Rival to CNB Mona Lisa

[rory 0]

Yes, cctv cameras are behind. Cameras on cell phones are taking better pictures than a dedicated cctv camera. Unless you want to spend big money on a 2-3mp camera you will end up with mediocre image quality. You can buy a dslr with 10mp for a lot cheaper than the price of a 2-3mp cctv camera. Bank robberies and theft footage is almost useless for facial identification with 95% of the cameras out there. I had a robbery on my street and I could not even make the model/color of the car out. The car was about 40-50 feet away from my camera: http://i792.photobucket.com/albums/yy204/alschmid/15.jpg

There were some water spots on this camera, but I still would not be able to tell. You can see the pixelation in this still which was pulled directly from the dvr.

 

Ive been giving evidence to the cops using this technology for years now, never have any problems. Even with some of the worst low quality cameras it is possible to enhance the images and in many cases get enough for a case. Unless the camera was tested directly at a monitor, not going through a DVR, it is not correct to judge it, that goes for all cameras.

 

As to the image in the link you posted, there is something horribly wrong with either that camera, DVR, or the capture method you used - even a $5 camera from china looks better than that

[bantham1 0]

Tell me about it. I have tried everything with the settings on the cameras/dvr etc.

[rory 0]

this is it resized down to 320x240. It is still horrible. Ive had similar terrible results saving images from captured video from this cheap Avtech DVR I have. But the Avermedia? It looks like perhaps you just used the remote software and clicked snapshot to save the image, and in that case that would be why you are saving these images in quad view, or full view. I just tested the same on a EB1304net and the images although locally are great, even the remote image is good, but the webcam snapshot is awful.

[bantham1 0]

It was downloaded to a usb drive then I took the snapshot. The other pictures in quad view were snapped i the web application (webviewer). I also played it back on the dvr itself to verify, no difference. I spent days trying to identify the car but could not make anything out. It was very bright out in the morning. I have noticed the brighter things get the worse picture I get. Around dusk yields the best picture.

[rory 0]

Tell me about it. I have tried everything with the settings on the cameras/dvr etc.

 

in the remote software, make sure overlay is turned on.

 

 

If I remember the recorded playback quality is fine, and live is great, just saving it over USB or ofcourse network is not good at all. Havent actually used this DVR in a long time, wouldnt buy it again as better things out there for less now.

[rory 0]

Be careful when you mount them. I've zipped through that really thin gauge black wire that runs real close to the screw holes. Not a good design... they should really zip tie those things or something to keep them out of the way.

 

Took me a while to figure out what was wrong with the camera, and was a total pita to solder back together... Maybe that's your problem?

Yeah I need to check that, though Im thinking now it could be a damaged wire in the steel pole, i will rerun that cable tomorrow, its just a short piece down the pole then spliced in a gang box at the bottom (originally they didnt run the cable long enough). Basically I powered up the camera here and it is fine. Also it DID rain a little and it got wet but it was 1 hour later and seemingly dry when i powered it up at the site, but going to dry it out for a couple hours in the sun tomorrow just incase. I dont even think anything really got into it, was just a few rain drops, but it did have the cover off and had a couple rain drops on the lens and the base of the camera inside, nothing looked settled though and the temp here is very hot. That wall mount is a bit of a pain to work with though, only had 4 special screws and 3 dropped as it was upside down, never could find 2 of them as they are black and well the grass is high and the dirt is dark .. LOL. Eventually found some other screws that fit.

[rory 0]

"In their price range" is the key. Sure, they won't measure up to the likes of the Panny 484s on a raw-quality basis, but they also cost less than 1/3 the 484's price. And like Rory says, there's little than can touch them for low-light response (IMHO they even kick the 484's arse in near-darkness).

I havent used the pano domes but hear they are good, but yeah at this price just cant beat it really. Going by most pricing ive seen of the pano domes the CNB VBM-24VF is at the least 1/4 the price.

[bpzle 0]

I don't think "can't be beat" is a fair statement. Just because you have not found it yet, doesn't mean it doesn't or can't exist.

