Soundy

Sounds like a ground loop problem to me - it's common when using baluns with *cheap* 12VDC cameras, because they share the power and video grounds internally. It has nothing to do with proximity of the power supply to the DVR, it's because you end up with two ground paths of different lengths to each camera. Any camera that has an internal power regulator (including 24VAC and dual-voltage types) should be free of the problem, even with a 12VDC supply, because the regulator isolates the power ground from the video ground. The only workaround that's really effective is a separate wall-wart power adapter for *each* 12VDC camera.

I think I would be insisting on a LOT better pricing from these guys: they're jumping headlong into technology that's all-new to them, learning it on the fly... and you're going to be their guinea pig. Expect it to take them a lot of extra time setting everything up, then troubleshooting it after the fact, and don't be surprised if there are some teething pains and plenty of return visits to fine-tune things. You want to make sure your contract with them accounts for all this, so you don't end up getting billed for THEIR learning time.

I'm definitely a fan of PC-based DVRs, but just to clear up a couple things: most standalone systems DO support fully configurable motion-sensing, masking, and so on, as well as varying levels of control over recording quality... and the vast majority so support remote access, with many of those allowing web-based remote viewing, PTZ control, and iPhone/Blackberry/Windows Mobile access and control. Consider that most standalones are customized PC hardware using en embedded OS (usually Linux or another Unix variant), and there's really no reason they can't do much of the same things as a "true" PC-based system. As you note, the main benefit to a regular PC is the flexibility and expandability. Adding new drives is easy. Auxiliary software can be installed (like the "finder" utilities for IP cameras, or video editing software), meaning you don't need a separate PC or laptop for those things. ANd typically the interface is a lot friendlier and controllable by mouse, which many standalone units aren't.

Sounds impressive! I'll have to look into Ioimage, based solely on this last bit. My bull**** detector has a hair-trigger when it comes to anything technology-oriented so it's always nice to deal with people who don't drive it crazy

First of all, all analog cameras output at the same resolution: 486 interlaced lines for NTSC composite video standard, 576 lines for PAL. These are the specifications of the video standard and must be complied with for communication to work properly. The "TVL" measurements you're reading refer mainly to the resolution of the SENSOR. So effectively, with low-TVL sensors, the camera is upscaling the picture... and as with upscaling DVD players and TVs, some do the job better than others.

Are those solid 22ga. cores? If so, chances are they used "Station Z" wire, which is common for alarm installs. The reason for twisting them together is that it gives better capacity (lower voltage drop, higher current capability), although for short distances that's really not a concern. It also provides some redundancy, so if one wire breaks, you still have the second one of that pair. The reason for using it may simply be that they have lots of it - if the system was put in by alarm installers, for example. We usually use this instead of 18/2 because it's more versatile - you can split the pairs out and run video over one, for example, and it's good for access controls, smoke detectors, intercoms, etc. - so it saves over needing to stock two separate kinds of cable. Chances are the system they had in place used 12VDC cameras, so one pair would be for + and one for ground... you can open up the IR domes to see what they used and wire the other end to power as needed. With 24VAC, there is no polarity, so it doesn't really matter which is which. We generally use yellow and red together for 12VDC+, green and black together for ground.

Don't get me started on Arecont - I can't stand them and will avoid them if at all possible. I'm also quickly developing a dislike for HikVision cameras

Given that last bit, I don't see why there'd be a huge difference with four pairs with an overall shield. Look at it this way: the STP is already in place. So try it - worst case, it doesn't work and you have to pull something new, or go to active baluns. Got nothing to lose by trying it!

I would think 1TB should last longer than that, but... what resolution are you recording at? I assume this machine records at max D1 or 4CIF (640x480 - 720x480)? What codec is it using (MEPG-4, MJPEG, etc.)? A full format of a 1TB *should* take maybe a couple hours... at least, it does with Windows using NTFS. No idea how much time it will want with whatever it's using (probably ext3). According to the disk space calculator here: http://video-insight.com/Support/Tools/Analog-Diskspace-Calculator.aspx ...four cameras, D1, 30fps, 24/7 recording, using MPEG-4 or WMV, 1TB should give you about 8 days. MJPEG with maximum frame quality only gives about two days, according to this.

Shielded cable will be fine... the benefit of baluns is simply that they DON'T REQUIRE shielded cable, because it substantially more expensive.

