I would like to know with DVR is best to watch live feed from remote locations through the internet. I would like something similar to the Geovision GV-800 DVR Card witch i've tried and i'm very happy with the results.

Thanks

you have to check.
pls tell me if you like to check our dvr, I will let our technician build internet access according to your reply.

err, most provide fairly decent images over the internet.
budget would be a nice thing to know, but, coming in under the geovision card in price, there's a lot to be had!

embedded 4 channel units like the iFCS LITE 4 CIF unit, or the PACOM's do nice remote viewing,

DM's stuff is a lot more expensive, but, also scales a lot better too!

try the ge wavereader

If you have the budget, the Nuvico Apex series dynamicaly scales the resolution of the images being transmitted to the images being viewed which greatly reduces network bandwidth for the smoothest remote video.

I.e. if you looking at a 16 camera screen it is transmitting 16 QCIF images, if you bring up 1 camera it immediately starts transmitting only that one image at D1 resolution.

For remote LAN/WAN viewing, TeleEye video recording servers are decent. Multil channel processing.

since the magazine publishers will never suggest anything that would hurt their advertisers maybe we should set something up where we can compare all these manufacturers recorded as well as remote viewing quality.

Couldn't agree more! NUVICO Apex kicks ass... AND starting in Feb 2009, it's HYBRID!

H264 is by far the best solution especially now with the latest profile of scalable video coding. Nuvico is a good machine but an older codec.

H.264(if using the correct type as there are many flavors of H.264) is indeed a better version of MPEG-4. However, the APEX series scales the resolution of all cameras based only on what is currently being viewed, and will still provide better remote viewing. Basically, the APEX is never transmitting more than 720x480 at a time - whether viewing 1 camera or 16 camera. That provides such a dramatic reduction of bandwidth that really nothing else compares.

264 is the best because it uses variable bit rates and only sends the changing frames down when necessary depending upon the configuration of the I, B, P frames.

Correct - though MPEG4 uses the same premise(H.264 is the latest version of MPEG-4. It is also known as MPEG-4 Part 10.). No argument there, H.264 is a smaller file size. The reason the Nuvico will outperform nearly any DVR on the market is because of how the DVR transmits(the scalable resolution I mentioned previously.), NOT because of the codec. The Apex series can transmit 16 cameras using (in theory) a 1/16 of the bandwidth required by other DVRs. H.264 definitly does not make up that much difference.

i hate to differ with you but dont confuse MPEG4 with H264 they are not related. The motion picture experts group calls it MPEG4 part 10 and the internation telecommunications union calls it H264 they should not be confused with mpeg4 part 2. Completely different profiles and architecture. 264 is a complex codec. MPEG4 part 2 does not have

slice based based prediction
arithmetic algorithm
deblocking filters
use of multiple reference frames
interlace management
weighted prediction

and it goes on:

264 goes down to 4 x 4 blocks
mpeg4 16 x 16

mpeg4 uses huffman algorithm vs arithmetic for 264

they are not even similar in their profile characteristics.

transmission with simple codecs cannot be managed. Its the DSP which has substream capabilities which controls the data flow.

In the end seeing is believing. If it does what you say then fine.

Anyone know what video format the Panasonic WJ-HD316 (A and non-A versions) DVR uses?

"Proprietary Super Compression "

That's actually what they call it.

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wc ... splayTab=F