Soundy

If you're going to post with the sole purpose of getting your store link out there via your signature, you think you could at least try to make the posts marginally intelligent? kthxbye

The main output should be able to display a 4-camera (2x2) multiplexed layout. The loop outputs are in case you want to send a camera individually to another device.

That's not difficult to find, or overly expensive - most of the Mona Lisa line have them. If you want the "bullet" design, take a look at the WFM-24VF (http://www.cnbtec.com/en/html/product/product.php?seqx_prod=1272). Should be able to find them for under $200. The VCM-24VF (flush-mountable vandal-resistant dome model) can be found for around $160; the VBM-24VF (surface-mount only - http://www.cnbusa.com/en/html/product/product.php?seqx_prod=1077) usually goes for a fair bit less than that. That's another matter, and you won't do it within your budget. You don't NEED a full-on PTZ, there are fixed cameras with remote-controllable zoom lenses... but they're not really that useful, because you'll only be able to zoom in on the center of the frame. AND either way, you'd need to run another pair of wires to the camera to control the zoom... AND your DVR would have to support PTZ output. Like I said, you already have existing lighting... skip the cheezy IR hack and get something with good low-light performance, that will simply make better use of the existing lighting. The Mona Lisa series of cameras work really well with almost no ambient light - case in point, the picture below has little more than a street light a couple hundred feet away (to the left) and a little dining room light coming through the closed blinds (to the right)... it's dark enough that I would have probably tripped over anything left laying on the patio: The light bulbs in this version are 60W... not a lot of light required (yes, that's me, carrying a piece of 2x8): Remember, NO IR on these cameras.

Doesn't look like anything special. Depends on how you define "good". I doubt it will realistically be anywhere near 150'. "Night vision" is a misnomer, BTW - essentially all an IR camera is doing is shining a flashlight on your subject, albeit an IR one instead of visible light. Keep in mind that unless the camera uses some form of "smart" IR control, the longer the range, the brighter it will be, and the more washed-out foreground objects will be. No. No. Yup. Really, if there's existing lighting, especially if it's fairly good lighting, look into a GOOD true-day/night camera WITHOUT IR. Built-in IR, 95% of the time, is a cheap workaround for poor low-light performance. Take a look at CNB's "Mona Lisa" line of cameras - they're well-respected around this site for excellent low-light response and a great price point for the quality. Thanks -Bmonaweck02

I use the Labco regulator boards all the time - both the PS241F (http://www.electronicproductonline.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=2237) and the PS243F (http://www.electronicproductonline.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1770 - sorry for the store links, it's the only listing I could find for them; Labco doesn't appear to have a website of their own). They fit nicely inside Pelco, Altronix, Honeywell, Enforcer, and most other power cans - tie the input into one of the 24VAC and channels and away you go.

Try http://www.pelco.com ? Edit: here you go: http://support.pelco.com/view.php?fDocumentId=19790

I wouldn't suggest using the orange and green pairs if you're going to just hack in a power supply, since those are normally the signal lines. You'll want to use "mode B" from your diagram below, sending power over the unused blue and brown pairs. Probably want to ensure those pins aren't connected to the switch, either.

The camera builders would buy them in bulk from Sony, most likely. No idea which Sony factory actually creates the sensors though.

Have you tried it on more than one PC? What version of Windows are you running it on?

I didn't realize Indiana was considered a suburb of Chicago...

Adding language packs to the system just changes the languages that the menus and whatnot appear in.... it has nothing to do with the language in the posts. You can post in any language you like... although you may be limiting the number of people that will be able to understand it.

This is what I'm saying: they may want to check with their insurer to confirm what their policy DOES and DOES NOT cover. You can insure just about anything against anything... it really becomes a question of how much it costs, which the insurer will base on what they determine to be the risk. Lightning-damage coverage would probably cost a lot more for you than it would for me, as we don't get a lot of lightning here. An insurer might also give a break if the insured can prove they've implemented suitable protection (lightning arrestors, proper grounding, lightning rods, etc.). Kinda like most auto insurers will give you a discount if you have an alarm, immobilizer, etc.