 

I think the OP and myself were referring to sub $175 cameras... I'm not sure how we got started talking about Panasonic...

[rory 0]

Well the difference to begin with is that CNB is the manufacturer, while many of the other domes are OEMd and then the price is much more. Anyway, I havent seen anything else yet, at least not for sale at a US retailer/distributor. No not that it cant exist, but just seems that CNB dont mind selling theirs for much less than the others for something that is actually good quality. Forget the vandal domes for a minute though, check the dfl-20s.

[thewireguys 3]

It was downloaded to a usb drive then I took the snapshot. The other pictures in quad view were snapped i the web application (webviewer). I also played it back on the dvr itself to verify, no difference. I spent days trying to identify the car but could not make anything out. It was very bright out in the morning. I have noticed the brighter things get the worse picture I get. Around dusk yields the best picture.

 

I am having the same issues with the image.

[ak357 0]

Yes, cctv cameras are behind. Cameras on cell phones are taking better pictures than a dedicated cctv camera. Unless you want to spend big money on a 2-3mp camera you will end up with mediocre image quality. You can buy a dslr with 10mp for a lot cheaper than the price of a 2-3mp cctv camera. Bank robberies and theft footage is almost useless for facial identification with 95% of the cameras out there. I had a robbery on my street and I could not even make the model/color of the car out. The car was about 40-50 feet away from my camera: http://i792.photobucket.com/albums/yy204/alschmid/15.jpg

There were some water spots on this camera, but I still would not be able to tell. You can see the pixelation in this still which was pulled directly from the dvr.

 

That what u can expect from mp camera

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn217/ak357/X1.jpg

[Soundy 1]

Check a "realtime" still from a 1.3MP camera pointing at the end of my street:

http://moltenimage.com:8080/now.jpg

 

(Note: using a standard, non-megapixel 5-50mm lens, so it's not quite as clean as it should be... gets the point across though )

[bantham1 0]

That is more what I am looking for. Something where you can at least tell what type of car the person has after they rob you. That way I can be on the lookout for the SOB. I doubt it is my DVR causing this issue as it did not happen with my other cameras. If anybody wants the CNB's then PM me and 100 each plus actual postage they are yours. I need something better.

[Soundy 1]

Your DVR is not going to produce images anywhere near that resolution, I don't care what analog camera you connect to it.

[bantham1 0]

I plan on getting a hybrid DVR.

[SEANHAWG 1]

It is at D1, I have checked the settings. Can I post the actual jpg here? I have it on my computer but do not see a way to add the file.

 

There is no way that can be D1. It just looks crappy if I am being honest. If your DVR is set at D1, then there is something wrong in your system, whether it be the camera, DVR, cable, connector etc. I would agree with a previous poster that that doesnt even look as good as CIF. Before you sell your CNB domes, I would do a bench test with the camera and take the DVR totally out of the equation. Take the CNB dome down, get an RCA cable with BNC adapter and plug the camera directly into your TV or monitor and see if you get better results.

[D.V.S. 0]

Here's a recorded snapshot on a Lorex 20" all in one from the VBM-24VF. Bantham1 said his other cameras don't have those jagged edges, so I don't know as I thought it was maybe the de-interlacing feature on his dvr gone bad or maybe if a firmware update would help. The van is going down the street at about 20 mph.

 

 

Edited September 27, 2010 by Guest

[rory 0]

Forget the DVR for a minute, there are no jagged edges on the raw video direct from the camera, thats not even possible as far as I know. Alot of the issues you guys are having are related to the DVR being used. Unless we can see a direct video of it, like using a capture card and AmCap with very little compression, then its going to be hard to tell from our end. But I know from testing several of these cameras over the past couple weeks, today and tonight included, the image quality is generally great, crisp, clear, as long as the specific camera is not faulty. I am not however testing it through a DVR, it is direct onto a CRT CCTV monitor.

