Soundy

You need a VIDEO to show you how to set up a PoE injector? Pretty weak advertising, really... How hard is it to plug in a power supply and two cables?

It's the IR light, reflecting on the inside of the dome or camera glass. It's a common problem with cheap IR cameras.

Mode A and B are just two different delivery specs for PoE: mode A provides "phantom power" on the data pairs, while mode B uses the other unused pairs. More details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_over_Ethernet#Powering_devices If your injector is using only mode B (which SHOULD be the case), then you should only need the mode B protector... but if you go to a PoE switch later, it could have issues with the data pairs only having 7.5V suppression, since PoE runs at 42-48VDC. To be safe, I'd go with the mode A unit...

No. Both standalone and PC DVRs tend to use the same chips that actually digitize the video.

Some systems do have the computer and monitor all in one unit. iMacs have always been made this way. HP, Asus, and several others now make all-in-one units as well. Chances are, though, the computer IS a separate tower in this case... if so, turning the monitor on and off has no effect on it.

We're using Western Digital "Black" series drives now and have found them really solid. They cost a bit more, but they've given us few, if any problems, whether in a DVR, or in a RAID. One customer now, we're using 8-bay RAID arrays with WD Blacks in RAID6, and using those as the primary data drives for the DVRs, connected via iSCSI. Whatever internal drive comes with the DVR is configured as an "alternate" drive, which the system uses if the main storage is offline.

Patterns are stored in the camera itself, so cable length should not be an issue with that. Is this the same issue as in your other thread? viewtopic.php?f=5&t=25890

Sure it can - connection is the same, a single pair of wire (twisted or not) between whatever serial output the DVR has, and the inputs on the camera. DVR only has to support Pelco D or P protocols (which almost all do).

The little standalone installer works okay (not great, but okay)... it's just too bad they don't actually make it readily available. Unless things have changed recently, they only thing they provide on the bundled CD and on their website is their full setup/NVR package... and the installation for that doesn't give you the option to NOT install the NVR, or to set it to NOT start automatically with windows. Yes you can stop it from starting with Windows. I know you CAN... but besides this not being obvious, having it start with Windows in the first place should not be a DEFAULT.

Presumably, they should support recording at a full 30fps... the reality may depend on the individual design.

Actually, the biggest cause of ground loops with baluns *is* a central power supply, at least when used with basic 12VDC cameras that have a common video and power ground. Separate power supplies - including those in separate buildings - should avoid the cause of the issue. Dual-voltage or 24VAC cameras tend to avoid the problem as well, since the cameras isolate the power and video grounds internally. To be safe, make sure the cameras' bodies aren't attached to anything grounded. You might also find it preferable, if you are using DC power supplies, to use transformer types, rather than switching models, as the transformer provides physical and electrical isolation from the source. Your distributor is delusional But with good cameras at least, it SHOULDN'T be a concern. One other thought: if you're using 12VDC-only cameras with common video/power grounds, and a shared 12VDC power supply, in the pool house, then you may still see ground loops... again, the solution is dual-voltage or 24VAC cameras.

I'd say that really depends - from my collection of used stock, I'd say about 99% of both are no faster than f/1.4... the majority max out at f/1.6 and some of the bigger ones are f/1.8 at best. The only one I can think of off the top of my head that's faster is a fixed 8mm that's f/1.2. I've seen an f/0.95 at one of our suppliers, but never used one.

As survtech indicates, the ONLY functional value difference between fixed and vari-focal is in installation, to let you fine-tune the area of coverage. In actual operation, there should be no real difference (all else being equal).

I believe most AI designs just have a gear on the motor, that then drives a ring gear on the iris... IN THEORY one could remove the motor and just turn the gear with a small screwdriver or something. But that would be tedious in the extreme, I would expect, and I believe most cameras will have the iris spring-loaded to close if there's no drive signal, so you'd have to lock it in place somehow. I think the DIY drive controller would probably be a better bet.

The little standalone installer works okay (not great, but okay)... it's just too bad they don't actually make it readily available. Unless things have changed recently, they only thing they provide on the bundled CD and on their website is their full setup/NVR package... and the installation for that doesn't give you the option to NOT install the NVR, or to set it to NOT start automatically with windows.

I know several photographers from another forum who were down there snapping away with their pro and semi-pro DSLRs. Between that, the HD video cameras, news cameras, and thousands of cel phones, there's no shortage of images - last I heard, VPD had received over 100,000 photos and thousands more video clips. Niiiiice, good job!

Well for starters, MP is not necessarily more expensive once you factor everything in. Let's do some quick math: a 1.3MP camera is typically 1280x1024 resolution. At 4CIF or D1 resolution, you're looking at about 704x480. Four of these bunched together, aimed at the corners of the same area, with no overlap, would yield about 1408x960. So a 1.3MP *in theory* could replace *up to* four analog cameras with an equal level of detail (cue arguments on different views, cameras not being able to see through objects., etc., none of which are relevant to the point of just doing the calculations for the sake of answering this question). So, for these four analog cameras, you'd need four sets of wiring, four channels of power supply, and four channels of recording. RG-59 and Cat5e both retail for about 40c/ft. around here (cheaper if you buy in bulk, but let's assume we're not)... so if you have a 100' run, that would be $40 for signal cabling for the single MP cam... $160 for the four analog cams. That's not including power cable, BTW. You'd also need the labor, not only to install and wire four cameras vs. one, but to aim and adjust all four as well. And four cameras bunched together would be a bit of an eyesore, I would think. The point is, as with anything else, you have to look at the TOTAL cost of your different options, not just the cost of one piece of equipment. One thing the naysayers seem to gloss over, too, is the wide variation in quality of analog cameras. You can't compare a $600 MP camera to $20 analog cameras ("look, I can get *30* of these cameras to the price of one of yours!"), for example - I could show you analog cameras that run $600 and up too. Either way, no, it's not something that will be fitted to every circumstance... but there are times when it can be a benefit. And don't forget, there are the installation/infrastructure benefits I outlined above, that MAY play into determining whether it truly is a more expensive option overall.

My understanding of these cameras is that there should be no port forwarding or DDNS setup required - I believe the whole idea is that they make outbound connections to the company's servers, and you can then access them and the recorded video via that. If they're behind a router that provides DHCP (like 99.9% of home broadband routers do right out-of-the-box, there should be no setup needed beyond creating an account on the service.

Some cameras have a "privacy" option that lets you blank out an area of the image - you could use that, if present, to blank the part that's looking at the screen. You could also try changing the shutter speed - if you can get it the same as the monitor's refresh, it SHOULD help the issue. Locking the shutter speed may cause other issues with exposure, though.

Let's try to keep things civil, kids... everyone seems a little edgy after the last few days' antics, let's just remember we're all professionals here

More importantly, WHERE'S THE BEACH?!

You could also just go out there at 12:55am and strew a bunch of nails around the lot... (and make sure to go clean them up after the tow truck take the racer's car away).

That's a really good start. This site seriously needs a "newb template" for people to fill out, and it could start with this. To that I would add, prioritize each item, so if it comes down to budget, you can either eliminate them, or plan to add them later.

Right off the top, I can tell you that what you're wanting to do WILL NOT be cheap. You're probably looking at MINIMUM of $1000 to do this well enough for it to give you anything other than a blur.

I believe most of these "finder" utilities use ICMP or some other low-level, non-routed communication, so the camera and the computer don't have to be on the same subnet initially. They're generally designed to find the camera, even if it has no IP configured at all (IQ cameras come from the factor with no IP, for example), and allow you to give it an IP, after which normal configuration steps can take over.