digital is the new way.

 

Yes, overall analog RS-170A CCTV cameras have done a fair job over the last few decades. It's time to move forward- progressive scan cameras with digital signal transmission (serial/rf channels) to the recording /storage system hub. The problem is why the IP network from the camera to the headend? I realize the need and importance of the network connection for PC viewing etc. Perhaps the IP network (TCP/IP) was an available platform etc., so the sheep were hearded in that direction by the expert industry shepards.

[dsiadmin 0]

The problem is why the IP network from the camera to the headend?

 

My best guess is that most business buildings and even some homes have exsisting network infrastructure to support the IP cameras. I know that's the reason I'm moving to using them in our upgrade. With a large plant layout (20+ acres) that has ethernet / fiber everywhere, I'm not keen on pulling cable for analog cameras. So IP is the way I'm going.

 

That said, I'm still struggling with getting the quality I expected. I've been playing with both the StarDot NetCam SC 5M and a Axis 209MFD-R which are both Megapixel cams. I can only get a fps of 12-18 by lowering the image quality settings. With higher image sizes the fps drops below 10 which gives me blur in the motion and still frames.

 

I'm trying to cover a shipping receiving dock and in some cases this might require an clear image of an unknown driver unlike known employee images.

 

Whats the key to getting good images with IP cams?

 

The network has 100 MB connections with low saturation rates. Is it worth swapping out hubs to 1 GB or setting up a dedicated camera network?

 

I'm about ready to order a handfull of cameras and need to settle some issues first.

 

Thanks for all the input so far.

 

Dennis

[dnieweg 0]

We record a wide variety of IP cameras (along with analog) and there certainly are big differences in operation and quality amongst manufacturers and even models. IQeye, Arecont and Axis are the most widely used and certainly are very high quality and reliable. There are however many others on the market that are a great value as well and are perfect for many applications.

 

The one thing I did want to point out in this IP vs Analog debate has to do with Megapixel IP. The is no equivalent analog camera to megapixel IP because analog, even high-res, if even recorded at the highest resolution (704x480) is still only 0.333 megapixel.

 

We routinely use 2 and 5 megapixel cameras nowadays and the video is absolutely stunning. Think about it, a 2 megapixel camera has six (6) times the resolution of a high-res analog camera.

 

Erron at 3xLogic wrote this blog entry comparing the cost of megapixel to analog and I think it's somewhat surprising.

http://www.3xlogic.com/blog/user/erron/megapixel-technology-too-expensive

 

One of the big issues with megapixel is the size of the images. These articles here talk about recompression which make megapixel usable.

 

http://www.3xlogic.com/aztech

http://www.3xlogic.com/megapixel

 

These is some sample video there as well.

 

Dave

[Soundy 1]

The problem is why the IP network from the camera to the headend?

 

My best guess is that most business buildings and even some homes have exsisting network infrastructure to support the IP cameras. I know that's the reason I'm moving to using them in our upgrade. With a large plant layout (20+ acres) that has ethernet / fiber everywhere, I'm not keen on pulling cable for analog cameras. So IP is the way I'm going.

 

It also has the benefit of not requiring additional/specialized hardware. Analog cameras, you have to have a capture card of some sort, and the more cameras you want, the bigger and more expensive it has to be. Adding more cameras once your card is full means either adding another card (which not all systems support) or replacing the card...

 

With IP, you can simply plug into existing infrastructure, you can record it to any computer on the network (or multiple computers, if you want the redundancy), no other hardware is required on the recorder(s), and the cameras can be viewed remotely by any system with a web browser, without the need of additional hardware or specialized software.

 

Given all that, other data-streaming methods would be largely impractical, as they'd also require additional new infrastructure and custom hardware and software, with little real benefit.

 

As others have pointed out, the problems described in this thread are not caused by deficiencies in the IP-video concept, but in the quality of the cameras themselves. As even cheaper analog cameras improve in quality, the capture process has hit a wall, so the difference becomes less noticeable between the cheap and the expensive cameras, particularly once the signal is digitized at a measly 720x480 pixels. But now that you've got the ability to transmit much higher resolution and quality, the variation in image quality becomes obvious again.

 

That said, I'm still struggling with getting the quality I expected. I've been playing with both the StarDot NetCam SC 5M and a Axis 209MFD-R which are both Megapixel cams. I can only get a fps of 12-18 by lowering the image quality settings. With higher image sizes the fps drops below 10 which gives me blur in the motion and still frames.

 

Motion blur isn't a factor of framerate; it's caused by low shutter speeds. Try opening up the iris on your lens to allow more light, use a "faster" (wider aperture) lens, and/or use a "light booster" mode if the camera has it. If possible, manually set a shutter speed of 1/100s or faster, and see if that helps your motion blur.

