Best DVR solution for 31 Camera setup

[mpr86 0]

Hello,

I am interested in installing a DVR for a building. I have been doing some research and have found a "32 Channel 960/960fps REAL-TIME Hardware Compressed H.264 DVR with 32 Channels of Audio" DVR.

 

I can't link as I have <5 posts, but the specifications state:

"Product Specifications:

• Real-time full-motion video (Max. 30fps per channel) with synchronous audio on every channel

• Up to 64 cameras can be viewed simultaneously from a single monitor

 

• Hardware compressed H.264 -- each channel is compressed independently

• Customizable image quality and resolution (up to Full D1 704 x480)

• Remote access and recording on client computer through LAN (network) or WAN (Internet) through static IP or dynamic DNS

• Monitor multiple locations from one DVR

• Bi-directional two-way remote communication between multiple servers in various locations

• Motion detecting (entire frame or up to 12 detection zones per channel)

• Four recording modes: Continuous recording, Motion Detection, External Sensor, or Sensor/Motion

•Alarm email message auto-sending with photo attachment

• Matrix card allows recorded data to be transmitted to a TV monitor (optional)

• Duplex mode -- recording during playback

• P/T/Z/F & Speed Dome control through software or keyboard -- no additional hardware required

• PTZ Auto-tracking with motion detection

• Search/playback by date/time directory (random-access)"

 

Is this a good system? I am looking for something that can do 30 frames per second recording.

 

The website that is selling this is edigitaldeals d0t c0m

 

Anyone have any other recommendations for a high end DVR with internet capabilities?

Thanks

[ak357 0]

Hello,

I am interested in installing a DVR for a building. I have been doing some research and have found a "32 Channel 960/960fps REAL-TIME Hardware Compressed H.264 DVR with 32 Channels of Audio" DVR.

 

I can't link as I have <5 posts, but the specifications state:

"Product Specifications:

• Real-time full-motion video (Max. 30fps per channel) with synchronous audio on every channel

• Up to 64 cameras can be viewed simultaneously from a single monitor

 

• Hardware compressed H.264 -- each channel is compressed independently

• Customizable image quality and resolution (up to Full D1 704 x480)

• Remote access and recording on client computer through LAN (network) or WAN (Internet) through static IP or dynamic DNS

• Monitor multiple locations from one DVR

• Bi-directional two-way remote communication between multiple servers in various locations

• Motion detecting (entire frame or up to 12 detection zones per channel)

• Four recording modes: Continuous recording, Motion Detection, External Sensor, or Sensor/Motion

•Alarm email message auto-sending with photo attachment

• Matrix card allows recorded data to be transmitted to a TV monitor (optional)

• Duplex mode -- recording during playback

• P/T/Z/F & Speed Dome control through software or keyboard -- no additional hardware required

• PTZ Auto-tracking with motion detection

• Search/playback by date/time directory (random-access)"

 

Is this a good system? I am looking for something that can do 30 frames per second recording.

 

The website that is selling this is edigitaldeals d0t c0m

 

Anyone have any other recommendations for a high end DVR with internet capabilities?

Thanks

 

nothing wrong with system u found but it will not do D1 at 30 frames

u will get half about 15, but 32 ch at cif no problem

I sell the same product

plus their price kinda too high

pm to me if u want more info

[mpr86 0]

Thanks for the response. I am interested, but I can't message you as I have under 10 posts and it thinks I am a spammer. Could you please email me?

 

m p r 8 6 at yah00 d0t c 0 m

 

Thanks

Hello,

I am interested in installing a DVR for a building. I have been doing some research and have found a "32 Channel 960/960fps REAL-TIME Hardware Compressed H.264 DVR with 32 Channels of Audio" DVR.