Multimedia "resolutions" don't really apply to analog video. "TV lines" is an indication of the vertical resolution of the sensor, but the horizontal scan lines are effectively infinite resolution, since it IS a continuous scan line. Theoretically, you're not making full use of the vertical capture resolution if you record at a higher res than the camera's TVL capabilities, but in reality you'd be hard pressed to see the difference between 360/420/480/520/etc. on even a D1/4CIF recording.

AFAIK it's SUPPOSED to work, but I have yet to get VLC to stream from an IQ511...

That said, they do build some pretty skookum PCs for their stuff to run on - my experience, it ranges from mid-level to enterprise-grade, but they don't do CHEAP JUNK. If you already have a machine you want to build your NVR on, or get your components at cost or something, then you can certainly realize some savings by building your own, but the Vigil PCs are pretty solid machines as well, and they do provide a warranty (I think hardware is one year, software three years, but I'm not sure about that, so don't quote me on it).

There are a few different ways to do it. Some IP cameras can push a stream or still image that you could embed in a website. If you're using analog cameras, many DVRs have web-based viewers that you could just link to. I can't speak for any others, but IQEye provides a nice little snippet of code (Javascript) that you can embed in any website to display their IP cameras, so you could easily create a layout with tables or frames to show multiple cameras.

Well, he actually works for them, so he'd be in a better position to know, but... when you can download the software, install it with the "NVR" option, and then just purchase your IP licenses... I don't see how they're tying the purchase to their PCs? It would be pretty f'n cheezy to say, "Sorry, we won't sell you the licenses because you didn't buy our computer." Maybe Erron could pop in here and clarify...

This has not been asked. To give a concise answer, I'm more concerned with price v performance than overall budget. This means I have to define "performance": -Reliable -Simple remote administration, even for the laity -Reliable Well, from my experience, the Vigil systems are basically as reliable as the PC they're built on. Slap it together on cheap hardware, and it may run forever, or it may fall apart under stress. Use quality parts, and you'll have no problems. That said, as with most PCs, you sometimes get surprises. For a while, some turnkey Vigils were using little Shuttle XPC "cube" cases, which were great and compact and for the most part worked well... until we got a whole spate of them that came down with the classic "bulged capacitor" plague. Not right out the door, mind you - most of the systems had been in service a couple years before a bunch of them all went down within a short timeframe. Kinda spooky, but hey... I don't blame Vigil *or* Shuttle, though, a LOT of manufacturers were blindsided by that issue. A bigger problem we had with the cubes were that because of their compact size, people would lock them in small cupboards or cabinets, and the heat will kill them in no time... ahh, there's just no accounting for human stupidity. But at the same time, there were a few that survived a very long time in very bad conditions. IN THEORY, the card shouldn't care... it's the software that gets snarky. Case in point: Vigil and Video Insight systems both use essentially the same ComArt-based cards. The Vigil software will install and run fine with the VI-branded cards (as long as you know the proper corresponding model numbers - ie. when installing on a Video Insight "V60" card, you select Vigil's model number, "HiCap50B"), but the Video Insight software checks the card for the VI branding, and when presented with the equivalent Vigil card, will simply report, "No compatible video board found". Thus, I can build a VI V60 machine, and a Vigil HiCap50B machine, and swap the V60 card into the Vigil and it will "just work"... but I can't swap the HiCap card into the VI system. We try not to, actually... it cuts into productivity F**k! That doesn't sound very "roll my own". What if I want to buy 2 DVR Cards or Software Licenses and 8 Cameras? I guess I'd have to ask their sales department, but to deny me that would be like saying "Sure, you can roll your own, but for every paper you need 16 grams of rolling media" Hey, a 16-channel system doesn't mean you HAVE to use 16 cameras! One of the earliest Vigils we have in use, is on a site with ONE camera... and it's had only ONE camera for... oh, probably 6 years now. But if they ever decide they need 15 more cameras, they're set! NOW THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! Now that said, they don't support EVERY brand of hardware out there... but then, few will. That's a LOT of extra dev time required to add in driver support for other brands. Realistically, they support the chipsets that they sell, which does cover a fair number of different card designs, and don't lock it to their own branding. I've talked them them about support for the Conexant chipsets, since we're retiring a bunch of GeoVision machines and it would be really cool to be able to rebuild them with the Vigil software, but with no existing Conexant support, they say it would be substantial work to add it, and not economically viable considering they don't sell any Conexant-based hardware of their own. Fair enough... I suggested they should just have WDM support in general, but never got a response to that Yup. We're using that wherever possible. Prices are good these days, making it much more viable. I'm a big fan of the LinkSys SFE-1000P switch, which has eight 10/100 PoE ports and two GbE/fiber ports, making it a great unit for a small number of IP cameras. For example, the stores where we're retiring the Geos in favor of Vigils, we're also adding 3/4/5 IQEye megapixel cameras to most stores, so this switch supports my cameras nicely, and the GbE ports are ideal to connect the DVR and a NAS RAID box. It's managed, fanless, and the real beauty is, the switch retails for under CDN$300.

