Never really been sold on NVR's...yet

[carrseom 0]

Let me say, to start, that I am not an authority on network/hybrid video recorders. There is always that suspicion in the back of my mind that the video will not get from A (camera) to B (the NVR) and if it does what qualitly and how bogged down will the network become.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be able to install cameras all over a facility using the existing backbone with little network trouble/bog or bugs....

 

I have been looking at www.milestone.com. Any thoughts?

 

I guess I am looking for an education.

 

Has anyone ever used NVR software on a linux platform?

[CollinR 0]

The biggest problem with NVRs is the crappy IP (and way overpriced) cams and the cost of the decent ones.

 

A subnet dedicated to cameras is preffered but most IP manufacturers act like you can run them over your existing, thats pretty hit and miss.

[cctv_down_under 0]

Gotta agree with Colin, although Ip has several advantages.

 

1/ Distance limitations can be overcome

2/ Additng additional cameras can be quite simple

3/ You can move the NVR you can not move or relocate a hard wired DVR.

4/ Dual streaming

5/ Lack of CPU stress due to the IP cam doing the compression

6/ Better network throttling

7/ A site that has 16 cams hard wired can add a simple 1 camera site to the system.

 

I am still unsold on IP yet, but once the quality gets there I am all for it, the biggest bug bear at the moment is the bandwidth and redundancy...but once this exists, say goodbye to analogue and hello to Megapixel cams.

[carrseom 0]

Thanks for the help guys. I just keep hearing about the IP camera revolution.

What about if a bank that has a network video system and gets hit with a denial of service attack and it shuts down the network?

 

What do you tell the loss prevention manager?

 

Uh, there is a bug in the system?

[kensplace 0]

Tell him/her that it was probably a inside job.

 

Banks should be able to afford to set the system up properly, so the video network is seperate from the normal network, and any external connections to the outside world into the video network are bullet proof, so all that would get hit would be the hardware talking to the outside, the remaining part of the network should carry on recording as normal.

 

Course, IP probably makes it easier for a insider with technical knowledge, and access to the hardware (say a technically orientated burgler who gets a job as a cleaner) to disable a system on-demand when required (ie when they are not present, a delayed attack)

 

As for bugs in the banks system, there probably are lots, as quite a lot of specialist software written by some very large firms is written by people with little knowledge of the area, who are better at 'talk' than actual coding.

[Thomas 0]

 

Course, IP probably makes it easier for a insider with technical knowledge, and access to the hardware (say a technically orientated burgler who gets a job as a cleaner) to disable a system on-demand when required (ie when they are not present, a delayed attack)

 

Not really. It's going to be an anonmous machine on the rack and if you spend the money for a PoE switch then there won't be tell tales short of ripping all of the wires out. Which would have the exact same effect on an analog machine.

[cctv_down_under 0]

I tend to agree, it is actually harder to get into an IP system, becasue most of the time you are just dealing with the client PC not the server and let me tell you that bank servers are for the most case very secure...as for loss of network connection ..you may have picked a bad industry to use an example because this is indeed a real issue in every other industry, but in banking they usually have disaster recovery and redundant network options.

 

You also need to usnderstand that not ALL IP cams are the same especially web servers, the ones I use have the option of local recording on network failure...for example is if the network goes down at all then the check message being sent does not retur to the camera/webserver and this then makes the system record to either in built HDD, Flash Storage or Local Network Computer, the NVR offsite knows exactly when the last video was sent and will replenish the missing data when the network returns.

[rory 0]

still nothing like a piece of coax and a 13" TV ..

[carrseom 0]

How long do the cameras you use record for given an extended network loss?

 

You funny man rory...!

[WirelessEye 0]

Whenever there are wires, you have the possibility of having your video feeds comprimised. Wireless/Solar on the other hand is much more difficult to bring down.

 

$0.02

[Thomas 0]

5/ Lack of CPU stress due to the IP cam doing the compression

 

This is often cited but untrue. On the server end the software is still going to have to recode the stream to be stored. There is no CPU savings.

[Maui Custom Surveillance 0]

Let me say, to start, that I am not an authority on network/hybrid video recorders. There is always that suspicion in the back of my mind that the video will not get from A (camera) to B (the NVR) and if it does what qualitly and how bogged down will the network become.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be able to install cameras all over a facility using the existing backbone with little network trouble/bog or bugs....

 

I have been looking at www.milestone.com. Any thoughts?

 

I guess I am looking for an education.