How long ago did you email them? I've had it take a couple days sometimes... and keep in mind it's now the weekend.

since the thread has taken a turn towards insurance etc, my vehicles have a policy that's called "commercial inland marine" that covers gear (up to a set $ amount) in transit & at the customer's premesis before it's signed off. As for a camera being stolen, even a $10K one at that, I would expect it would be covered under the building's general liability policy, along with fixtures etc. Lightning strike? Maybe they'd better be filtered through one of these: http://www.amazon.com/Belkin-BE108200-06-Protector-Telephone-Protection/dp/B000HPV3RW It's a $200,000 insurance policy for connected equipment for only $14.99!!! edit: I just googled "commercial inland marine" and some of youse might find it interesting. It seems like a good option for this industry (I sell in others as well). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_marine_insurance Not to question Wikipedia, but others will want to check with their broker... not all insurance providers will have the same coverage or offer it under the same name. And you might EXPECT a building's coverage to include things like cameras, but you can never be sure. You wouldn't believe some of the horror stories I hear about insureds who end up not covered because they wanted to cheap out and exclude coverage for certain things - growing up, for example, our home insurance didn't include fire, because we lived in a log cabin with wood stoves for heating and cooking, and fire coverage would have cost a fortune. Especially when it comes to commercial coverage, some insurers will offer "packages", but sometimes those packages exclude certain specific things... an insured may not even think to ask their broker if their security system is covered, until they find out too late that it isn't. The point of all this: naturally, if your equipment is installed and signed off, it's now the customer's problem (as far as insurance goes), but in the interest of good customer service (and less headache if you have to come back to replace damaged or stolen gear), you might want to ask your customers to check on their coverage, especially if you're putting in a bunch of $10,000 cameras. A quick call to their broker should be all it takes - "Hey, I just installed $130,000 worth of surveillance system, is all this covered against theft and damage under my current policy?"

Deal

A whole bunch of people here can. What sort of details do you want?

If the DVR has one of these (probably labelled MAIN OUT or something along those lines): You can use one of these: And then use a standard A/V cable: To connect it to an A/V input on your TV (Tip: use the YELLOW wire).

If someone wants to send me one of these puppies, I bet I can figure it out

Thanks, this is helpful, and echos the comments of the CAI designer. He said that using a) the more common 7812 type of approach would produce too much heat and insufficient power, and b) he also did not want to use a switching approach due to reliability. Comment a) makes perfect sense. I don't know if the approach in b) is less reliable, but he is confident in the reliability of his existing design of regulating an input with lower voltage and higher current. Best, Christopher Just for the record, I didn't recommend using a 78xx for this purpose, I only used those as an example of common, low-cost, reliable IC regulators. There are also 3A and higher-output ICs available - like this: http://www.national.com/mpf/LM/LM350.html#Overview

The other neat thing with Ubiquiti is that most of their products are supported by DD-WRT

Fair point, Sean. We can deal with the link If it helps bring traffic to the site, all the better - we should thank the poster(s) for their assistance Edit: Good call on them being the same poster, too: both accounts had the same IP: 123.238.249.148, based in India. IP has now been banned.

And who would this high-end company be? The problem I have with proprietary systems like this is that it locks you into their hardware - if you want to expand things, you can only do it with their equipment. Would you not be able to use a standard 802.11x network with QoS to achieve the same (or similarly effective) optimization? And what does "theWIREguys" know about wireless anyway? Airaya was the company I was talking about and also Firetide and Fludemesh say the something. Well I have to disagree about proprietary systems and wireless. I want proprietary for wireless for security. You can't connect to a Airaya, Firetide, or Fludemesh wireless node without a matching device. Any old 802.11 device will not connect. Ah, fair enough. Hmm, you got me there!

And who would this high-end company be? The problem I have with proprietary systems like this is that it locks you into their hardware - if you want to expand things, you can only do it with their equipment. Would you not be able to use a standard 802.11x network with QoS to achieve the same (or similarly effective) optimization? And what does "theWIREguys" know about wireless anyway?

Given that fiberglass ladders are typically heavier and more expensive than aluminum ladders, why do you suppose installers bother to purchase them? Best, Christopher Oo, I know, I know! They're non-conductive and safer if you're working anywhere in the vicinity of high voltage.

Are you recording FROM the TV as well???