 

I can't link as I have <5 posts, but the specifications state:

"Product Specifications:

• Real-time full-motion video (Max. 30fps per channel) with synchronous audio on every channel

• Up to 64 cameras can be viewed simultaneously from a single monitor

 

• Hardware compressed H.264 -- each channel is compressed independently

• Customizable image quality and resolution (up to Full D1 704 x480)

• Remote access and recording on client computer through LAN (network) or WAN (Internet) through static IP or dynamic DNS

• Monitor multiple locations from one DVR

• Bi-directional two-way remote communication between multiple servers in various locations

• Motion detecting (entire frame or up to 12 detection zones per channel)

• Four recording modes: Continuous recording, Motion Detection, External Sensor, or Sensor/Motion

•Alarm email message auto-sending with photo attachment

• Matrix card allows recorded data to be transmitted to a TV monitor (optional)

• Duplex mode -- recording during playback

• P/T/Z/F & Speed Dome control through software or keyboard -- no additional hardware required

• PTZ Auto-tracking with motion detection

• Search/playback by date/time directory (random-access)"

 

Is this a good system? I am looking for something that can do 30 frames per second recording.

 

The website that is selling this is edigitaldeals d0t c0m

 

Anyone have any other recommendations for a high end DVR with internet capabilities?

Thanks

 

nothing wrong with system u found but it will not do D1 at 30 frames

u will get half about 15, but 32 ch at cif no problem

I sell the same product

plus their price kinda too high

pm to me if u want more info

[nroberts 0]

check out their h.264 dvr, its the best one out there for a good price. i've been using it for a while and its never given me one problem and the picture quality is awesome. pm and i'll send you the specs i have on it

[rory 0]

I doubt that is a High End DVR, also, you may want to use 2 16 channels, 32 channels is asking for problems to begin with, plus it will only be real time in very low quality.

[sajaan458 0]

I agree with Rorry, 32 ports in real time on one system will create a lot of I/O and system may not be very stable. I have not seen any DVR that can record 30fps per channel in D1 resolution. I use AVerMedia DVRs and they have PCI Express 16 port DVR card, which can display/record 30fps per channel with 640x480 mode. You can also stack two AVerMedia 16 port express DVR cards in one system.

[CSCOUT2001 0]

RTSSENTRY can do 7.5 at D1 and CIF is 30 frames per second per camera on a 16 channel. It is called the Echelon. Nice Box for the high end market, it is limited to 16 ports so you would need two 16 channel DVR.

[Kingwood 0]

Dear Sir/Madm,

 

If you need 960fps realtime,HK-DS4008HFI is OK,which is 4chs,D1, Reatime.30fps.

 

So you need 4pcs to build one system.

 

You can search the products via google.

[Kingwood 0]

I agree with Rorry, 32 ports in real time on one system will create a lot of I/O and system may not be very stable. I have not seen any DVR that can record 30fps per channel in D1 resolution. I use AVerMedia DVRs and they have PCI Express 16 port DVR card, which can display/record 30fps per channel with 640x480 mode. You can also stack two AVerMedia 16 port express DVR cards in one system.

 

I think 4pcs 8chs Realtime D1 DVR cards is OK.

 

If he need 32chs real time D1 DVR in one cards,I think they are no such a card in market yet.

[PMA 0]

 

Anyone have any other recommendations for a high end DVR with internet capabilities?

 

Hi, well if it's high end you need and image quality, I would go for an Ip based system.

[rory 0]

Hi, well if it's high end you need and image quality, I would go for an Ip based system.

 

If its not MegaPixel IP then the quality typically wont be any higher than a decent DVR system, sometimes even worse actually.

[PMA 0]

High end Ip system would emply Mp cameras.

[Kingwood 0]

 

Anyone have any other recommendations for a high end DVR with internet capabilities?

 

Hi, well if it's high end you need and image quality, I would go for an Ip based system.

 

In normal,IP Cameras Based system have worse quality,and the picture is not very good.

[PMA 0]

Hi kingwood,

 

Don't have much to say about that why don't you take some time reading some interesting articles of analog vs Ip from some companies and IT experts ... Remember, it's not me that saying that just google it.

 

Unfortunately I can not post any links because of spam... would have undreds for you.

 

"- Resolution. Analog cameras cannot provide resolution above television standards, which corresponds to 0.4 mega-pixels at 4CIF. Many analog systems run at a much lower resolution due to technical and cost restrictions, operating at 0.01 mega pixels. Network Video technology can provide a resolution up to 15 times the quality of analog video. The latest cameras now can process video up to 3Mbitp/s."

" Digital images do not lose quality in transmission or storage. A digital picture is created using Motion-JPEG. Once created, the image is free from degradation. Each frame within a video stream is sharp.

