Soundy

Mark, your post has nothing whatsoever to do with the OP's question. I've now had to edit all but one of your posts so far to remove inappropriate advertising. If you have something useful to contribute to our discussions, that's welcome, but simply replying with random links to your products is not acceptable.

Timeframe sounds about right. Around here you probably could have charged double that

How well are the cameras working now, particularly the ones on the "cheap" cable? If they're good, I'd probably forgo rewiring - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Of course, if too substantial a number need to be rewired, it might become more efficient to just redo them all. I've never worked a job this big, but I have run into this sort of situation several times. My preference in such a situation (short of complete rewiring into racks with cable management, which is the ideal) would at the very least be taking everything offline, disconnecting all the cables and untangling them (as much as possible), tracing all the runs and labeling them properly, then bundling them in some sort of orderly fashion - a bundle for each recorder, organized by coverage area or camera purpose or camera type (fixed/PTZ/etc.), or whatever makes sense - then trimming them to length (along with a suitable service loop) and re-terminating them. Same applies to the power supplies. Obviously this promises to be a monumental task, especially tracing of the runs... I could see a couple days being dedicated just to that task, and of course, you'd be offline the whole time. Might not be that desirable.

Could be a failing sensor, if it's not a setting... but try a power cycle first (give it 30s or so before powering back up). One other thought, I wonder if the sensor is overheating? Maybe try powering the camera down for several minutes and see if it clears up, at least initially.

bryceb, weakest link theory does apply to a degree... however, in addition to the max resolution of the DVR, you're also still limited to the maximum lines supported by the video standard itself.

Check the "quality" setting? Could be affecting the compression level... on my IQ511 it's on the "image" tab in the settings. Dropping it medium here doesn't cause that result, but it might be different on the 711.

Almost looks like the color depth has dropped to around 12-bit color or less. Silly question, have you tried rebooting or power-cycling the camera?

I wouldn't say it's hogwash, but it certainly has become overstated. Kinda like the "megapixel race" in digital still cameras, or going further back, the "sample bitrate" in CD players - remember when they were making big deals out of 24-bit D/A converters... and then 48-bit, and then 96-bit, and so on... until someone came up with "1-bit MASH converters" and it turned into less-is-more? All this for a data stream that was 14-bit maximum by spec. By that same token, this is definitely being over-sold. Pixel count in MP cameras is going the same way as well. All these numbers are *AN* indicator of that nebulous factor known as "quality", but not the ONLY indicator... depending on the purpose of a specific camera, it may or may not be relevant at all. And as per historical example, more and more manufacturers are "fudging" the numbers, further reducing their relevance. Unfortunately, as in all the other examples, they've latched onto something they can quantify (sort of) and sell to end users purely by virtue of having bigger numbers... just like the magapixel race, just like the bit race...

Well, 30mph works out to 44 feet/s. With a 1/60s shutter, the car is moving .7333ft. (8.8") during the shutter's duration. That's some significant blur. 1/125 will cut that approximately in half (4.4") - probably still too much to get a clear view. If you can get it to 1/500s, you cut the movement down to barely 1".

Most of our customers want minimum 30 days... we'll typically just make sure they have enough drive space to get AT LEAST that, but more is always good too - it lets you increase resolution and framerate and even lower the compression settings. One customer sees mainly issues with credit cards, and it can take time for reports to get flagged and processed and passed down from the CC company to the store, so they ask for 90 days' retention. It all depends on the individual customer's requirements.

That would work, but I suspect not very well. Sending a fairly static desktop is one thing, but cameras will be REALLY slow to update. You can do it, but it will likely be painful. Better than nothing, though.

Sean, if you have a PC-based DVR, try a product like TeamViewer - the server portion makes an outgoing connection to their system, and you log in from there. TV can also create a VPN for your remote client to work over. Not the speediest way, but should actually work.

Ideally, you'd run some kind of conduit, LiquidTite, or other sealed piping, into the camera housing (dome or otherwise), and terminate inside the housing. If using a bullet that has a permanent "wire tail" you'd run the conduit to a weatherproof junction box and terminate inside that.

I've replaced more Seagate drives in the last three years... Try going to Western Digital drives - we've been using the Caviar Black and even the Caviar Green drives in Vigil DVRs and QNAP RAID arrays and have had very few problems... those that have died can be pretty readily attributed to heat in dust-clogged machined. That said, heat is your biggest enemy, with power instability being a close second. You don't have to refrigerate your machines or anything, but having sufficient, properly-routed airflow is critical. That doesn't mean just loading the case up with fans, either; you just need to place and align the fans to keep air moving through smoothly, and it will carry the heat away.

Rory's on the right track: you can sometimes use PIR motion detectors to trigger recording on the DVR. Of course, this requires the DVR to support alarm inputs, which if yours is a really cheap one, it may not. What make and model DVR are you using?

That is correct. Bear in mind if you're using Internet Explorer, you MUST specify "http://" when using a port other than 80. Mozilla-based browsers assume http protocol if none is give... IE assumes it only when using port 80.

Oh please, Rory... it's a friendly nudge in the ribs and everybody but you knows it. Grow a sense of humor.

Power-over-Ethernet is a defined standard (IEEE-802.3af) that designates a minimum power at a minimum voltage. PoE typically runs 44-48VDC. Cameras that support it have to be able to accept that voltage via the network port. *THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT WILL ACCEPT IT AT THE POWER TERMINALS*

Rory only uses CRTs for his test monitors. This is what he packs up the ladder for setting up IP cameras:

Specs look good... others with similar features run about the same price range. Can't say if it's ACTUALLY any good without using one, though. BTW, you only need to post a thread once; multiple posts in different areas won't get you replies any faster.

IP Chicken SHOULD be giving you the outside, world-accessible WAN address of your connection. What make/model is this modem? It sounds offhand like the Siemens units that our main DSL provider, Telus, uses - you can view most of the admin interface, but not edit anything without the proper login.

That would be something you'd have to ask the client. All of ours, the retention time they specify is just that, no backups... but if you're not sure, ask; do not assume.

I would guess, no. Your modem sounds like a combined modem/router device; it will need to operate in bridged mode, or have you Netgear's IP set as DMZ, or something similar. You should be able to find your actual WAN IP from going to www.ipchicken.com but that will only get you to the WAN side of the modem. If you search the 'net using the actual brand and maybe model of your modem, there may be info on a default admin login, which you may be able to access using the gateway for the "internet port"... which I see isn't listed, but I'd guess is probably 192.168.0.1 or .254.

All it's missing is an actual video input.