 

Also, set reasonable expectations for your frame rates. I've found in almost all of my installs, I don't need any more than 5fps, and for a lot of them, even 1fps is sufficient. You don't usually need *full-motion* video for *surveillance* purposes. Full-motion is 30fps, but most people would be hard pressed to see a difference at even 15fps.

 

Whats the key to getting good images with IP cams?

 

With any cameras, the main key is getting the most light possible into the camera. Sufficient shutter speeds is important for avoiding motion blur. However, higher shutter speeds mean less light gets in, so you need to allow more light with a wider opening. That often means a better lens.

 

All these factors are inter-related - skimping on one usually means you need to compromise on another. Cheap cameras will have cheap sensors that don't do well with less light.

 

The network has 100 MB connections with low saturation rates. Is it worth swapping out hubs to 1 GB or setting up a dedicated camera network?

 

Try testing the cameras with a dedicated network - just your camera(s) and NVR or viewing system, and a switch if necessary. Chances are, you won't notice it's any better, and if not, then changing up your whole network won't help either.

 

I'm about ready to order a handfull of cameras and need to settle some issues first.

 

As others have already said, look at the quality of the camera itself as your main suspect. Check some of the other recommended brands.

[kalpesh_nikumbh 0]

IP cameras with HD Resolution , H.264 , progressive scan , 16:9 aspect ratios are also available for surveillance use...

[normicgander 0]

Try testing the cameras with a dedicated network - just your camera(s) and NVR or viewing system, and a switch if necessary. Chances are, you won't notice it's any better, and if not, then changing up your whole network won't help either.

 

Yes, but often dedicated networks are installed anyway for IP camera systems. The problem with DVRs is most use ITU 601 encoder chipsets . So forget anything above 4CIF, then factor in compression. Ah, then let's not forget the 2 field problem associated with interlaced RS-170A video cameras in dynamic scenes. As a solution for the transitional market, We will see more OEMs introducing progressive scan cameras with analog outputs (There could be the potential for 700 to 1000 tvl plus cameras). This will improve performance of standard D1 DVRs. But, the problem will still be the DVR. If DVR OEMs would improve their effective TV lines of resoultion, it would be a big improvement.

 

In the end, IP or analog, it's going to be the cost vs. quality, length of storage, bandwidth etc. which the customer/end user must decide to purchase.

[cachecreekcctv 0]

Having never installed either IP or Megapixel cameras, I am wondering what would be the benefit to customer, if the customer has older DVR, which can only record in either CIF or D1 mode? Would the video images from a Megapixel cam be better, even though the DVR is the same? How do I sell this type of camera as a "benefit"?

[robert 0]

Having never installed either IP or Megapixel cameras, I am wondering what would be the benefit to customer, if the customer has older DVR, which can only record in either CIF or D1 mode? Would the video images from a Megapixel cam be better, even though the DVR is the same? How do I sell this type of camera as a "benefit"?

 

First of all - you cannot connect megapixel cameras to DVR as it has BNC connectors against megapixel RJ45 connector.

 

Secondly - image size. Look at this comparison. Analog can show and record maximum 0.4 mpix only.

http://libava-s.lv/wp-content/uploads/salidzinajums.jpg

 

Third - installation. You can run just one cable for power and video for megapixel cameras, its POE.

 

4. Image quality - its amazing.

 

etc etc

Edited December 18, 2008 by Guest

[Soundy 1]

Having never installed either IP or Megapixel cameras, I am wondering what would be the benefit to customer, if the customer has older DVR, which can only record in either CIF or D1 mode? Would the video images from a Megapixel cam be better, even though the DVR is the same? How do I sell this type of camera as a "benefit"?

 

There's NO benefit if the DVR doesn't support IP cameras. The images would be far better, viewed through the camera's web interface, but you wouldn't be able to actually record them.

[cachecreekcctv 0]

Using Avermedia EB1704 Hybrid. IP cams OK.

[dsiadmin 0]

First of all - you cannot connect megapixel cameras to DVR as it has BNC connectors against megapixel RJ45 connector.

 

Actually some IP cameras do have BNC connectors too. I connected the StarDot NetCam SCM5 to our old DVR and the picture looked great. Not sure it would record as great in that mode vs. the IP DVR server I just set up.

 

They sell that feature as a way to hook up to the camera during installation and testing with an old style monitor.

[cachecreekcctv 0]

So, in all actuallity, Megapixel cameras can be viewed "real time" , but only can be recorded in D1 on DVR ? To record this high of a resolution (from Megapixel cams), I would have to resort to some other means of recording?