 

Has anyone ever used NVR software on a linux platform?

 

I have been a distributor for a major DVR company for about five years, and I switched to IP NVR's about a year ago. There are number of reasons for deciding to change from DVR's to NVR's, here are a couple of reasons that I have.

 

Reason number one, is that it's much easier to network a large building using ethernet, WiFi wireless, or home plug standard, then it is to run individual cables from each camera back to the DVR. The savings in labor can be considerable.

 

Reason number two, is the higher resolution available in IP cameras. It became rather embarrassing getting a call from a client about a robbery or other event, going to the premises to help retrieve evidence from the archive, only to have the people in the images unrecognizable, unidentifiable, license plates on cars on readable. This is especially embarrassing after a client has spent large sums of money on a DVR, and the bottom line is he can make little use of the data it provides because the resolution of the analog cameras is not sufficient. The highest resolution and analog camera can produce is .4 megapixels, and this is being generous because most DVR's have resolutions of .2 megapixels per analog camera. A simple IP camera such as Axis 207 is capable of almost .4 megapixels, or 640 x 480 pixels, can encode in either motion JPEG or MPEG-4, has audio capabilities, and inputs for security devices, all for about $250!

 

I also use IP cameras that are capable of 3 megapixels, some are capable of 8 megapixel. The advantage of having a high-resolution IP camera is that you need fewer cameras to cover a large parking lot for instance. I can make one 3 megapixel IP camera do the work of four to six analog cameras, again the savings can be considerable.

 

Reason number three, is reliability. This is something I was not expecting, because IP cameras are much more complex than analog cameras, because they are miniature computers I was expecting that they would have more things going wrong with them. I have IP cameras I have been running now for two years, and have had a lot much less maintenance than I have had with analog cameras. I'm not exactly sure why this has been so, it seems IP cameras are built better with better quality parts. I have purchased analog cameras in the past that were very shabby in their construction, with loose screws and missing parts. I have never had an experience with IP cameras where they were shabbily built.

 

The downside to IP cameras are that they are networked devices, and you will have to charge a consulting fee to train the client in the use of networks, networks always crash eventually, and if the client is not trained how to bring the network up you will be making numerous trips to various clients just reboot routers.Regarding the linux platform, I have not come across to any archiving software for IP cameras that uses linux. The DVR that we were distributors for here in Hawaii, was a linux based system. Initially, these were superior DVR's to the Windows-based systems of a few years ago, before XP. The downside to linux-based DVR's or NVR's if they exist, is they cannot take advantage of the new smart or intelligent software technologies that are now becoming available.

[cctv_down_under 0]

Quote:

5/ Lack of CPU stress due to the IP cam doing the compression

 

 

This is often cited but untrue. On the server end the software is still going to have to recode the stream to be stored. There is no CPU savings.

_________________

 

True...but this is only true if you are not using encoder/decoder box's, becasue I like analogue cameras better I tend to use a combination of both...can I ask thomas, does decoding the video take as much resource as compressing it?

[Thomas 0]

True...but this is only true if you are not using encoder/decoder box's, becasue I like analogue cameras better I tend to use a combination of both...can I ask thomas, does decoding the video take as much resource as compressing it?

 

It depends on the codecs used, methods, etc. But you're going to eat the some overhead for it.

[rory 0]

Let me say, to start, that I am not an authority on network/hybrid video recorders. There is always that suspicion in the back of my mind that the video will not get from A (camera) to B (the NVR) and if it does what qualitly and how bogged down will the network become.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be able to install cameras all over a facility using the existing backbone with little network trouble/bog or bugs....

 

I have been looking at www.milestone.com. Any thoughts?

 

I guess I am looking for an education.

 

Has anyone ever used NVR software on a linux platform?

 

I have been a distributor for a major DVR company for about five years, and I switched to IP NVR's about a year ago. There are number of reasons for deciding to change from DVR's to NVR's, here are a couple of reasons that I have.

 

Reason number one, is that it's much easier to network a large building using ethernet, WiFi wireless, or home plug standard, then it is to run individual cables from each camera back to the DVR. The savings in labor can be considerable.

