CIF, D1, H.264 Mayhem!

[SEANHAWG 1]

I am just now starting to dive into DVR's and am a little outdated on all of the newer equipment that is on the market. I noticed that the most common thing I have seen on the specs of DVR's is H.264 compression. From my understanding, this just makes the video quality of your cameras appear better??? If so, how? Or if I am missing the point?

 

And what is the difference between CIF and D1? Does it have to do with pixel information? Does D1 have more pixels? And how does this relate to H.264 or does it relate?

 

And all of my cameras are mainly only 330 TV lines. Since my cameras are just standard resolution, am I wasting my money buying a DVR with D1? Most of the non-D1 DVR's that I have seen are a little cheaper and I hate to waste money on a feature that I cant even see since my cameras are not really considered high resolution. I dont really want to put "blingin rims on my granny's Volkswagon" if you get my point.

[Soundy 1]

I am just now starting to dive into DVR's and am a little outdated on all of the newer equipment that is on the market. I noticed that the most common thing I have seen on the specs of DVR's is H.264 compression. From my understanding, this just makes the video quality of your cameras appear better??? If so, how? Or if I am missing the point?

With any sort of "lossy" audio or video compression, there's a tradeoff between file size and media quality. A higher level of compression will result in smaller files (and thus lower bandwidth needed for network streaming - important if you're viewing over the internet), but it also means lower relative quality. Lower compression will give better end quality, but requires larger files and greater bandwidth for streaming.

 

H.264 is a relatively new compression format that CAN produce substantially smaller files with minimal loss of quality. However, it does typically require substantial processing power for both encoding and decoding (some manufacturers' implementations are worse than others), and it's not necessarily the best suited for CCTV use. At a full 30fps, the difference can be very noticeable, but CCTV often records at lower framerates, and you don't find as great an advantage as the framerate drops.

 

And what is the difference between CIF and D1? Does it have to do with pixel information? Does D1 have more pixels

?

CIF (Common Interchange Format) specs 352x240 video resolution. 4CIF is four times that - 704x480. D1 is essentially the same as 4CIF. So yes, it's four times the resolution.

 

And how does this relate to H.264 or does it relate?

It doesn't directly relate.

 

And all of my cameras are mainly only 330 TV lines. Since my cameras are just standard resolution, am I wasting my money buying a DVR with D1?

You're never wasting your money going with higher-resolution recording. Consider if you ever want/need to replace those cameras, you'll probably end up with something that's 480TVL or better. Even at 330TVL, you're still losing substantial resolution by recording at CIF.

 

As with compression, the trade-off is file size. Higher resolution = better detail = larger files.

[SEANHAWG 1]

sweet thanks!

[rory 0]

And what is the difference between CIF and D1? Does it have to do with pixel information? Does D1 have more pixels? And how does this relate to H.264 or does it relate?

 

CIF is 352x240, D1 is 720x480.

Regarding cameras, a typical low res camera of say 380TVL may be 510 x 492 pixels.

A high res of say 480-600TVL normally would be 811x508 pixels.

So if you record in CIF with a low res camera you will still be loosing out.

A standard that i use to record in is 640x480, much less recording space and barely noticable difference in quality.

H.264 is the compression, its typically lower quality (bitrates) then basic MPEG4 and MJPEG, but smaller file size so longer recordings. Personally I dont use H.264 for recording on DVRs, but I use it for the Remote Video Transmission for faster frames. DVRs will vary on how good its compression and quality is.

 

Everything Soundy said I agree with also

[Guest]

And what is the difference between CIF and D1? Does it have to do with pixel information? Does D1 have more pixels? And how does this relate to H.264 or does it relate?

 

CIF is 352x240, D1 is 720x480.

Regarding cameras, a typical low res camera of say 380TVL may be 510 x 492 pixels.

A high res of say 480-600TVL normally would be 811x508 pixels.

So if you record in CIF with a low res camera you will still be loosing out.

A standard that i use to record in is 640x480, much less recording space and barely noticable difference in quality.

H.264 is the compression, its typically lower quality (bitrates) then basic MPEG4 and MJPEG, but smaller file size so longer recordings. Personally I dont use H.264 for recording on DVRs, but I use it for the Remote Video Transmission for faster frames. DVRs will vary on how good its compression and quality is.

 

Everything Soundy said I agree with also

 

Here in the land of PAL D1 is 720 x 576.

 

I take take a different approach to the subject.

 

Think about the operational requirement.

 

What do you want the CCTV system to do?

 

Do you want to produce the best possible evidence?

 

Then why purchase a machine that will not produce the best possible recording given the camera quality?.

 

What is worse, why purchase a DVR that can record D1 or 4CIF and then set it up to record less?

 

You can normally give away frame rate but never resolution.