[normicgander 0]

Some IP cameras can have an analog RS-170A output (reduced image size). However the original imager may not be progressive scan.

[cctvexpert 0]

IP cameras are ridiculously overrated and not ready for prime time. You are going to find that networks have latency, end of story. An IP camera can never compare with an analog camera except for the use of megapixel. I am sure you are going to see HD analog cameras coming out in the next year or so as people realize you are going to continue to have problems transmitting the HD images across a network. Megapixel IP cameras also have issues with ghosting, day/night issues, etc. In essence, they are overhyped by the companies that have nothing else to offer.

[robert 0]

IP cameras are ridiculously overrated and not ready for prime time. You are going to find that networks have latency, end of story. An IP camera can never compare with an analog camera except for the use of megapixel. I am sure you are going to see HD analog cameras coming out in the next year or so as people realize you are going to continue to have problems transmitting the HD images across a network. Megapixel IP cameras also have issues with ghosting, day/night issues, etc. In essence, they are overhyped by the companies that have nothing else to offer.

 

Well, I wouldnt be SO negative on megapixel CCTV

 

1. I cannot see any problem in network and HD video transmittion - its 21st century and there is a gigabit network out there(check google if you dont believe me ).

 

2. "An IP camera can never compare with an analog camera except for the use of megapixel".

That is actually main benefit of them and why they are becoming so popular.

 

3. How are you going to get HD on analog - any suggestions, ideas? I think they have reached their limits long time ago. Its television standart that limits them, its physics.

 

4. "day/night issues"

 

Its not an issue - they just need much more light than analog.

 

Just chill

[cctvexpert 0]

analog have not reached their limit. It is a very loooooooooooooooooong discussion on what you can do with analog. It is not the DSP since there is A/D and D/A conversion. The question is how you transmit the video. The big deal about IP cameras used to be that you could use the structured cabling network, but then they forget that video baluns have been around for more than a decade and you can run video across UTP and bypass the network so no degradation in signal or latency.

 

Megapixel technology is still very very premature. They are in the lunchpail cellphone stage and have a long way to go. IP cameras inherently have low light issues. So it begs the question why pay more and get less.

 

I am not down on IP I am just realistic and don't buy into the hype.

 

FYI, even with a Gigabit or 10G network remember a network has latency. You can take a 10G network and still try to control a PTZ and watch what happens. Many people will say they have latency lower than 100 milliseconds but as I say go ahead and try it.

 

The biggest thing in general is managing customer expectations and unfortunately sales people over hype technology. For example, the size of the IP market and the supposed death of analog.

 

Curiously enough Axis came out with a press release last week saying the market wasnt growing as quickly as they expected and blamed it on the economy yet the analog market suffered no such degradation, funny huh.

[robert 0]

Megapixel technology is still very very premature.

 

Yes it is. But it doesnt mean its bad and we shouldnt buy it

 

 

Curiously enough Axis came out with a press release last week saying the market wasnt growing as quickly as they expected and blamed it on the economy yet the analog market suffered no such degradation, funny huh.

 

I could agree on this, recession doesnt do any good.

[cctvexpert 0]

The point is I agree it is not bad. It has potential solely in the megapixel area and even at that the need for megapixel is very limited.

 

If you are in 1 physical building there is no need for an IP camera.

 

If you are in an area where you can have a choke point there is no need for a megapixel camera.

 

Comes back to why spend more and get less.

 

Another drawback is you lose the network you are SOL.

 

Also, the irony is that IP cameras are supposed to be the future yet most utilize MJPEG which is an antiquated codec that sucks up bandwidth.

 

The IP cameras are first starting to discover H264 but even at that they are using the baseline codec when that is not the best solution.

 

H264 has been around for more than 5 years and now they are on to H264SVC and you would think in reading the magazines that 264 is something brand new.

 

The problem with this industry is that there is a lack of adequate information and alot of disinformation. I read these message boards from time to time and it gets amusing how off the mark people can be and I am not talking about opinions I am talking facts.

[ak357 0]

IP cameras are ridiculously overrated and not ready for prime time. You are going to find that networks have latency, end of story. An IP camera can never compare with an analog camera except for the use of megapixel. I am sure you are going to see HD analog cameras coming out in the next year or so as people realize you are going to continue to have problems transmitting the HD images across a network. Megapixel IP cameras also have issues with ghosting, day/night issues, etc. In essence, they are overhyped by the companies that have nothing else to offer.

 

What do u mean by "HD analog camera" ?

 

I beg you to show to me image produce by best analog camera in

night about 30-40 feet from object and 20-30 feet wide

can you provide image please ?

Edited January 4, 2009 by Guest