Soundy

All using the lenses that came with the cameras. Actually, that one was maybe a poor example, the focus turned a little soft a couple days after we installed it (it's 40' up a wall, so it's not easy to get up and adjust it without a boom lift). It seemed the best example of low-light though - all the others are are looking at fairly well-lit scenes.

You can use devices like HiWires to run ethernet over coax, which would allow you to put in IP cameras, although they aren't particularly cheap, either.

AV3155DN:

Guessing a simple NO/NC type alarm signal. Best, Christopher "MegaFlashâ„¢ provides automatic camera calibration to support a wide range of strobe lights, and the 1 millisecond (ms) speed shutter can be triggered by a network request or the input/output connector. " Assuming a decent trigger (which is not hard to do), only one frame is needed for one car, independent of the speed of the vehicle (within some range, e.g. 0 to 100mph). I've reviewed images from the CA DMV (California Department of Motor Vehicles) of vehicles running red lights, and the cameras are set to take the photo when the vehicle hits a precise location in the intersection. Best, Christopher That's how red-light and photo-radar cameras work. Capturing high-speed cars has nothing to do with framerate and little to do with shutter speed - it's all dependent on the flash. Since your average strobe burst is on the order of 1/10,000s to 1/100,000s, the camera's shutter speed becomes largely irrelevant. Most common trigger for this sort of thing would just be a vehicle-detector loop in the road/driveway/etc. Simple, effective, and reliable.

I've very, very rarely had to replace an "octopus" cable for broken connectors. A DVR should be tucked in its place and almost never moved, so there's no reason for any "wear and tear" on the connectors. That said, neither is a particularly ideal solution IMHO. The octopus CAN be a pain the arse to sift through if you need to find a particular connector in a mess of incoming cables, especially once you start getting into 32-channel systems. On the other hand, most backplane connectors tend to be pretty tightly packed and while it's easy to tell which channel you're going for, actually reaching it and disconnecting the cable can be a major challenge unless you either have a special tool for it, or really thin fingers. One thing I do like about the octopus cable, if I have to remove a DVR for upgrade or repair, I don't have to disconnect 16-32 cables, keep track of which is which, and then reconnect them all to the new system - I just have to unplug the octopus, take out the old box, put in the new box, and reconnect the octopus. This is especially handy if I want to drop in a loaner DVR while I have the other one out for repair.

Sounds like there are two problems at play here. First, "blur", especially at night, is generally motion blur caused by a too-slow shutter speed. Unfortunately, you won't be able to adjust that with this camera, so your only solution there, short of replacing the camera, is more light. From what I was able to find about these cameras, they only have 12 LEDs and are rated to *maybe* 30 ft. illumination, so for viewing your street , the IR is all but useless. I think you have that backward - the 3.6mm lens would be the wider view, and the 6mm a tighter shot for more detail. Looks like these cameras come with a 3.6mm lens, so you must have switched the 6mm ones yourself - are you sure they're properly focused? There's no way you'll get plates at that range with that coverage, especially not if your trying to capture moving cars. The resolution of analog is just too low. Well, the Geovision is a decent entry-level PC-based system; that isn't where your problem lies (not most of it, anyway - you might check your record resolution settings, make sure they're as high as possible). The problem here is entirely in your cameras - you need something higher-quality with better low-light performance and/or better illumination. Unfortunately, that won't be particularly cheap. Your skinny "mistake" wire could be part of the problem as well - can you tell us exactly what type of cable it is? If it's not the right type, it could be causing distorted or noisy video that's also reducing your quality.

Looks like the IR LEDs are reflecting off the inside of the glass and into the lens. There should be a black rubber "gasket" around the end of the lens and snug up against the inside of the glass to prevent that - make sure that's in place.

