Soundy

www.ubiquiti.com - often used and highly recommended by other members of this forum.

Check out the offerings from www.ubiquiti.com

Not quite sure what you're after here... two cameras to one receiver can be done - you'll need a two-channel receiver, that would then have two separate outputs for two separate video signals. For the DVR, you'd have to run that into two separate inputs. Essentially all you're doing there, though, is using a receiver that's two receivers in one box. To run two LCDs, you'd then either need a DVR with two outputs (which pretty much limits you to a PC-based system), or use a VGA splitter, which will just give you the same display on both monitors. I get the idea you're trying to do something more complex than that, and I suspect it's something that's probably not possible, but I really don't understand most of your post

I'll suggest DMZ only for the purpose of testing whether port forwarding is the root of connection issues. If it doesn't work in the DMZ, then port forwarding isn't you (main) problem and you need to look elsewhere.

Integrate it with what? See if it does Pelco D or P protocol - most PTZs support it as a "generic" protocol.

Try data+ to 485b, data- to 485a.

HOW to configure the DVR will depend a bit on the DVR itself and the internet setup... first issue is to get the client to install internet into building B. Is there any way to pull wiring between the two buildings? The other option, if you can do this, is to locate the DVR in building A and just wire the cameras in building B. Or, use ethernet extenders to run ethernet from building A to building B - GEM, for example, makes two models that will allow you run ethernet up to 1200m, one over coax, one over Cat5e. If there's any existing wiring between buildings, such as phone multicore, you could use baluns to send the video over unused pairs, or DSL adapters to put an ethernet connection over an unused pair. Lots of options, but more info is needed to make a solid determination.

Yeah, the problem is, not all DVRs will actually provide this information.

STP is nearly twice the price of UTP... and the shielding doesn't do a lot unless you terminate with at least shielded connector. I've installed tens of thousands of meters of Cat5e (including one job that was a total of 30,000m) and never needed it... I don't see where it's worth the extra price.

Hahahaha, this reminds me of some of the BS I've seen in audio mags... I remember a couple in particular from many years ago in Car Audio Magazine... One amp (don't recall the brand) was touting their "SCAT design" - SCAT standing for Solid Core Acoustic Technology. In short: they used solid rather than stranded wire for the internal connections. But this ad went on and on about the benefits of this design. Wow. Another was for an Eclipse head unit, using optocouplers to transfer signals between the digital and analog sections. Now this has some solid basis in theory: the idea is that electrically isolating the two sections prevents digital EMI noise from bleeding into the analog circuits. The marketing hype, however, gave it some fancy name and stated in bold letters that this was a benefit because it meant "signals move at the speed of light (that's fast!)" Last time I checked, electricity moved pretty close to the speed of light, too... close enough that it really wouldn't make a difference over a distance of a few millimeters. *sigh* I actually wrote to the magazine (yeah, a letter... this was in the early 90s) to call these ads out... they wrote back that they couldn't actually print my letter (can't piss off the advertisers!), but they got a good laugh out it, and sent me a T-shirt as thanks

Heheheh, I've BUILT enough mic cables to know it's attached at both ends... generally to pin 1 In any case, back a little more on-topic: the one problem that's common with baluns and cheap 12V cameras is ground loops induced by the fact that the cameras use a common ground for power and video, and baluns basically put a coil inline with the signal ground on both ends, effectively creating one very long ground path, while you still have a separate shorter ground path through the power ground. AC and dual-voltage cameras avoid this because the power ground is separated from the signal ground by the regulator/rectifier (and in some older cameras, a transformer). Back even more on-topic: none of this has anything to do with IP cameras, except to reiterate the point: grounding your cameras will MOST OF THE TIME make NO difference... if you DO have noise issues (which would probably show up as network dropouts on an IP camera), grounding MAY help... or it MAY make things worse. If you DON'T already have problems, grounding MAY also create issues. In short: your guess is as good as anyone's My advice would be: don't ground the cameras by default. I've never done it, and I've never had an issue. Save it as something else to try IF problems arise... or of course, if local electrical codes require it.

Video memory has nothing to do with the number of cameras...

