Soundy

One of these will do nicely... we use lots of them, they're pretty solid. http://www.samsung-security.com/products/quadsmultiplexers/

There are a number of ways to do this, but you're right, none will be particularly cheap (maybe just an arm and a few toes). You could do an analog camera over UTP using quality baluns... but with analog, you'd need a capture device of some sort in your PC (and really, for security recording, a dedicated PC is highly recommended). A dual-voltage (12VDC/24VAC) camera should work alright at that distance if you feed it from a 28VAC power supply with sufficient wire gauge (might even get away with three of the four pairs in a Cat5e, or better yet, Cat6, which is larger gauge). You could use an IP camera with the aid of ethernet-over-coax adapters as well, many of which extend ethernet's range beyond 100m. This one, for example, claims to support ethernet AND power up to 1km over coax: http://gemelec.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&product_id=704&category_id=68&manufacturer_id=0&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=1 You could also go wireless using a number of different relatively-low-cost WiFi setups (lots of people here use Nanostation), but you'd still need to power the camera and the transmitter.

With analog video... doubt you'll find anything. Any higher vertical resolution goes beyond the practical limits of analog video itself, so there would be little call for it.

Only time I've used these kind of brackets for fixed (non-PTZ) cameras, they were a royal PITA and ended up being more trouble later (granted, these were Areconts, not CNBs). We've always just gone direct wall-mount, never had a problem. I suppose the bracket helps protect from birds (then again, it gives them something else to sit on), but as often as not around here, rain is accompanied by wind, so water still gets on the dome. One disadvantage to the bracket, as well: it makes the camera more susceptible to damage or theft - toss a rope over it and give a good tug and you have yourself a nice new camera.

Some ISPs may block you sending to other mail servers, which would block outgoing mail if you had your own SMTP server set up, but you should still be able to send mail to THEIR SMTP server. How else would you do it in Outlook/OE/etc.?

It's about the closest you're gonna get, and without more details from the OP, that's about the best "fit" anyone can give.

CNB VBM-24VF. Good indoor and out. Good picture, good low light, killer price for what you actually get. Pick up four of them and be happy

Tried it with Pelco P? Seems to me there an oddity with Pelco protocols where ID 1 on one protocol is ID 0 on the other, etc. Er... looking again, that camera is showing that it's at ID 2... while you're set to ID 1.

Hmmm, 0.75mm translates into about 20 AWG... that's not a lot for long distances, especially if you have IR cameras on 12V. What you really want to do is monitor the voltage AT the camera, WITH the camera connected. Choose one as far from the power supply as possible, where you can control the lighting... measure the voltage at the camera with the lights on, then turn the lights off so the IRs kick in, and see if the voltage drops significantly (assuming these are IR-equipped cameras).

Most PTZs display a splash screen when they're started up, which often contains the camera's current baud/protocol settings. You might want to have the local sparks power the camera down and power it back up, then check the recorded video for that display... just to confirm the settings are what they're supposed to be. I've seen instances where a DIP switch *looks* like it's been toggled, but it's not fully pushed over, and that could cause an incorrect setting. Unfortunately, despite the model number, there's no guarantee that the new camera is *identical* to the old one. In fact, what I've been able to find searching on that model, looks identical (right down to the wall bracket itself) to a couple of old cheap PTZs I pulled out of a site recently, which were packaged under a different model number with no brand name. When I searched the model, though, I came up with a half-dozen different vendors selling the same - or similar - cameras under their own names. The manuals for most of them were identical, but a couple were different, and showed different connections and DIP switch layouts, meaning even with the same model number, different companies were selling different versions of the same camera. Anyway, have them check for the startup display to confirm the configuration.

We get them at ADI/Burtek (as well as GEM, MuxLab, and NVT).

Don't sacrifice resolution for framerate. Even 5fps is *more* than sufficient for most sorts of retail uses. No, it doesn't give you smooth, TV-like movement... but you're not producing for TV, you're recording for review of events, and evidence. In this kind of instance, you don't need to see what's happening every 1/30 of a second... in fact, once per second will do a good portion of the time. If you need to use a lower framerate to achieve a higher resolution, by all means, that that option over lower res/higher fps.

If I was actually going to sell a client something like that (assuming the insisted against my advice), I'd probably mark it up at least 300% as well... because I KNOW I'll be getting called on soon to deal with the problems. And I know the client will want me to honor the warranty on it, so for the first year, those calls will be on my dime. The markup is intended to compensate for those easily-forseen circumstances... as well as for the headache of the inevitable calls where the client complains about the crappy video and lousy feature set and how difficult the thing is to operate...

How's the support on either? Can you call and get a live tech 25/7 with the Swann? How about with the Q-See? Things like that commonly account for such price differences - it's easy to charge less when you don't have anything in place to back it up. Well, you know what they say about user manuals: documentation is like sex - when it's good, it's really good, but when it's bad, it's still better than nothing.

It's hard to say whether your client actually got ripped off on his previous system, without knowing just what it was and what you classify as "exorbitant", but this is an industry where you really do get what you pay for, at least as far as equipment (can't speak for labor or markup). You go cheap... you get cheap. I'd put dollars to donuts, you put in any kind of "DIY kit" system, your client will end up being unhappy with the results.

