Disappointed with record quality - Aposonic 16ch DVR

[Jmath 0]

I'm working with an Aposonic A-S1602R25 16 channel DVR with several different cameras. Originally I was using only the cameras that came with the package. I was getting a very low quality picture even with the DVR (supposedly) set on full D1 (704x480), so I bought some higher $ cameras. Unfortunately this resulted in only a small improvement. Now I suspect the DVR might be to blame.

 

Here is a snapshot from one of the cheap cameras that came with the DVR:

 

Here is a snapshot from one of the higher quality (but still disappointing) cameras:

 

Here is another from one of the higher quality cameras:

 

I also bought this camera:

http://www.securitycamerasdirect.com/products/color-65-ir-weatherproof-camera

and this one:

http://www.securitycamerasdirect.com/products/540-line-164-ir-2_8-10mm-weatherproof-camera

 

I tried these two recently and both gave a disappointing picture, especially the cheaper one. I don't have snapshots for those but they were similar to the first snapshot I posted.

 

Are these fuzzy pictures a result of the DVR or is this just how bad analog recording is? Should I buy a better DVR?

 

Thanks

[lowpro 0]

I'm sure others will chime in but I can tell you that those cameras are pretty bad. The specs are pretty low.

 

That being said, Welcome! Better get comfy as you'll have a lot of reading to do!

[Jmath 0]

I guess what my question boils down to, cameras aside, how much of a quality difference does the DVR make?

[ak357 0]

I guess what my question boils down to, cameras aside, how much of a quality difference does the DVR make?

Do forum search and see if u like any D1 pix u find

I will not be surprised u won't find any

They all suck

You need Mega pix cameras as simple as this

[lowpro 0]

There are many threads. Here is an example...

http://www.cctvforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=32322

[Kawboy12R 0]

If you're happy with the live quality of the video and the recorded quality sucks then it is the DVR. If the recorded quality is exactly the same as the live quality then you have a great DVR with poor cameras.

 

As ak357 said, you're better off with megapixel cameras if recorded quality is of utmost importance. From what I've seen, superb analog DVRs cost more than cheaper IP cameras that will easily record exactly what they display. The only person I've seen claim that he had an awesome analog DVR that played back video EXACTLY the same as the live view paid somewhere around $3500 for the DVR alone. You can get three or more excellent high end IP cameras plus a computer to record them on for the price of that DVR alone and the image will be MUCH better.

[Securame 0]

2nd and 3rd pics do look better than the first one, that being said, they are not good. The two cameras you are linking, second one is just a normal camera (not good for sunlight/contrasts, indoor camera looking at a glass, etc), the first one is junk.

[Jmath 0]

If you're happy with the live quality of the video and the recorded quality sucks then it is the DVR. If the recorded quality is exactly the same as the live quality then you have a great DVR with poor cameras.

 

As ak357 said, you're better off with megapixel cameras if recorded quality is of utmost importance. From what I've seen, superb analog DVRs cost more than cheaper IP cameras that will easily record exactly what they display. The only person I've seen claim that he had an awesome analog DVR that played back video EXACTLY the same as the live view paid somewhere around $3500 for the DVR alone. You can get three or more excellent high end IP cameras plus a computer to record them on for the price of that DVR alone and the image will be MUCH better.

The live quality is what is in question, it is the same as the recorded quality. You say that if that is the case, the DVR is good. But wouldn't the DVR effect the live quality too since I'm watching the video through the DVR? The DVR has to do the analog to digital conversion and display the picture to a monitor, so I feel like it does have an effect.

 

So paying $200+ for each analog camera is normal to get a decent picture? I'm quickly realizing I should've gone with IP cameras from the start. But, now I'm in somewhat of a hole.

[Kawboy12R 0]

Yep. A quality crisp picture in a camera that will handle difficult situations like the one with sunlight in the background through the windows costs money whether the cam is analog or IP. IP is a lot easier to get a crisp recorded image and the detail captured is much higher even if you get a crisp saved picture from an analog cam. The feature you're looking for is Wide Dynamic Range (WDR), or ExDR, or something similar. Some cheaper cams will claim WDR but, like most things, you generally get what you pay for.

 

You might be able to crisp up your images on the cheaper cameras just by putting in better lenses though. They're probably m12 (12mm metric thread) board lenses of some kind. A 3.6mm lens is a pretty common wideangle (not fisheye) lens. You can get good quality lenses from a reputable source for 8-20 bucks/lens that might perk up those cheap cameras if they take screw-in lenses. Some super-cheap cams either won't come apart or won't take a different lens, but it's worth a shot.

 

m12lenses.com has a good selection of m12 and CS mount lenses. The "megapixel" m12 lenses are higher quality than the Joe Schmoe regular m12 lenses because you need better lenses in the high-definition IP cameras. You can see the fuzziness and imperfections that aren't visible through analog resolution. Might be worth the money buying an "expensive" $15-$20 lens to see how good your cameras can get (if they take replaceable lenses at all, that is).

[Jmath 0]

Thanks, the lenses idea I have not tried. That seems like an affordable option at the moment.

[shockwave199 0]

Hold on- what do you have your recording settings at in the dvr exactly? I'm gonna guess you somehow have it set to CIF. Get into your quality settings in there and let us know what they're set at. Also by channel, adjust your brightness, color, hue, and saturation settings better. Your pics have nasty artifacts from what looks to be color settings that are too extreme. Of course analog is not MP quality. But analog should be better than that. A few of my older snaps- snapped remotely-

 

 

 

 

[thewireguys 3]

^^^

[Jmath 0]

Hold on- what do you have your recording settings at in the dvr exactly? I'm gonna guess you somehow have it set to CIF. Get into your quality settings in there and let us know what they're set at. Also by channel, adjust your brightness, color, hue, and saturation settings better. Your pics have nasty artifacts from what looks to be color settings that are too extreme. Of course analog is not MP quality. But analog should be better than that. A few of my older snaps- snapped remotely-

I checked all that before posting, as I suspected the same thing. The settings:

 

Best REC Resolution - FULL-D1

Compression - Normal

No Dual Streaming

Each camera set on the highest record quality

Each camera set to 7 IPS so that the total IPS is less than the spec 120 IPS @ Full D1

[shockwave199 0]

I'm quickly realizing I should've gone with IP cameras from the start. But, now I'm in somewhat of a hole.

I suppose. Good luck to you.