 

Reason number two, is the higher resolution available in IP cameras. It became rather embarrassing getting a call from a client about a robbery or other event, going to the premises to help retrieve evidence from the archive, only to have the people in the images unrecognizable, unidentifiable, license plates on cars on readable. This is especially embarrassing after a client has spent large sums of money on a DVR, and the bottom line is he can make little use of the data it provides because the resolution of the analog cameras is not sufficient. The highest resolution and analog camera can produce is .4 megapixels, and this is being generous because most DVR's have resolutions of .2 megapixels per analog camera. A simple IP camera such as Axis 207 is capable of almost .4 megapixels, or 640 x 480 pixels, can encode in either motion JPEG or MPEG-4, has audio capabilities, and inputs for security devices, all for about $250!

 

I also use IP cameras that are capable of 3 megapixels, some are capable of 8 megapixel. The advantage of having a high-resolution IP camera is that you need fewer cameras to cover a large parking lot for instance. I can make one 3 megapixel IP camera do the work of four to six analog cameras, again the savings can be considerable.

 

Reason number three, is reliability. This is something I was not expecting, because IP cameras are much more complex than analog cameras, because they are miniature computers I was expecting that they would have more things going wrong with them. I have IP cameras I have been running now for two years, and have had a lot much less maintenance than I have had with analog cameras. I'm not exactly sure why this has been so, it seems IP cameras are built better with better quality parts. I have purchased analog cameras in the past that were very shabby in their construction, with loose screws and missing parts. I have never had an experience with IP cameras where they were shabbily built.

 

The downside to IP cameras are that they are networked devices, and you will have to charge a consulting fee to train the client in the use of networks, networks always crash eventually, and if the client is not trained how to bring the network up you will be making numerous trips to various clients just reboot routers.Regarding the linux platform, I have not come across to any archiving software for IP cameras that uses linux. The DVR that we were distributors for here in Hawaii, was a linux based system. Initially, these were superior DVR's to the Windows-based systems of a few years ago, before XP. The downside to linux-based DVR's or NVR's if they exist, is they cannot take advantage of the new smart or intelligent software technologies that are now becoming available.

 

Hi, I'd like to know which CCTV Cameras and DVRs you were using in the past.

 

Thanks

Rory

[Maui Custom Surveillance 0]

Let me say, to start, that I am not an authority on network/hybrid video recorders. There is always that suspicion in the back of my mind that the video will not get from A (camera) to B (the NVR) and if it does what qualitly and how bogged down will the network become.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be able to install cameras all over a facility using the existing backbone with little network trouble/bog or bugs....

 

I have been looking at www.milestone.com. Any thoughts?

 

I guess I am looking for an education.

 

Has anyone ever used NVR software on a linux platform?

 

I have been a distributor for a major DVR company for about five years, and I switched to IP NVR's about a year ago. There are number of reasons for deciding to change from DVR's to NVR's, here are a couple of reasons that I have.

 

Reason number one, is that it's much easier to network a large building using ethernet, WiFi wireless, or home plug standard, then it is to run individual cables from each camera back to the DVR. The savings in labor can be considerable.

 

Reason number two, is the higher resolution available in IP cameras. It became rather embarrassing getting a call from a client about a robbery or other event, going to the premises to help retrieve evidence from the archive, only to have the people in the images unrecognizable, unidentifiable, license plates on cars on readable. This is especially embarrassing after a client has spent large sums of money on a DVR, and the bottom line is he can make little use of the data it provides because the resolution of the analog cameras is not sufficient. The highest resolution and analog camera can produce is .4 megapixels, and this is being generous because most DVR's have resolutions of .2 megapixels per analog camera. A simple IP camera such as Axis 207 is capable of almost .4 megapixels, or 640 x 480 pixels, can encode in either motion JPEG or MPEG-4, has audio capabilities, and inputs for security devices, all for about $250!

 

I also use IP cameras that are capable of 3 megapixels, some are capable of 8 megapixel. The advantage of having a high-resolution IP camera is that you need fewer cameras to cover a large parking lot for instance. I can make one 3 megapixel IP camera do the work of four to six analog cameras, again the savings can be considerable.

 

Reason number three, is reliability. This is something I was not expecting, because IP cameras are much more complex than analog cameras, because they are miniature computers I was expecting that they would have more things going wrong with them. I have IP cameras I have been running now for two years, and have had a lot much less maintenance than I have had with analog cameras. I'm not exactly sure why this has been so, it seems IP cameras are built better with better quality parts. I have purchased analog cameras in the past that were very shabby in their construction, with loose screws and missing parts. I have never had an experience with IP cameras where they were shabbily built.