Welcome!

Are these IR cameras? How far are they from the power supply, and what size power wire was used? It's POSSIBLE they aren't getting enough power and are dropping out intermittently, although it shouldn't affect all of them at once, unless the PSU is badly under-rated to the point that one camera's draw increasing causes the voltage out of the PSU to drop. I've installed dozens of Vigil DVRs that use the HiCap50B boards and never seen a problem like this. I think only once, I had a board go bad and Windows wouldn't recognize it at all... other than that, they've been rock-solid.

Well then, this should cheer you up! This is where I grew up

The resulting files certainly can be edited... the catch is, most recorders will use a proprietary or semi-proprietary recording codec (often their own tweaked variation of MPEG-4, MJPEG, or H.264) that you may not be able to import directly into FCP without converting it first, or exporting it from the recorder into a different, more generic format. There's a lot of discussion on a very similar topic over in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=22740 What I would suggest looking at is using consumer HD camcorders for this, as it's far easier and less hassle to import their video, timecode included, directly into FCP. The problem with using CCTV systems for this purpose is, editing is generally the LAST thing that you want done to CCTV footage, since it needs to be unaltered to be of any use for legal evidence... thus, while most systems don't specifically prevent editing, few actually make accommodation for it. If you're still set on using CCTV equipment, what you might look into it VideoInsight (www.video-insight.com)... I've not used the later versions since they went IP-only, but in their analog versions, you could have it record with standard MPEG-4 or even WMV, either of which should import easily to FCP. You could check with them if their systems still support this.

It's not the number of cameras that affects bandwidth as much as the number of viewers. If your camera stream needs (for the sake of easy calculation) 100kbps... then five viewers on it will mean 500kbps; ten viewers will be a megabit of upstream required. That's where a streaming server comes in - your connection only needs to support a single feed to the server, then they handle the heavy bandwidth needs.

Alright, calm down now... Your TV analogy doesn't really play, because camera technology is really advancing in different ways than consumer TV tech. The fact is, you've got some very particular needs that will not be addressed by CHEAP cameras. Simple as that. One, you need good vision under very low artificial light. Your $17 USB webcams will not do that. Neither, as D.V.S. noted, will an IR camera (which in most cases, are cheap cameras with poor low-light performance, that make up for that by adding IR illumination). IR is handy in very-low and no-light situations, but most cameras have no way to control the output power, so you really have a "sweet spot" in distance where they work best... and your birds will fall well outside that sweet spot. Two, you need a very wide field of view at a very close range. The $17 webcam won't do that either. In fact, for the angles you need, at the range you need, most lenses packed with cameras won't do either... or will just barely do. You also need to be able to focus at very close range, and still have significant depth of field. The webcam will focus closely (by design), but probably not give you very great DOF... meaning if you focus it on the birds up close, they'll be out of focus at the other end of the cage. The real problem arises from the fact that the cure for one problem will worsen another. You can improve depth-of-field by closing down the iris of the lens... unfortunately that also reduces the amount of light it passes, which won't do for night viewing. One thing that MIGHT help you, is that most animals' eyes (and people's too) tend to really reflect back IR light, giving them that glowing-eyed zombie look (think of shining a flashlight in a cat's eyes at night). If this holds true of your birds, you could use a low-power IR illuminator or two, mounted at a distance (so the IR doesn't wash out the image), and that would help you determine whether the birds' eyes are open or closed (providing they don't bury their heads under a wing when they sleep, as some birds do). To get around the short-focus problem, look at a couple of low-light, true-day/night type cameras placed outside the cage. If one side has to go against the wall, then line the cameras up looking into the two sides that are perpendicular to the wall. That should give you almost a full view of the cage, with two different angles to look for glowing eyes and peg-legs. This method can also take advantage of another trick of optics, in that the further you put the cameras from the cage, the less the cage bars/wires themselves will be a factor. As you put the cameras further back, you also reduce the short-focus problem. Beyond that, if you're still having trouble with angles, you could add another camera looking in through the other side parallel to the wall. None of this requires overly expensive cameras... true-day/night type (with removable IR cut filters) will give the best low-light response, even under just the birds' own night light, and work even better if you go with the IR illuminators.

Doubt that... dual-voltage cameras would just be making that same conversion internally. Is this a different site now? Hmm, different sites, different cameras, different DVRs... same problem? Well, the only common denominator here is YOU!

Is there an "FCC ID" number silkscreened anywhere on the board, or on a small sticker?

Try lifting the ground on the DVR and/or camera power supply. If it's a standard three-prong, U-ground type cord, you can just snip the ground lug off... or get a ground-lift plug like this: (The metal tab is designed to attach to the cover-plate screw on a gang outlet, to provide a ground for a two-prong socket... just bend it out of the way to provide a ground lift). If you find more than one device need to be lifted, get a cheap power bar and snip the ground lug off its plug, then plug those devices into that.

Yes, the camera board itself can be rotated internally. Just keep in mind you won't be able to see anything much below the horizontal plane.