 

Just my thought on the subject.

 

Ilkie

[SEANHAWG 1]

Also, if you use a tube TV, can you notice much difference when using the higher resolution recorders as opposed to the standard rez? I figure the difference would be pretty noticeable on a nice LCD, but what about the ol tubes?

[nancyh1980 0]

Also, if you use a tube TV, can you notice much difference when using the higher resolution recorders as opposed to the standard rez? I figure the difference would be pretty noticeable on a nice LCD, but what about the ol tubes?

 

Even with the nice Tatung, Samsung.... CCTV LCDs, they are still not as good as the older tube CCTV monitors. I remember helping my boyfriend taking out all the Tatungs CCTV LCDs and putting back the Pelco tubes because the security chief preferred the pic. We all concurred with the guy.

 

We came back 3 months later with a 20" Bosch CCTV LCD. It was so good that we changed out all the pelco tube to the Bosch.

[rory 0]

Then why purchase a machine that will not produce the best possible recording given the camera quality?.

 

What is worse, why purchase a DVR that can record D1 or 4CIF and then set it up to record less?

 

You can normally give away frame rate but never resolution.

 

in a small office kitchen for example many times more then CIF is not needed.

In cases where you just want to see what is going on, in small non priority locations like that, CIF can accommodate it. We used similar to CIF for years, though poor quality also because of VCRs, we still were able to capture evidence. I think we are all spoiled now

[SEANHAWG 1]

It could just be me but when I test my cameras on some of the tube TV's we have, it seems the picture is clearer as opposed to hooking them up to an LCD TV we have which I thought was odd. These are just standard-rez analog cameras.

[survtech 0]

A high res of say 480-600TVL normally would be 811x508 pixels.

Max pixel count for 99% of NTSC analog cameras is 768x494 or less. A very few may be higher (Panasonic WV-CW5xx claims 976x494) but, despite its claimed 650 lines of horizontal resolution in color mode, no other analog equipment is capable of recording or displaying that.

[survtech 0]

It could just be me but when I test my cameras on some of the tube TV's we have, it seems the picture is clearer as opposed to hooking them up to an LCD TV we have which I thought was odd. These are just standard-rez analog cameras.

Nope, that's normal. Analog cameras usually look best on CRT monitors. You might check out the Orion LCD monitors. They come pretty close to CRT in PQ.

[SEANHAWG 1]

Okay thanks.

[rory 0]

A high res of say 480-600TVL normally would be 811x508 pixels.

Max pixel count for 99% of NTSC analog cameras is 768x494 or less. A very few may be higher (Panasonic WV-CW5xx claims 976x494) but, despite its claimed 650 lines of horizontal resolution in color mode, no other analog equipment is capable of recording or displaying that.

I disagree, other then some cheap chinese brands most 480-600tvl have a total pixel count of 811x508. If it claims high res and does not have 811x508 i stay clear of it, regardless of what res the recorder does. Ofcourse whether the specs are correct or not is another thing, thats why one uses a reputable brand.

[thewireguys 3]

A high res of say 480-600TVL normally would be 811x508 pixels.

Max pixel count for 99% of NTSC analog cameras is 768x494 or less. A very few may be higher (Panasonic WV-CW5xx claims 976x494) but, despite its claimed 650 lines of horizontal resolution in color mode, no other analog equipment is capable of recording or displaying that.

I disagree, other then some cheap chinese brands most 480-600tvl have a total pixel count of 811x508. If it claims high res and does not have 811x508 i stay clear of it, regardless of what res the recorder does. Ofcourse whether the specs are correct or not is another thing, thats why one uses a reputable brand.

 

I still don't understand why 811x508 cameras mean anything if you can record at a max D1 704x480

[rory 0]

I still don't understand why 811x508 cameras mean anything if you can record at a max D1 704x480

Do you honestly dont know, or are you just trying to stir things up?

[survtech 0]

I disagree, other then some cheap chinese brands most 480-600tvl have a total pixel count of 811x508.

Huh?!? From the Manufacturers' spec sheets - active or usable pixels:

 

Pelco

CC3751H-2 768 (H) x 494 (V)

C10CH NTSC 768 (H) x 494 (V), approx. 380k, PAL 752 (H) x 582 (V), approx. 440k

 

Sanyo

VCC-6584 768 (H) x 494 (V)

VCC-5884 768 (H) x 494 (V)

 

Bosch

LTC 0455 768 H x 494 V

LTC 0485 768 H x 492 V

 

Panasonic

WV-CP280 768 (H) x 494 (V)

 

Are they "cheap chinese brands"?

[rory 0]

I disagree, other then some cheap chinese brands most 480-600tvl have a total pixel count of 811x508.

