hardwired

When viewing Exacq remotely over typical DSL-speed connections, I've found that the most fluid framerates are achieved by using the web-based interface, which lets you use lower resolution images, allowing a higher framerate with a given amount of bandwidth (image quality will be lower, or framerate will be lower - pick one). The client software uses full frame images, which will be far slower, especially with megapixel cameras.

If you're not seeing the signal strength indicators on the units lit, is almost sounds like the units aren't actually linked. Try searching for the AP from the station, and then try connecting to it that way. Also, make sure "Client Isolation" is unchecked. Try auto channel selection, turn Airmax back on, keep ACK on auto. The CCQ being that bad makes it sound like there's lots of interference, somehow. Do you have two Nano's very close to each other for any reason, or near another source of interference that you can identify? The "useless" WDS mode that people talk about on the Ubiquiti forum is when people are trying to use a single radio at a midpoint to repeat a signal, that doesn't work very well AP-WDS to STA-WDS is the way that most people seem to run Ubiquiti equipment, as I mentioned, that is how to achieve a transparent bridge.

Who said not to run AP-WDS to STA-WDS? I agree not to use store and forward WDS repeating (losing half the bandwidth each hop), but running in WDS mode is not the same thing, it is necessary to keep the MAC headers on data packets from being changed, which a lot of systems don't like. WDS mode creates a layer 2 bridge, which appears transparent (like a wire) to the cameras and NVR.

Make sure you are running them AP-WDS to Station WDS, turn power up until you are as close as possible to -50 on the signal strength, run Airview spectrum analyzer mode (from the AP, it drops the link while running, you can't do it from stations unless you are directly connected to their LAN port) to look for interference in the area, try Auto channel selection/ changing channels on the AP, try turning off AirMax on the AP, try locking MCS rate to MCS7, change bandwidth to 10Mhz (in that order). Try temporarily turning off one of the stations to see if one has the issues, or both. If you are running two different locations with NSM2's as stations, and AP's, at least one of the stations is somewhat out of the beam of the AP (although at that range, you can usually shoot into the back of them and still have it work). I have a set of 2.4 Airgrids going 2.5 miles with one line of trees in the way, and I'm still in the -60's with the power turned down, you should be great at that distance.

Glad I helped on the alignment issue. Try uninstalling the AV100 software, it tries to always run in the background, and tends to screw things up. Are you confirming this framerate in playback, or live viewing? If it's in the live viewing, try changing the image quality from the default "Full" in the setup tab of the smart client to "Super high", or "High", the Smart Client can put a very high load on the viewing PC at the default settings.

Memories, indeed. in the late 80's I worked in a repair shop where we worked on pinball machines, as well as video games, and just about anything else. I vividly remember the Williams Hyperball game, we had one that had a slightly warped playing field that would cause the ball to jump up and shatter the glass! Fixing that one was fun, it fired the balls REALLY fast! And don't get me started on those laserdisk based games, those were an absolute pain in the a$$..... Right now, I've got a Mario Brothers game in my living room, getting ready to turn it into a MAME console.

Try going into the camera settings and adjust the starting pixel position on the #3 image (rather than starting at 0, try a hundred or so pixels as the starting vertical position). That should digitally crop the image and move it up in relation to the others. Then you can fine tune the cropping between each image as needed. *********Edit******* Also check if you have "maintain image aspect ratio" either checked or unchecked on all of the cameras, it looks like some are set that way and some are not.

We've been building our own for quite a while (Windows 98 era). We like the control of component choices, speed of service (we often fix units in the field), and the additional profit margin we have by doing it that way.

For the wiring pinout for the Fujinon lenses, http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/optical_devices/security/zoom-lenses/index.html#See_All The Rainbow, http://www.rainbowcctv.com/specs/23_inch/s10m.html If you want to roll your own controls, (the hard way, BTW) you pretty much just need to have a reversible polarity (for zoom, focus direction control) ~6 volt DC or so signal applied to each of the control motors through relays. There are RS422/485 controllers on fleabay, too, although I can't vouch for how well they work.

Paperweights under my desk.

