Which DVR provides the BEST internet viewing quality?

[slekkas 0]

I would like to know with DVR is best to watch live feed from remote locations through the internet. I would like something similar to the Geovision GV-800 DVR Card witch i've tried and i'm very happy with the results.

 

Thanks

[jasmilelv 0]

you have to check.

pls tell me if you like to check our dvr, I will let our technician build internet access according to your reply.

[iFCS_GUY 0]

err, most provide fairly decent images over the internet.

budget would be a nice thing to know, but, coming in under the geovision card in price, there's a lot to be had!

 

embedded 4 channel units like the iFCS LITE 4 CIF unit, or the PACOM's do nice remote viewing,

 

DM's stuff is a lot more expensive, but, also scales a lot better too!

[blowrabbit 0]

try the ge wavereader

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

If you have the budget, the Nuvico Apex series dynamicaly scales the resolution of the images being transmitted to the images being viewed which greatly reduces network bandwidth for the smoothest remote video.

 

I.e. if you looking at a 16 camera screen it is transmitting 16 QCIF images, if you bring up 1 camera it immediately starts transmitting only that one image at D1 resolution.

[normicgander 0]

For remote LAN/WAN viewing, TeleEye video recording servers are decent. Multil channel processing.

[cctvexpert 0]

since the magazine publishers will never suggest anything that would hurt their advertisers maybe we should set something up where we can compare all these manufacturers recorded as well as remote viewing quality.

[CCTV_queer 0]

If you have the budget, the Nuvico Apex series dynamicaly scales the resolution of the images being transmitted to the images being viewed which greatly reduces network bandwidth for the smoothest remote video.

 

I.e. if you looking at a 16 camera screen it is transmitting 16 QCIF images, if you bring up 1 camera it immediately starts transmitting only that one image at D1 resolution.

 

Couldn't agree more! NUVICO Apex kicks ass... AND starting in Feb 2009, it's HYBRID!

[cctvexpert 0]

H264 is by far the best solution especially now with the latest profile of scalable video coding. Nuvico is a good machine but an older codec.

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

H264 is by far the best solution especially now with the latest profile of scalable video coding. Nuvico is a good machine but an older codec.

H.264(if using the correct type as there are many flavors of H.264) is indeed a better version of MPEG-4. However, the APEX series scales the resolution of all cameras based only on what is currently being viewed, and will still provide better remote viewing. Basically, the APEX is never transmitting more than 720x480 at a time - whether viewing 1 camera or 16 camera. That provides such a dramatic reduction of bandwidth that really nothing else compares.

[cctvexpert 0]

264 is the best because it uses variable bit rates and only sends the changing frames down when necessary depending upon the configuration of the I, B, P frames.

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

Correct - though MPEG4 uses the same premise(H.264 is the latest version of MPEG-4. It is also known as MPEG-4 Part 10.). No argument there, H.264 is a smaller file size. The reason the Nuvico will outperform nearly any DVR on the market is because of how the DVR transmits(the scalable resolution I mentioned previously.), NOT because of the codec. The Apex series can transmit 16 cameras using (in theory) a 1/16 of the bandwidth required by other DVRs. H.264 definitly does not make up that much difference.

[cctvexpert 0]

i hate to differ with you but dont confuse MPEG4 with H264 they are not related. The motion picture experts group calls it MPEG4 part 10 and the internation telecommunications union calls it H264 they should not be confused with mpeg4 part 2. Completely different profiles and architecture. 264 is a complex codec. MPEG4 part 2 does not have

 

slice based based prediction

arithmetic algorithm

deblocking filters

use of multiple reference frames

interlace management

weighted prediction

 

and it goes on:

 

264 goes down to 4 x 4 blocks

mpeg4 16 x 16

 

mpeg4 uses huffman algorithm vs arithmetic for 264

 

they are not even similar in their profile characteristics.

 

transmission with simple codecs cannot be managed. Its the DSP which has substream capabilities which controls the data flow.

 

In the end seeing is believing. If it does what you say then fine.

[G22 0]

Anyone know what video format the Panasonic WJ-HD316 (A and non-A versions) DVR uses?

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

"Proprietary Super Compression "

 

That's actually what they call it.

 

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=110063&catGroupId=14463&surfModel=WJ-HD316A/1000V&displayTab=F

[CCTV_queer 0]

The codec talk was fun.

 

That said, Nuvico is MPEG-2, streaming via network via a seperate chipset at a proprietary H.263, which I might add is EXACTLY what every H.264 out there today is, a PROPRIETARY H.263.

 

H.264, as we've been tuned to understand it through cute marketing in all our favorite publications, does not actually exist. It's no different than all the hype associated with megapixel and IP cameras. The manufacturer spending the money to advertise in the publication is also writing the articles about their super awesome-o compression, and/or pushing the subject of IP/megapixel video costing the same as analog. I digress... Truth be told, bus architecture today cannot support the workload TRUE H.264 requires.

 

Any schmuck can apply an H-series codec to a DSP and call it something, H.264 for example. Aver, TI, Infineon, Freescale, Philips, whoever... if you're writing an H-series codec to their DSP, it's a proprietary H.263.

 

With regard to hardware compression, and as someone who is a patent holder of three hardware-based compression algorithms, I'd further argue its court admissibility. As an expert witness for digital video evidence in one of the largest cities in the US, so often have I come across instances where video captured by the "H.264" DVR of the month contains I, B, and P frame issues, a commonality in H.263 algorithms. Intra-prediction, the process by which hardware-compressed video is applied, has been known to cause inaccuracies and macroblock motion estimation errors.

[cctvexpert 0]

it is MPEG4 and if you believe in super compression then i won't burst your bubble also about the tooth fairy

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

it is MPEG4 and if you believe in super compression then i won't burst your bubble also about the tooth fairy

 

Actually, since the WJHD316 is old enough that MPEG4 was not very common yet, and they call their MPEG-4 DVR a MPEG-4 DVR(WJRT416) so I think it's a derivitive of MJPEG - Though I could be wrong.

[MikeD 0]

The latest in fast transmission for video is H.264 video CODEC. This is an MPEG4 derivative CODEC and is intended specifically for fast transmissions speeds. I would search for a system that has this as a video coding option. My next best suggestion would be a variable bit rate MPEG4. Both options are readily available in the market.

 

In addition look for systems that allow you to reduce frame rate, resolution (size) and quality. I think this thread is for embedded units though you mention an PC card in your post. If you are looking for embedded systems, I'm not familiar with any H.264 ones that I really like. I know GSP has a nice MPEG4 version.

 

My company 3xLOGIC and many others make a PC based system that supports H.264 as well as MPEG4 with the variable bit rates, resolution etc. etc.. that will enable a user to 'tweek' the best possible image quality and speed for their needs.

[cctvexpert 0]

Aventura Technologies and I believe GE but maybe not in USA makes an H.264 embedded DVR for many years now. With respect to H.264 there are many different profiles and some perform better than others. Alot of progress has been made since it was introduced as a standard back in 2003. In fact, the latest version is know as scalable video coding or SVC, which is actually much better than the baseline AVC profile. It has the ability to properly manage substreams which is key when we talk about network transmission. H.264 while called MPEG4 Part 10, is in no way, shape or form closely related to the older MPEG4 Part 2, which utilized Huffman not Arithmetic algorithm. It is a horse of a different color.

[cqdvr 0]

[moderator edit]Please do not post adverts, contact the forum administrator if you wish to purchase advertising[/moderator edit]

[cctvkey 0]

264 is the best because it uses variable bit rates and only sends the changing frames down when necessary depending upon the configuration of the I, B, P frames.