Huh?!? From the Manufacturers' spec sheets - active or usable pixels:

 

Pelco

CC3751H-2 768 (H) x 494 (V)

C10CH NTSC 768 (H) x 494 (V), approx. 380k, PAL 752 (H) x 582 (V), approx. 440k

 

Sanyo

VCC-6584 768 (H) x 494 (V)

VCC-5884 768 (H) x 494 (V)

 

Bosch

LTC 0455 768 H x 494 V

LTC 0485 768 H x 492 V

 

Panasonic

WV-CP280 768 (H) x 494 (V)

 

Are they "cheap chinese brands"?

 

Looks like someones feelings are hurt.

[Soundy 1]

I disagree, other then some cheap chinese brands most 480-600tvl have a total pixel count of 811x508.

Huh?!? From the Manufacturers' spec sheets - active or usable pixels:

 

Pelco

CC3751H-2 768 (H) x 494 (V)

C10CH NTSC 768 (H) x 494 (V), approx. 380k, PAL 752 (H) x 582 (V), approx. 440k

 

Sanyo

VCC-6584 768 (H) x 494 (V)

VCC-5884 768 (H) x 494 (V)

 

Bosch

LTC 0455 768 H x 494 V

LTC 0485 768 H x 492 V

 

Panasonic

WV-CP280 768 (H) x 494 (V)

 

Are they "cheap chinese brands"?

 

Looks like someones feelings are hurt.

 

Come on now, girls...

 

You're both right.

 

From the VCM-24VF spec sheet:

 

Total Pixels Number: 811(H) x 508(V) 410K

Effective Pixels Number: 768(H) x 494(V) 380K

[SEANHAWG 1]

Here is another great question. Total pixels vs. effective pixels? Is the effective pixels the only ones being used or seen and if so, why have more pixels if only a certain amount is being used, or am I getting this all wrong.

[Soundy 1]

I bet Scott Broscious would have some input on this!

 

*ducking for cover....*

[rory 0]

Here is another great question. Total pixels vs. effective pixels? Is the effective pixels the only ones being used or seen and if so, why have more pixels if only a certain amount is being used, or am I getting this all wrong.

 

Why even bother recording when the burglar covers his face anyway??

Why eat food to stay alive when we are bound to die one day anyway??

Why drive a car to work when one can just take the bus??

 

Point is most cameras claiming 480TVL+ with less then 811x508 total pixels are typically crappy cameras in general. When choosing a camera for the first time one can just rely on the manufacturer saying it is the bestestess camera around and perhaps waste their money, or they can look at some of the specs and try to go by that to at least make a somewhat informative decision. Obviously most professionals know that if you buy an $800 panasonic it is bound to be a decent camera regardless of the specs, but in the real world of the not so rich where one has to purchase cameras that cost much less then that, it takes some speculation and if even one thing does not look right it is best to move onto another camera.

 

The bottom line is to ignore TVL and go by image pixels, total or effective.

Although there are also other factors that make the camera a decent camera.

 

Now, let the games continue

[ak357 0]

Here is another great question. Total pixels vs. effective pixels? Is the effective pixels the only ones being used or seen and if so, why have more pixels if only a certain amount is being used, or am I getting this all wrong.

 

Do u really want to learn this ?

Start with basic theory

What is NTSC

How picture is "drawn" on a television or computer display

and so on ...

if u are serious I can supply lots of links

Then u will see its not just number of pixel on CCD

[SEANHAWG 1]

Yes I do want to know the difference between effective and total and what effect they have on an image. If I came across as being sarcastic on my last question, I wasnt. I actually would like to know.

 

On most of the specs of the cameras that I have came across either does not distinguish between the 2, or it just describes the effective so thats why I was curious.

[survtech 0]

Yes I do want to know the difference between effective and total and what effect they have on an image. If I came across as being sarcastic on my last question, I wasnt. I actually would like to know.

 

On most of the specs of the cameras that I have came across either does not distinguish between the 2, or it just describes the effective so thats why I was curious.

Effective or active pixels are the only ones that matter. Any others do not participate in the production of video and are, therefore, wasted. A case in point: most 720p cameras actually use 1.3MP imagers. 720p is 1280x720, but the imager is 1280x1024. Since the camera is designed to use only 921,600 active pixels, the rest have no bearing on the image.

 

Besides, color NTSC itself is limited to around 450 lines of resolution. It doesn't matter if the imager has more pixels than approximately 720 horizontal, no NTSC monitor is capable of displaying the additional resolution; no DVR/NVR is capable of recording it and most, if not all, analog switching and distribution equipment is incapable of passing it.

[survtech 0]

Looks like someones feelings are hurt.

Why would you say that? You mis-stated something and I corrected you. It doesn't bother me that you were wrong.