 

The downside to IP cameras are that they are networked devices, and you will have to charge a consulting fee to train the client in the use of networks, networks always crash eventually, and if the client is not trained how to bring the network up you will be making numerous trips to various clients just reboot routers.Regarding the linux platform, I have not come across to any archiving software for IP cameras that uses linux. The DVR that we were distributors for here in Hawaii, was a linux based system. Initially, these were superior DVR's to the Windows-based systems of a few years ago, before XP. The downside to linux-based DVR's or NVR's if they exist, is they cannot take advantage of the new smart or intelligent software technologies that are now becoming available.

 

Hi, I'd like to know which CCTV Cameras and DVRs you were using in the past.

 

Thanks

Rory

 

I have been a distributors for "VPON" for approximately 6 years, and have many installations, everything from Quiznos to hotels. VPON is proprietary, using Lennox.

 

As far as analog cameras go, I have used some Panasonic's, Sanyos, and a lot of no-name cameras using Sony chips.

 

But it doesn't matter how much money you spend or what brand you get in and analog camera, you still can do no better than .4 megapixels

[rory 0]

Im not sure what you mean by .4 Megapixels, but the highest CCTV Recording source is 720x480 currently, and most CCTV High Res Cameras are 811x564 pixels.

[ak357 0]

Im not sure what you mean by .4 Megapixels, but the highest CCTV Recording source is 720x480 currently, and most CCTV High Res Cameras are 811x564 pixels.

 

he mean 811x564=457404 ~0.45 megapixel

[Maui Custom Surveillance 0]

Im not sure what you mean by .4 Megapixels, but the highest CCTV Recording source is 720x480 currently, and most CCTV High Res Cameras are 811x564 pixels.

 

I cannot recall where I was reading about how the interlaced lines of resolution created by analog cameras for television sets work out mathematically .4 megapixels, but that is a figure I have read on more than one occasion. So I did a Google and came up with the article below.

 

Ten Things You Won’t Hear from Your

Analog Camera Vendor

 

Viewed in a wider context, the convergence to IP-based networks includes

a number of factors to consider aside from a comparison of what two types

of cameras can provide the end user. Things such as performance, open

systems interoperability, flexibility, future-proof, and network

connectivity. However, in this paper we seek to explore 10 of the most

important functional differences between today’s network cameras and

their dated analog cousin, and why these factors are important to

understand when making that next camera purchase.

 

1. End to interlace problems. An analog camera at high resolution

(4CIF) has a significant problem with interlacing. This is because

with an analog video signal, even when connected to a DVR, all

images are made up of lines, and each image is formed from two

interlaced fields. When an image has a lot of movement, the image

will become blurry. The blurriness results from the objects moving

between the image capture of the two interlaced fields. A network

camera employs “progressive scanâ€

[rory 0]

Im not sure what you mean by .4 Megapixels, but the highest CCTV Recording source is 720x480 currently, and most CCTV High Res Cameras are 811x564 pixels.

 

he mean 811x564=457404 ~0.45 megapixel

 

isnt 1 megapixel 1024 X 768 ?

[rory 0]

Things such as performance, open

systems interoperability, flexibility, future-proof, and network

connectivity.

 

We've already debunked these Myths in other posts on the forum.

 

Also, Ive read that article also before, and the writer doesn't seem to have had much experience with CCTV.

[ak357 0]

that why I put "~" for "approximate"

[rory 0]

that why I put "~" for "approximate"

 

True, Im not disputing the higher quality video of a color IP camera.

Though going by the article above, their 0.4 Megapixel is 4Cif, thats 704x480.

 

See this thread here, the last post.

http://www.cctvforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=6460

Most quality CCTV cameras are higher than D1.

[Maui Custom Surveillance 0]

Things such as performance, open

systems interoperability, flexibility, future-proof, and network

connectivity.

 

We've already debunked these Myths in other posts on the forum.

 

Also, Ive read that article also before, and the writer doesn't seem to have had much experience with CCTV.

 

Are you trying to say you have debunked all 10 points?

 

I am sorry I missed that debunking, maybe you could just debunked one of the 10 points for me?

[rory 0]

Things such as performance, open

systems interoperability, flexibility, future-proof, and network

connectivity.

 

We've already debunked these Myths in other posts on the forum.

 

Also, Ive read that article also before, and the writer doesn't seem to have had much experience with CCTV.

 

Are you trying to say you have debunked all 10 points?

 

I am sorry I missed that debunking, maybe you could just debunked one of the 10 points for me?

 

Sorry, but there are many posts on the forum in reference to this already.

Thanks

Rory