Pc based Vs Standalone or specific DVR.

[peshaw 0]

Hello,

I dont know if this thread is ever started on this forum but any ways,

Which one of the two either a pc based geovision Dvr card or a specific or standalone Dvr is more reliable when 24/7 security and surveillance

is required regarding durability and performance.

I already have a linux based standalone Dvr which i am using and one good feature in that Dvr is if there is a electicity power faliure and Dvr shuts down it start in the same settings and modes in which it was before shutting down.Is this also possible in Pc based systems?

One thing which i dont like about this Dvr is it has wavelet compression and in video playbalcks as well as live montring it gives pixelation when zoomed particularly on a person and identification becomes impossible.

Is there a way to enhance zomming in my Dvr so it gives a clear image without pixilation.

 

 

Capt.Peshaw Fernendez.

[rory 0]

What's the model of your DVR?

 

Most budget standalone DVRs wont give you any kind of decent image quality and also not many features.

 

As for a PC DVR, you can use a UPS with AVR to assist in the event of a power outage or brownout.

 

Wavelet is actually high quality, but it is "less" compression.

Depends on the DVR what it does with it though ...

[kelvin 0]

Wavelet is good for time-lapse when you are doing playback. MPEG4 is nice if you are in real-time recording.

[VST_Man 1]

PC Based systems continue to improve. Codec/software is always going to be improving due to competition. The PC Based system will be able to "upgrade" more easily than a standalone.

 

My opinion is to stick with a well known, supported, and financed operating system/DVR and allow the competition to set the technology pace. I also belive that hardware compression will fade and software will prevail based on the fact that hardware is more expensive and software is not.and software is easily improved over hardware.

 

I'm sticking with the video card/software that is built off of a Microsoft Operating system. As microsoft compets to be the best the software it drives will in turn improve.

 

Standalone DVR's are behind the power curve in ease of use, video editing, and codec updates. They have a place but it seems that the overall product is always missing a link to one thing or another. You always have to load somethings, update the codec, or use the player.

[cctv_down_under 0]

I agree with VST, but a standalone purpose built machine is more stable and that was the original question

[kensplace 0]

If you are getting pixellation when zooming in on a person, its likely its not always the fault of the dvr, unless the DVR is a low res one, or you have your compression set to low on the DVR.

 

Most cctv cameras (even the pro, so called high res ones) are actually really low resolution cameras compared to a decent digital camera.

 

Take a picture on say a 3 mega pixel camera, and you can zoom in to see extra detail, as there is extra detail captured by the camera, but on a typical cctv camera, you only have say half a mega pixel or so (off the top of my head) to play with, so what you see is pretty much what you get, and any decent level of digital zoom will just make those pixels bigger, and pixellation will occur.

 

Thats why you need zoom lenses, or multiple cameras with different fields of view, to capture what you need to see, a wide angle shot on a typical cctv camera is good for an overview, but you wont be able to make out fine details, and zooming will be a waste of time after the event. You would need to zoom in at the time, with a zoom lens if you want to see those details.

 

Sometimes though, the dvr can be low res, which means you could be recording at less than your camera is capable of, in which case, you are better of with a different dvr to be honest.

 

It could even be another peice of equipment in the chain, from cabling problems reducing picture quality to say a multiplexer. One multiplexer I looked at recently with a view to buying, a Robot multiplexer had a good resolution for recording (764 x 480) but was crippled by the fact that it could only ever display or playback a max resolution of 512x512.