It sends the EMI on the cable to ground, I thought. Grounding both ends can cause radio stations to be picked up on line level audio signals IME. Well, we're not generally dealing with audio on this forum, are we? In any case, the suggestion to use shielded 18/2 was simply just for cost and convenience... As far as audio, well, pretty much every XLR-terminated mic cable I've ever seen had grounds connected at both ends, save those that were poorly soldered, or one or two that had the grounds disconnected specifically to provide a ground lift to address those odd, pesky, unexplainable noise issues

I have a bunch of 10,000rpm 50GB UW320 SCSI drives out of a file server, sitting in a box... pity they're so small as to be of limited use... now THOSE were *FAST*

Like what? Are both ends of the cable grounded in your scenario? If they're not connected at both ends, then they aren't grounding anything, are they? Well first of all, if you're talking analog cameras (this thread is referring to IP cameras), they're already all grounded to a common point via the signal lines. Beyond that, there's nothing WRONG with powering cameras from individual transformers, be they all near the DVR, or separate locations closer to the cameras. But all this has nothing to do with my statement: I come from a studio background, and I've seen every conceivable type of grounding layout for equipment, including having *everything* lifted and isolated except for the signal grounds... and I have seen instances where a star ground for everything actually CREATES noise problems. There's no one explanation for it - sometimes there are environmental reasons that are beyond your control, sometimes it just takes one oddball piece of equipment. I'm not saying that star grounding NEVER works... I'm saying that it's NOT a universal always-works setup. Sometimes additional grounding helps... sometimes it doesn't make any difference... sometimes it creates more problems than it solves. My experience in CCTV, it simply not necessary 99% of the time.

One central ground, or a "star" grounding topology, CAN help with noise and ground-loop issues... SOMETIMES. Sometimes the extra grounds just create other problems. If you want to plan ahead, use shielded 18/2 for your power and just leave the shield disconnected *unless you find you need it*.

Don't even get me started on Pelco's IP cameras. I tested a Sarix dome a while back and was NOT impressed. Aside from the *really neat* live RBG histogram, it didn't seem to do anything special, or have overly spectacular quality, certainly not worth the price they wanted.

http://consumerist.com/2008/03/do-coat-hangers-sound-as-good-monster-cables.html

We installed a ton of IS110s for our largest customer a few years ago (their spec). The following summer at least a half-dozen of them died (all in direct sun). We put CNBs in while the Pelcos went out for warranty repair. After the first three, we just left the CNBs in place... they've been working fine ever since. We've replaced a number of other IS110s with CNBs when they've failed, too. Besides that, that stupid spring-clip that holds the camera assembly in the housing is just retarded. And don't even get me started on the submini-TS service port that they don't give you a cable for, and worse, bury away in the bottom of the IS90s... I will say, the EH35xx housings are our go-to models for outdoor housings (3508s for the thin IP cameras, like IQ511s), and the CC3701H-2 is still a really good box cam (as long as you don't try to use their frustrating-to-attach snazzy wall/ceiling mount for it). Pelco's not all bad, but I swear they let engineers design the cameras top-to-bottom... guys that have never had to actually INSTALL one...

As far as the contents go, you've pretty much covered it. Short of the odd cleaning of the dome, they really don't need much in the way of maintenance - I've seen Spectras running in the field for years, operating on constant tours or auto-sweeps, without ever needing a thing other than wiping down the outside of the dome. At worst, I can imagine if they're not completely sealed, you might have to take the dome down and clean out dead bugs or spiders... This, of course, is one of the things you get when you pay $3000 for a PTZ, vs. a $300 unit: reliability.

No great loss

I've used the QNAP NAS boxes as storage for Vigil DVR/NVRs, they work quite well. AFAIK their NVR boxes are essentially the same units but with different firmware (oriented toward NVR rather than general-purpose functionality) and connections for a local console. They should work quite well for you, the QNAP boxes are solid. With this setup, you don't need a server - the cameras record directly to the storage array.

Wow, a card built specifically for one relatively obscure NVR package? Better jump all over that! While it appears Eyesoft IS designed to take advantage of a CUDA-enabled card, I doubt that it's really necessary... I suspect disk I/O will be a bigger issue for you. Still, if the price point is right, there's no reason NOT to go CUDA... but I'd do some shopping around first, as it sounds like this supplier is trying to work an upsell on you, probably something that benefits him more than it does you.

What sort of ring would you like? Diamond, or maybe a birthstone? I can get lots of jade stuff around here. I actually got in touch with their Western Canada rep, and it turns out he lives about 5 minutes from me. He seems to really know his stuff and offered to give me some hands-on training with the system. Also gave me a couple ideas on what might be going on with this system. But if we still have issues, I'll be sure to give you a shout for that hook-up!

That's the board IN the backbox though, isn't it? I've had to replace a couple of those as well..