"Analog Image quality is lost when using long cables and the resolution of a magnetic tape is normally quite low. In addition, the quality of the recorded video deteriorates over time."

 

But I'm curious about what all the other members have to say about this???

[rory 0]

Typically if using all analog (CCTV CRT Monitor) and CCTV cameras, it would be crisper than a basic IP Camera system (Non Megapixel system) at least going by the ones I have seen online and also locally (note, using 811x508 pixel cameras). Now, if you put that on an LCD (or even just a VGA CRT monitor, though clearer than the LCD) then the video quality of the analog CCTV system just degraded, at least visibly (doesnt mean it still didnt record in high quality) - tip, use the video card S-Video output to a CCTV CRT monitor with an S-Video input and it will be very crisp in playback.

 

Both of them have their limitations when it comes to how many frames they can do as the camera numbers go up from 4+, the analog one due to the PCI bus and the IP due to the network bandwidth - both also depend on what products are used, especially with the IP depending on whether it is off the shelf or high end network products.

 

We have had discussions on this before though under the IP forum .. most of what you find on google will be marketing hype by both industries though. Also many IT experts have little to no experience with professional CCTV systems prior to using IP cameras.

 

MegaPixel takes IP systems to a whole other level.

But then you need decent software and expensive network gear to fully utilize it.

 

After seeing megapixel though (even just from my digital still camera), Im getting tired of low res anything, will be trying some MP gear soon. Though, most clients will not be able to afford that kind of system anytime soon.

 

My 5 cents

[PMA 0]

I have seen expensive systems running (analag, Ip and hibrid to Ip with matrix).

The image quality in the Ip systems with Mp cams running without bandwidth limitations on a giga network is by far superior to analog. In the hibrid systems it's really easy to the detect which cameras are Mp and analog just by their quality. Don't forget that Ip cams don't lose quality over distance or time

About the network gear, it's truly not expensive (today all computer come with 1000mb network card, and except if you go for a truly expensive switch / router / gateway with 24/48 ports, you can by this equipment really cheap too). It will be expensive if you run it in fiber optic and their modulators.

And now with POE (Power over Ethernet) the Ip systems are even easier to install. About the software I agree, but it's just a matter of time (you might have some surprises this year)

[rory 0]

Yeah but sounds like you're talking about cheap IP systems, using cheap network gear. You need much more expensive gear for high quality MP systems. Same with CCTV systems, cheap gear typically means low quality among other issues like stability; a professional system is going to cost, and dont forget this is a security system we are talking about.

 

As for quality, I still stick to what I already said before, all IP (Non MP) systems I have seen so far have been lower quality than professional CCTV systems, perhaps mostly due to the excessive compression required for the network. At the least, the quality was no more, as the image pixels are the same in general, then add in the compression for the network. Then there are the wire issues, cat5 is flimsy cable, especially compared to RG59 Siamese coax.

 

When you were viewing that Hybrid system I hope you were actually at the DVR and you were not looking at them over the network? Also, could have just been bad a crappy system, plenty of those out there in both industries (I separate them as CCTV and IP Surveillance are somewhat different, the Security pros -typically with much more experience with Surveillance, Cameras, Remote Video, and also things such as Burglar Alarms, etc) started off in the CCTV industry while there are alot of beginners swamping the IP industry now).

 

One thing that does make me chuckle though, all the so called experts on IP Video Surveillance (google searches bring up a few) and their Myths about how bad CCTV is compared to IP surveillance, yet they fail to show any comparisons what so ever, and still expect us to fall for their marketing hype

 

The only thing I can agree with them on is that MegaPixel is higher quality, but they also fail to mention all the other issues that come with that, such as much lower frames, and a very high cost per camera.

 

Also, POE is very limited, that cant push high end Day Night Infrared Cameras, which is most of my applications.

 

PS. what cameras were on that DVR or hybrid system? Makes a huge difference, plus the installers may not have know how to setup the cameras properly, the perfect image is not plug and play like many think, and just for others reading this, most bullet cameras these days actually come unfocused, so if the quality looks bad, most likely it is either low res camera (511x pixels - 380TVL-420TVL) or its simply not focused properly (or other setting such as AI, BLC etc).