There are a couple other factors to consider as well: 1. Future use. If you think you'll upgrade to IP cameras in the future, it may be preferable to pull UTP now. UTP also gives you the ability to run multiple analog signals over a single line, or to run video, power and control signal (such as RS-232/485 for a PTZ). 2. Cable cost. Sometimes you'll find one or the other type substantially cheaper, or already have some onhand. If you're wiring up a new site, it's likely already being pre-wired with UTP for network and phones, so it may be more cost-effective to add another run or two of UTP at the same time (especially if you or your builder can get a bulk deal). There are other cost considerations either way. You can run network over coax, for example, using devices like HiWires, but you're looking at several hundred dollars (currently) for a single pair. Going the other way, baluns to run analog over UTP add cost, but can average out to cheaper - for example, four pairs of baluns to a single Cat5e/6 run, vs. four coax runs. There's no definitive answer as to which is "best"; each method has its place. You have to factor in all your needs to determine which is best suited for you.

There is no one "best". Different systems have different strengths and weaknesses; only you can determine which is "best" for YOUR needs. There are numerous "what is the best DVR" threads - you might be better to search those rather than re-start the holy war.

If you have EXISTING, properly-supported telephone runs, however, you CAN use that, if there are conductors available. With baluns, you can run one video signal on each unused pair.

Not to mention, if it needs to be inspected or have something like UL-approval, you'll never get that on a DIY. But to answer the original question: what sort of power supply do you need? 12VDC or 24VAC? Multiple fused outputs, or no? Space-conscious? What sort of current capability?

I don't think it's a factor of the line speed itself - the Q-See remote software probably recognizes when you're connecting via WAN and dials down the quality to accommodate. The Panasonic web viewer either doesn't know or doesn't care.

Excellent news! I've done phpBB installs and one conversion, I know how much is involved (actually, CONFIGURING everything in phpBB3 is the largest part of it!)

Or use one of these:

Lot of good info and some pictures here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_rod http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_protection_system http://science.howstuffworks.com/lightning7.htm

A ground rod on the building is potentially half the problem - it makes the building an attractive (pardon the pun) target for the lighting. Once the electricity enters the building, it can fan out into anything else attached to the building. The idea is to have a separate rod (or series of rods and wires - there are specs out there for the best coverage) sticking up substantially above the building, with its own path to its own ground rod, to provide a "first strike" point for the lighting and channel it away from the building structure.

It would be easier to answer this (and your other question) if we knew exactly what DVR and cameras you have, but it seems like a fair guess that it's a low-end camera-and-DVR package system - and it's not uncommon to not have a lot of clarity from these systems. Between low record resolution and mediocre cameras that try to fit into a midpoint between quality and angle of view, there's just not a lot of detail to be had. There are several ways to get higher quality, but none of them will be cheap. You can go with megapixel IP cameras, but those are expensive compared to what you have, and you would probably need a new DVR that supports them. You can also use a "longer" lens on some cameras to get a closer, tighter view of faces, but that will reduce the area covered, and since these are probably "bullet" cameras, it may not be easy to change the lens. Beyond that, it's hard to suggest anything without more information on exactly what you have, and what you're trying to achieve.

Also a good idea... and remember, once you have an appropriate device, it can always be re-deployed on another site if needed, so the ROI doesn't have to end with this one problem.

If I'm following your setup correctly, you're viewing the same stream on both LAN and WAN with the Panasonic... however with the Q-See, the system is likely providing different streams, recompressing the WAN stream for lower bandwidth, which naturally means lower quality. Are you using a browser for all tests, or remote client, or...?

How about a big-assed lightning rod on or near the barn, grounded somewhere away from the building, to channel the hits elsewhere? Add another one on the house if needed, too?

Shouldn't have a problem finding an all-in-one that will record for a couple weeks given a big enough card. There are IP cameras that can record direct to network storage, but that's probably not a cost-effective solution for this purpose.

I could create one on Google Docs...

Agreed on both counts. There is no one perfect camera, DVR, or software style for every application - that's WHY so many different variations exist!

Well then, invent one And then figure out how to get everyone to conform to it!