Soundy

I don't know about Milestone, but no DVR or NVR I've worked with will create a single continuous file anyway - it would become unwieldy for the system to work with for indexing and searching. The closest I've seen is VideoInsight, which in earlier versions at least, would let you set a maximum file size (don't know if current versions still do this). Vigil creates a new file for every minute, as does GeoVision, regardless of whether you use pre/post or constant recording. I wouldn't be surprised if Milestone is the same. What you're trying to do, or rather, the way you're trying to do it, really isn't workable. Using the export option of any DVR will be far easier, as you could then export as much or as little video to a file with a specific name, say, with the dog's name and the date (for example, "Poochie's test April 10 2011.avi"), or burn each dog to his own CD/DVD, or whatever. Using Vigil as an example, the process would be easy: click Search, set start time and end time, click Search, select the camera, then click Export, select the destination(s) (hard drive, CD/DVD, flash drive), give it a filename, and click OK. A few minutes later, it's done. It's fairly intuitive, and would be easy to create a "quick steps" card for the users. Doesn't get much easier, and doesn't require the staff to mess around with the filesystem of the machine or muddle their way through video-data folders.

What you're trying to do sounds better suited to a standard camcorder, maybe the type that records to mini-DVD or hard drive. However... if you have enough storage on your DVR, staff could just search back through the recorded footage for incidents, rather than having to search through offline recordings. A good DVR makes searching easy enough.

The DVR is really the least of your worries right now. And as for the camera height, it's not so much an issue with the angle on the plate (although being more straight-on will help), but the fact that having the plate moving across the frame makes motion blur more likely, while having it head-on means the plate will move less within the frame. There is a bit of a trade-off, as there will be a narrower range where the plate is in focus...

Are you trying the full dyndns address from your home PC as well? Some routers prevent loopback connections, meaning you can't make a connection going out and then connecting back in through that router. You might have to try it from a remote location.

To me, the biggest problem with that image, besides the motion blur, is that the plate appears to be out of focus... which is probably a result of poor assembly practices when the camera was put together. It should be possible to tweak the focus, even on a "sealed" bullet design... But yeah, that won't solve the real problem of it just not being a sufficient camera for that job. And of course, it doesn't help cleaning up the existing image.

Lesst may have been a little blunt, but he makes a good point, and your statement above is exactly what he's talking about: people have specific ideas about what they want their cameras to do, but they don't want to pay what it costs to do it PROPERLY. It's a major frustration for the professionals here, when we try to sell customers the RIGHT solution for what they want, only to have them insist on something cheaper that we know WON'T do the job... and then come back afterward complaining that we sold them junk when it doesn't live up to expectations (Lesst is living the dream by turning those jobs down flat... we're trying to do that when possible these days, as well). There's nothing like having someone come to you because they recognize you as an expert (or at least a professional), only to question why your solution costs so much more than what they see at the local Costco... and refuse to accept any explanations of WHY it costs more to do things right the first time. And BTW... both the brands you mentioned - Swann and QSee - are generally regarded as bottom-of-the-barrel cheap junk around here (although QSee has added a few better products to their line lately, from what I hear). Guarantee you, nobody here is surprised that they came up short on you.

Whole bunch of these existing on some sites we took over... not sure what they are. All are B&W... believe they're varifocal as well. The bubble hinges down on "slides" that let you flip it out of the way a bit. Something tells me it's an Extreme, but a much older one - didn't find anything like it on their site.

Many IP cameras have built-in motion detection and/or analytics and can be set to send video only on motion (or other external trigger inputs, as well).

Not familiar with those cameras specifically, but see if they have a setting for half-duplex audio.

Yeah, if that's microwave, it's VERY secure - unlike WiFi, it's a very tight beam, you'd have to insert a receiver directly in it... and the receivers are not readily available from your average Best Buy. And the data stream itself would probably be encrypted as well.

The DVR isn't the expensive part... the bandwidth required it. You'd need a fast upstream bandwidth to get the best quality, and most ISPs only provide fast downstream, until you get into higher-end service plans.

Exactly. Some can get much larger than that, too. Notice that image attachments are limited to 75kB. If you insert an attached image inline, every time someone views that post, the image is downloaded again. If the images are too big, that adds up to a LOT of bandwidth being used. In any case, I suspect the main reason PDF isn't supported is simply that nobody ever thought to add it, and as I say, it's NOT present by default in phpBB3.

