Poor image quality

[gimili 0]

I have some panasonic WV-CW500 cameras for my shop and a Pelco 4500 16 Ch. dvr. Personnally I am not impressed at all with the quality. As soon as you increase the resolution to max on the dvr it forces you to drop the fps down to 3. I am looking at this one instead: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/739224-REG/AverMedia_NEH5216HP_16_channel_Hybrid_Embedded_Linux.html. With the Pelco 4500 with so called crystal clear quality you have a max resolution of 704x480 with 3 fps and video/stills seem pixilated and grainy IMHO. The live video on the main monitor is much better than the recorded video on the Pelco. Perhaps I need to tweak something? The quality on the spot monitor is also poor but that may be due to the length of the cable or the vga converter for the lcd monitor. There is no way I can see plates. Perhaps by zooming and a lot of luck.

 

If anyone has any other suggestions or advice I would appreciate them also?

[Soundy 1]

The live video is likely better because the cameras are effectively being piped straight through to the display, while recorded video has been digitized and compressed. You'll find this with most DVRs, particularly those that use hardware compression.

[gimili 0]

The live video is likely better because the cameras are effectively being piped straight through to the display, while recorded video has been digitized and compressed. You'll find this with most DVRs, particularly those that use hardware compression.

 

Thanks for the tip. I am new to this and very green. Is there no dvr that can record decent analog? Is 7.5 fps sufficient?

[Soundy 1]

There are many factors that go into "decent" video besides just resolution. Type of compression, and level/quality of compression come into play as well.

 

"Sufficient" frame rates really depend on the specific purpose. 3fps, or even 1fps, can be sufficient for many installations. Check this demo for comparisons of different frame rates: http://www.panasonic.com/business/security/demos/PSS-recording-rates.html

 

There are lots of DVRs out there that will do higher frame rates at higher resolutions, but keep in mind that analog video is limited to about 704x480 capture resolution. Also, remember that the higher the frame rates, the more storage will be required.

[gimili 0]

That link was very helpful to understand fps. Thanks a lot!

 

I am guessing compression is my problem. Is there a compression level or type that would yield video where faces are not grainy?

[SEANHAWG 1]

I once also purchased a Pelco DVR and was not impressed at all with the recorded video quality. Actually, it sucked. I was expecting alot more from a Pelco unit. It probably has something to do with how the video is compressed. You probably wont find many DVR's that will look as clear as the live video but there are some very close that is hardly noticeable at all. 7.5 FPS per channel at D1 is what you will find on most 8 and 16 channel DVR's, and usually most 4 channel DVR's, but having a 4 channel do D1 @ 15 FPS per channel is pretty typical too. If you want to get a DVR that can do full strem 30 FPS D1 on every channel then the price usually more than doubles for that, but for most surveillance scenarios, you dont need anything of that nature.

[rory 0]

maybe the DVR cant process the higher frame rates and quality with the compression used?

With the PC Geo DVRs for example, the 1480, even with a Core 2 Duo using H.264 (which uses more CPU) goes around 80-90% CPU usage at default frames, drop the frames down to around 15fps max then the CPU usage drops considerably, also change to Mpeg4 from H.264 and again, less CPU usage.

[gimili 0]

...video but there are some very close that is hardly noticeable at all. 7.5 FPS per channel at D1 is what you will find on most 8 and 16 channel DVR's...

 

Can you give me some examples?

[gimili 0]

maybe the DVR cant process the higher frame rates and quality with the compression used?

With the PC Geo DVRs for example, the 1480, even with a Core 2 Duo using H.264 (which uses more CPU) goes around 80-90% CPU usage at default frames, drop the frames down to around 15fps max then the CPU usage drops considerably, also change to Mpeg4 from H.264 and again, less CPU usage.

 

Thanks for the info. I have the quality setting on highest which I assume would be the lowest compression. With the highest resolution you can only select 3fps.

[SEANHAWG 1]

I sent you a PM of some video.

[Soundy 1]

I have some panasonic WV-CW500 cameras for my shop and a Pelco 4500 16 Ch. dvr. Personnally I am not impressed at all with the quality. As soon as you increase the resolution to max on the dvr it forces you to drop the fps down to 3. I am looking at this one instead: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/739224-REG/AverMedia_NEH5216HP_16_channel_Hybrid_Embedded_Linux.html. With the Pelco 4500 with so called crystal clear quality you have a max resolution of 704x480 with 3 fps and video/stills seem pixilated and grainy IMHO. The live video on the main monitor is much better than the recorded video on the Pelco. Perhaps I need to tweak something? The quality on the spot monitor is also poor but that may be due to the length of the cable or the vga converter for the lcd monitor. There is no way I can see plates. Perhaps by zooming and a lot of luck.

 

If anyone has any other suggestions or advice I would appreciate them also?

 

 

what kind of dvr @ 3 ftps?

i have seen dvr 15-20 ftps @ D1