Need Help/Not sure if its possible....within reason

[CHoffman 0]

I have a client who has a doggy daycare. They installed a DVR that an "expert" told them would work with some garbage cameras...they want there customers to be able to login and see Fido running around. The problem is that the cameras are so pixelated when viewing from the website that you cant tell which dog is which. Part of the issue is the limited bandwidth .72 mbps upload. Unfortunately I couldnt tell what brand of DVR it was, it looked like a generic import. The cameras are garbage because the on local monitor they seem like they are low TVL.... and the installer used all premade cables.

 

Basically they want a better system, he liked the idea of IP cameras, given that right now he doesn't even care if it is being recorded. But the bandwidth limitations Im not sure this would fix the problem. He also wants something that is compatible with all, or most web browsers and will of course work on smartphones. He has 5 cameras now and wants to expand to 8.

 

The obvious first choice is that they are gonna need faster internet, its a newly constructed area on the edge of town and ISP choices are limited as of now. But beyond that its becoming clear that working on all browsers is the real challenge. Having his customers login and download a bunch of active-x controllers may be a bit too much for any dog watcher. Maybe at this point IP cameras are out of the question, I need to stick with H.264, some better cameras and run some RG6 lines...until he can get faster internet.

 

Ive kicked around the ideas like a ustream account with webcams, dns server, loggin in directly to the cameras and viewing snapshots saved to the SD cards...

[Soundy 1]

That bandwidth (or lack thereof) will be your biggest issue no matter what kind of cameras you use. However, even if you want to start with analog cameras, I'd suggest using Cat5 cable and baluns for them, as that will leave you wired for easy upgrade to IP cameras later. Similarly, you could look into basic VGA-resolution IP cameras to start, or you could use megapixel cameras that support a low-bandwidth substream, and use that for your feed until the bandwidth becomes available to switch to the higher feed. That would also give you the option to, say, update a website with a single high-res still at a time interval (once a minute, perhaps) while providing the separate low-res live stream.

 

The other problem with your upstream speed is that no matter what resolution you use, the more users you get on it, the more choked it's going to get. If one stream take 128kbit, then six viewers is going to saturate your upstream, so you'll definitely want to look into some kind of re-streaming or re-broadcasting service.

 

Using decent name-brand IP cameras would also give you the option of adding an NVR later should they decide they want to record them - just plug it into the network and configure it for the cameras.

[CHoffman 0]

I was looking into some of those Foscams or Loftek's.... not sure what I think of them yet. Some pretty mixed reviews. But they are cheap...

 

Any input?

[Soundy 1]

Isn't part of your problem already that you have cheap gear? They've already wasted money on stuff that isn't doing the job... there's no point wasting more on something else that's going to be marginal at best. Tell them to spend a little extra to plan ahead - you can get a really good 3MP dual-stream camera for around $400 that also has built-in recording, so you can give them something that will fit their needs now, and be ready to give them more when the rest of the technology allows. It even lets you set a different resolution, framerate and bitrate for the main stream so that the HD feed can be gradually increased as more bandwidth becomes available.

[CHoffman 0]

True..

 

I have a Vivotek IP8331 and a FD7161 laying around here that I want to have him try out... gimme a chance to tinker.