You've pretty much nailed it! Sometimes the same software can be used for both. Several packages are designed for "hybrid" operation of both IP cameras and analog capture card... naturally this software can do either/or, as well as both. It depends. Some IP cameras allow digital PTZ internally, streaming the affected output as primary or a secondary stream. Some DVR packages will also allow you to PTZ with analog AND IP cameras, recording the full image while showing you just the zoomed portion. IN GENERAL, yes. Analog video is limited by the video standards they use - 525 lines of vertical resolution for NTSC, 625 lines for PAL; analog DVRs typically max out at around 720x480 resolution (some only go to 640x480). Once you're streaming digitized video, you're not limited by the analog transmission standard, so there's theoretically no limit on resolution (except network bandwidth, and realistically, cost of the camera). There are currently network cameras available up to 16 megapixels (4872 x 3248 pixels). GENERALLY you'll pay more for this, but there is quite a wide price range. There's also a wide price range with analog cameras, depending on features, options, and various performance characteristics, and there are some analog cameras that cost significantly more than several megapixel cameras. No - you can use individual PoE "injectors" as well, that plug into the network cable in-line with the camera. But generally, a PoE-capable switch is more convenient and cost-effective if you're using more than a couple cameras. Note that MOST (not all) IP cameras can also be powered separately, usually with 12VDC and/or 24VAC (or 24VDC in a very few cases), so it does provide another option. It's a trade-off. Keep in mind that while you're paying more for the camera, you don't have to buy the video capture hardware, so you're saving some there. Some IP systems charge a per-camera license, but several IP camera manufacturers also bundle NVR software with their cameras, that will work for free with their cameras. Correct. GeoVision is one that does not charge an extra license fee to use GeoVision-branded cameras with it. There is a per-camera license cost for other cameras, though. Couldn't tell you what any of the prices are...

I doubt the power supply "requires" that amperage - power supplies are typically rated by how much they can *supply*. Devices that run off them are rated for how much they require. Cameras are typically well under 1A, sometimes as low as 200mA. As long as the sum the current requirements of all devices doesn't exceed that of the power supply they're attached to, you should be fine. I WOULD be concerned about the potential voltage drop of 5VDC over Cat6 cable, although it shouldn't be an issue if the runs aren't over 20m. What IP cameras are you using that require only a 5VDC supply, though? The question about using a PC power supply for running cameras has been covered here many times - it's generally agree that you can do it, but it's not really recommended.

^That's a good point - you should check with your local gaming commission/authorities to see what minimum requirements there are (if any) in your area.

Why are you dual-booting your DVR in the first place? A security system will typically be running 24/7 anyway. Rarely will a DVR need more than 4GB, either - 3-4GB, XP Pro, and just be done with it.

Or just export it to an image, and attach that? I don't know why it's not supported... maybe because nobody ever asked before? I know it's not a default supported format in phpBB, so it would have to be manually added to the allowed list. Could just be nobody thought of it before. It also might not be desirable because PDFs can be very large, and the site host may provide only limited space and bandwidth to the account. Lots of reasons it may not be allowed... you might think about things like that before getting snarky and storming out. Despite all that, you'll find people here are still willing to be helpful. A generic thought about a WiFi system this size: you probably don't want to have more than a couple cameras per access point, ideally just one, so you'll want a point-to-point connection for each camera, tying directly into a switch.

They're aware there's a potential latency issue with IP cams, yes? As in, the live view you're watching is delayed by anywhere up to one second (depending on the camera, NVR, network, and various settings)? Our resident casino expert (survtech) often brings this up as a drawback to IP cams in casinos... something to make sure management is aware of before you forge ahead. May matter to them, may not... but they should be aware. Any more than two or three cameras, you'll want to have a dedicated network for them. Not necessarily. Video encoders can be used to "convert" existing analog cameras into IP streams. You'll still be limited to VGA or 4CIF resolution from those cameras, but that would allow you to switch to an NVR first, attach the existing cameras to it, then upgrade the cameras to megapixel over time. This is a basic layout I use on several sites that are running a mix of analog and IP cameras...it keeps the cameras all on their own network, but links into the corporate network as well to give them remote access... Another option to look at is HDcctv, which seems particularly suited to casino use: it uses existing coax (within limits), and streams uncompressed HD video in realtime (no compression, no latency). Catches are, it's just entering the market, so there's not a huge selection of equipment out there yet... and despite claims of using existing wiring, does appear to still have issues if the wiring is of low quality. But still, something to consider.

Camera and mount look like a Pelco Spectra system. I think you're right about the plate being an antenna for the wireless, but I couldn't tell you what make or model it is.

Yeah, that looks about right. Thanks!

Welcome aboard!

I'm guessing these cameras don't have auto-iris lenses? I can't find anything about them in a google search. This, of course, is one of the drawbacks of cheap cameras with built-in IR... AGC (auto gain control) *may* help...

Welcome, y'all!

Sounds like something with the video card... either hardware, driver, or if it's a hardware-compression capture card, maybe something with the overlay component of the display card.

lolwut