One important question has not been asked (or if it has, I missed it - sorry, in the process of rebuilding a PC on the other side of my desk, so I'm intermittently distracted), is what's your budget? Is the freeware/open-source requirement as much about standards as it is cost? It's maybe a little overkill for your situation, but as an example, take a gander at 3xLogic's Vigil systems. You can buy a complete turnkey DVR/hybrid DVR/NVR system from them; or you can buy the card and software to roll your own; or you can buy just the software and use it as a straight-up NVR with a WIDE range of cameras, or with a decent range of third-party capture cards for a DVR/hybrid system, and on a WIDE range of PC hardware. AFAIK, the smallest package analog/hybrid setup they sell is a 16-channel unit, which is why I say it may be a bit overkill for your current needs... but consider that something like that provides a lot of expandability for the future. You could start off with an all-IP setup and add analog capture hardware and cameras later, or start off with an analog setup with the ability to add IP cameras later. They do sell cameras and capture cards, but again, you're not limited to those; the software is not code-locked to their name-branded hardware like a lot of others are. If you have a spare PC kicking around, download the 30-day demo version of their software and give it a look! As far as the cameras, take a look at CNB's offerings - they make some great cameras for a really good price. An advantage to going to with IP cameras in your situation - with a temporary, portable setup - is that you have a lot more options for hooking things up on remote sites... for example, if the cameras are close together but the DVR has to be farther away, you can just connect the cameras to a local switch, then via a single run to the DVR (you can even do it over DSL/cable/3G/HSPA to a remote DVR). If wiring is a problem, WiFi solutions can be implemented (not the best, but still an option if it's really necessary).

Well, you can always mount the DVR and power supply closer together. In one instance, we terminated at the PSU and used four Cat5e runs to extend 14 video feeds from there to the other end of the desk, where the DVR was. Or like I say, the long runs can be protected by conduit, loom, etc. Lots of possibilities!

It's really only necessary to post your question once, in the related forum.

These ones (the gel-filled ones are blue): The ones we use, at least, if you look inside, they're lined with little teeth that can bite through the wires' insulation when you crimp them down. They're small, so you do usually need to strip larger wires just so they'll fit, and you'll certainly get a more reliable connection by stripping first, but I've regularly used them without stripping as well. I've done it a variety of ways. You can terminate everything to a punchdown block (BIX, or whatever)... I've used the string to split the jacket, pulled out JUST the video pair, then run all the video pairs together over to the DVR, wrapped in split loom... I've also ended everything at the DVR then extended the power runs to the PSU with 18/2... really, it depends on the specific installation.

In addition to the potential voltage drop mentioned above, many alarm installers refuse to use 24AWG for power because it is so fragile. A nick while stripping or a tight terminal screw can easily break 24AWG. PoE avoids these problems because the higher voltage reduces the current and the RJ45 connectors avoid the need to strip or use terminals screws. Best, Christopher I've actually had more breaks from nicking the wire while cutting off the jacket, than I have from stripping the individual wires. And I usually use a pair of small flush-cutters for stripping stuff that small. It's really not a big an issue as some people make it out to be. In any case, use tool-less baluns and B-crimps that bite through the insulation, and you don't have to worry about stripping the inner wires at all.

My money is on either faulty wiring (signal leaking between the two runs), or a faulty card...

Well then, you'll never get to play poker on TV. I wouldn't be surprised that it's part of the TV contract they sign, that they're required to show their hole cards to the cameras.

Probably not. As you note, it's cheaper that running two separate or Siamese wires, it's easier to work with, it future-proofs you, and it means you only have to carry one kind of wire around. No-brainer, in my books.

The voltage drop DOES start to become an issue with higher current draw, especially when you start getting into IR cameras, which seem to be overly popular. For example, once you get up to a half-amp draw, you lose nearly a full volt at 12VDC.