 

As to why some other cameras looked okay on the Avermedia and these dont, were they both tested at the same time? Something could have changed during the time the old cameras were there and the new ones were added. Even if the cameras were bad the images Bantham1 posted do not look like bad quality related to the camera, that looks more like a codec or processing issue on the DVR or PC side of it. Ive seen ALOT of bad images direct from bad cameras, and they dont look anything like what was posted. I even mentioned before I have a crappy DVR here I use myself (free) and I know what that can do to the best of cameras, well makes it look somewhat like the images posted by Bantham1, only alot worse than his!

 

BTW Im not saying Bantham1 is NOT having an issue with these cameras .. he might well be .. no cameras are perfect, ive had several models from various brands come bad myself .. which is why its so important to test before you take it to the client, even better is to keep stock and test all of them .. but going by the image it doesnt appear to be a camera issue in his case.

 

Also I would buy them but for used cameras it would have to be less $$

[rory 0]

I am doing the same thing.... Just got the VCB-34VF to test hoping it will be better.

 

Did you ever test this? if so how was it?

Thanks

[SecretSquirril 0]

There will shortly be a couple of very interesting alternatives to CNB Mona Lisa hitting the market.

 

Replacing the low price Next 520TVL offerings will come the Nextchip NVP2040 together with the Sony 639 CCD. This will offer 600TVL and reasonable performace - expected to be more competitive than Mona Lisa.

 

The other alternative will be the Effio-E from Sony. Current offerings, sometimes called Effio-E 760 pair the Effio-E chipset with the Sony 639 CCD. The performance was OK, but not great. Latest releases using Effio-E are the Effio-E 960 - pairing Effio-E with the Sony 673 CCD. Offering a much improved IQ, with better sensitivity and quoted at 650+ TVL. Some manufacturers are already beginning to market these as 700TVL solutions which is not strictly true. Pricing for the 960 solution is expected to match HQ1 at the installation level.

 

With regard to Mona Lisa itself, there are rumored to be 2 versions of the chipset. One promoted by CNB themselves, and one passed to the China local market to be assembled by other manufactures. I say rumored, as CNB have directly denied the sale of the chipset to any other manufacturers, but it is openly offered by others in China.

 

Early production using Mona Lisa suffered two major issues - color wash and WB issues. Both have been addressed, but so far the offering has yet to hit the European markets in a major way.

 

Squizz

[rory 0]

Another Korean Manufacturer on this forum mentioned at one time that the Monalisa is actually made by another Korean company?

[SecretSquirril 0]

Another Korean Manufacturer on this forum mentioned at one time that the Monalisa is actually made by another Korean company?

 

Have heard the same rumor, but cannot find proof as yet. Another suggests that CNB bought the rights to an Isreali designed DSP.

 

It is interesting that several Korean manufacturers released their "own" chipsets within a few months of each other. Perhaps there is indeed a common central theme. After all, many of the larger names in Korea do not actually manufacture directly....

 

One thing I am sure of - CNB made a major investment into Mona Lisa. The evidense being the relentless push to promote only Mona Lisa based products (at that level, not taking away from Blue-I) - even withdrawing Sony based zoom products for the soon to be released Mona Lisa varients. The zooms are not yet at sample stage.

 

Squizz.

[Dongwonsecurity 0]

Another Korean Manufacturer on this forum mentioned at one time that the Monalisa is actually made by another Korean company?

 

Have heard the same rumor, but cannot find proof as yet. Another suggests that CNB bought the rights to an Isreali designed DSP.

 

It is interesting that several Korean manufacturers released their "own" chipsets within a few months of each other. Perhaps there is indeed a common central theme. After all, many of the larger names in Korea do not actually manufacture directly....

 

One thing I am sure of - CNB made a major investment into Mona Lisa. The evidense being the relentless push to promote only Mona Lisa based products (at that level, not taking away from Blue-I) - even withdrawing Sony based zoom products for the soon to be released Mona Lisa varients. The zooms are not yet at sample stage.

 

Squizz.

 

Suprising to read this subject. CCTVforum knows much.

Yes, it is ture that Korea has excellent R&D companies developing DSP now and it becomes a trend to have own DSP among Korean manufacturers. Some has very good image but dose not sell much as no brand name such as Samsung. Some are poor even 600tvl, 3D etc.

so now distributors need to test camera sample more to avoid marketing trick.