Few issues here- What wireguys was saying is that Arecont only produces auto iris camera in non-day/night versions, a very poor choice of design. Why create a camera possibly better suited for outdoor use by putting auto iris control on it, and then make it not perform well at night by not having a D/N ICR capability? And, they are incorrect in stating that suitable auto-iris lenses are not available (although perhaps when they made this statement, it was true, it is not now). I've used AI megapixel lenses from Fujinon and Kowa, and have had good results, rivaling any manual iris lenses short of extremely high end machine vision lenses (also from Fujinon). Arecont has had some great ideas- but in implementation, they have often failed badly. The 3130 and 3135 are a great idea, but are limited in lens options by the imagers being placed too close together. The dome cameras have had a variety of issues (non-functional gimbal design, distorted domes- and don't even get us started on their firmware- I had a 5105 turn itself into a 3105, and had to be sent back to the manufacturer for repair). Arecont has just recently received the notoriety of being judged the worst camera manufacturer by an industry testing site, which listed polls from integrators worldwide. And, from my experiences with them, they've earned that title. Calling Arecont a more reliable resource than some of the members here will probably earn a laugh, at best.

Speco has a couple of wall can mounted DVR's, one model has the camera power supply in it. Can't say how good it is, though, I've never tried it.

The cheap electret condenser microphones work pretty well in most instances, but for high-end audio applications (police interview rooms, etc) we've used the Crown PZM microphones http://www.crownaudio.com/mic_web/pzm.htm. They are really excellent, but cost quite a bit more.

I have to disagree a little bit about the auto iris lenses on CMOS cameras. I do agree that most CMOS cameras do not need them for the dynamic range in bright light. But, in most installations I've done with CMOS cameras/manual iris lenses, I found better daytime image quality and depth of field with the lens stopped down somewhat, which means you are sacrificing more night capability. AI lenses would allow better results in day (more DOF), and night (full open iris for best low light performance). It's too bad that the Arecont's suck in so many other ways that I've quit using them.

If you don't have to have FIPS, I've been getting ~15-20 Mbps throughput on the Ubiquiti 900 stuff, and 70+ Mbps on 2.4 and 5.8, for a lot less money. Ubiquiti doesn't support certificates, but does support WPA2 (personal and enterprise) Radius, EAP-PEAP, and EAP-TTLS.

The analog stuff in 900 (or 2.4 or 5.8, for that matter) is pretty much garbage, wide channel widths and no security, but if you go IP based, you have a lot more options in the 900 band. Ubiquiti makes a number of IP radio items for the 900 band with WPA2, Radius options (no FIPS, though) I use quite a lot of their gear, especially the 5.8 stuff. Their 2.4 gear will burn through a fair amount of foliage, especially in shorter links. (I have a 2 mile link that goes through some trees that works at full capability). Redline and Alvarion claim NLOS capability for their higher band stuff that has FIPS, but I haven't tried it (pretty pricey stuff).

We use the AIM/Cambridge CPMC8810 three piece crimp connectors on RG59 Plenum cable, you might try finding those.

I heard the Avigilon encoder only works with Monster Cable high performance Ethernet cables. http://www.monstercable.com/productdisplay.asp?pin=4697 Why bother with that stuff, just use 10GB single mode fiber transceivers!

It's probably internal reflection from the IR, try it with the dome cover (or end cover, if it is a bullet) off, and see if there is a difference. This is a common problem with dome cameras with IR, the IR bounces off the dome cover internally, fogging the image.

Depending on the amount of video you are trying to move, you may easily exceed your ISP's monthly data transfer limits, and find yourself with large overage fees. This is why (along with ISP bandwidth limitations) that hosted video for security applications hasn't really taken off. (I have customers that utilize 1TB or more of storage per day. There's simply no way to economically make something like that work offsite.) ISP's typically oversell their bandwidth at a 10:1 ratio, or more. To get a dedicated network connection to effectively transfer large amounts of video, you are looking at connections that can run into the thousands of dollars per month.

Is there any specific markings on the cable? it sounds like you might need a BNC connector for a 22 gauge core, or smaller (commonly, RG59 has a 20 gauge center conductor).

A little bit of solder will hold the pin on (don't get too much on the outside of the pin, though, or it will not fit in the connector). If you heat the pin with a soldering gun, and apply the solder to where the wire enters the pin, it should flow into the pin. Some connector pins have a tiny hole to allow you to see if the wire is all the way in, you can also apply solder through it (always just a tiny bit, though).

Unfortunately, that's an even more vague description that probably encompasses a significant percentage of every PTZ camera on the market.

On a few jobs we've inherited with 12VDC cameras, I've still had to leave a bunch of individual wall warts for each camera- attempting to put them all on one supply created ground loops on several cameras. Ground loop isolators could have helped, but do you really want to use a hundred dollar isolator on a fifty dollar camera?

That's interesting, is there an explanation for that? I think it's mostly that the input power doesn't share a ground reference with the video output cable shield, compared to 12VDC cameras, where the power ground and the video ground are usually tied together internally.