Soundy

Gee Rory, wasn't it you that was just telling me in another thread, it's the installer's fault if he has trouble mounting a bullet cam??

and yet it still cant see at night (0.1 lux is NOT good enough for most apps and yes I have seen their couple so called night shots which are loaded with outdoor lighting) Ah, but then the question of the lens really comes into play. Remember, where your average CCTV lens has a maximum aperture anywhere from f/1.2 to f/1.8, f/2 is considered VERY fast for most EF-mount lenses, especially with varifocals (talking in the upper-mid range, four-digit-pricetag range), and f/2.8 to f/4 is far more common. The Sigma 300-600mm beast seen in the "Megapixel images" thread is f/5.6 *at best*, and with the 2x converter on the rig shown there, it won't open beyond f/11. In a nutshell, unless you're spending as much on the lens as you are the camera, most of the lenses you're putting on the Avigilon are at least two stops slower - or one-quarter the light transmission - than typical "low-end" megapixel C/CS-mount lenses. At f/11, that's a full SIX stops slower than f/2... or 1/64 the amount of light.

That's not noise... you have ghosts! OOooOooOoOOOOOooOoooo... There are tons of noise-reduction utilities and plugins in the photographic world... I've used NeatImage with some pretty good success. Noise Ninja is another popular one. Most better photo-editing programs (Photoshop, Paintshop Pro, etc.) have decent noise-reduction tools built-in. There's a rather extensive listing and reviews of different packages here: http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/digital-photography-software/noise-reduction-software/pls_5647crx.aspx

I don't have any grand expectation that it's a magic fix, but like I say, it was something I had an idea to experiment with. If it DOES work, a single diode will be just as effective as a bridge rectifier - all the bridge effectively does is add another diode to the power line.

Sunlight on its own should not be causing motion detection. It may be something else moving through the field causing changes in brightness, or reflections off moving objects. Changing to a manual- or fixed-iris lens isn't likely to solve your problem - in fact, if you have wide variations in lighting, the lack of ability to adjust to that with an auto-iris will probably make your situation worse - either it will be completely washed out in the bright sun, or if you adjust for the bright sun, it will be too dark once the light is gone.

In the absence of a model number, photos of one of these devices might help.

That would really depend on that camera's specific design. We could say "probably" but there are just too many variations on the theme out there for anyone to say with certainty without at least a make and model (and even that may not help). You're pretty much on your own to experiment with that... That's a definite "maybe". Chances are, the wires attach to the camera board with a simple three-pin header, as the power and video likely share a ground. The trick is, if you do get it apart, you have to find another board with the same connector using the same pinouts... and depending on how things are packed into the case, the pins may have to be in the exact same position. There is no "standard" for these things. I wouldn't count on the wiring for a cheap camera being "high quality", or even "medium quality".

if you use an adjustable regulator, you can just insert your diode or rectifier, put a meter at the camera and tweak your output voltage for the desired results

The limited DOF in this cameras is not because of the lens mount, and not DIRECTLY because of the sensor size. The problem is, with the smaller sensor, you need to use shorter lenses, and THAT is why you get greater DOF. Typically CCTV cameras have 1/4" or 1/3" sensors, compared to 16mm frame sizes in film, or 24-35mm sensors in DSLR cameras. For example, my 50mm f/1.8 lens on my Canon 40D ("1.6x crop" APS-C sized sensor), I get about a 25x17-degree field of view and very shallow DOF at f/1.8. To get that same FOV on a 1/4" CCTV sensor, you'd use an 8mm lens... and 8mm will give you pretty substantial DOF no matter what you do (well, unless you can get your aperture down to f/0.2 or so - good luck with that). None that I'm aware of. Generally, the camera and lens for this purpose are a single unit. You'd need some way to power the lens and feed it control signal separate from the camera. Frankly, if you do find something like that, it's likely to be fairly expensive.

Not exactly. CS refers only to the specific mount design (diameter, thread, etc.). CS mounts can have fixed-focal-length or varifocal lenses attached. Depth of field refers to the area, front-to-back in a view, that remains in-focus. It's affected by both aperture and focal length - a very short focal length will give you near-infinite DOF (meaning everything from very close, back to the far distance, will be in focus) but give a very wide view with little detail. Long lenses will get you a narrow field of view and give you more detail on distant objects, but the focus will become a lot trickier. There's some more info, along with some examples, here: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm Nothing in the ad you linked to suggests that camera supports remote-controlled zoom OR autofocus. The wire you're referring to is likely the wire for the auto-iris drive, that allows the camera to adjust the lens iris in response to changing light conditions. The two small silver knobs you see on the bottom of the lens would be the zoom and focus adjustments. If what you looked at were mostly webcams, then yes, those would generally be limited to 180 degrees or less - they'd have little need to go beyond that. CCTV PTZ cameras almost exclusively have 360-degree rotation - as shoreview says, push to controller to one side, and the camera just goes around and around until you release the control. Just different styles. The dome provides protection for the camera mechanism, often as part of a sealed environmental housing. Dome PTZs tend to be more compact, because the camera itself is designed specifically to fit inside a dome. The "bubble" itself is usually a smoked plastic, so others can't see where the camera is pointing. The reason I asked if it mattered was mainly for cosmetics: if this camera was supposed to actually appear in your film, something like the Esprit would probably be more "telegenic", as people would be able to see it moving and aiming in different directions, thus reinforcing the image of it being a PTZ. In a typical dome PTZ, as described above, the camera itself isn't usually directly visible, so there would be no indication to viewers that the camera is looking around in different directions.

I prefer SSD/USB in a lockable slot. If failure, just take a shadow copy and send to customer by mail with the following instruction: 1. Unplugg power cord! 2. open Slot for USB stick. 3. Take out the USB stick and put the new one in. 4 Close the slot. 5. Plug in the power 6. Start up DVR. No need to send people put to fix it! Customer do themself! JD Friend of mine just went through something similar, in fact. He deals with the new LED sign boards on city buses, which are computer-driven, booting off 8GB CF card. He had a corrupted image on one, so he had the company in Britain upload a new image to my ftp server, and I put it on a DVD for him from there - he took that home and re-imaged a new flash card from their disc.

Will this camera be used strictly for providing video, or is a prop as well? In other words, does the "look" of the camera matter? In any case, most better "pro-quality" PTZs will do the trick. Pelco has some good models - Spectra if you want a dome (which needs to dangle from something), Esprit if you want something that can sit on top of a pole or platform. The Esprit includes a box housing similar to the EH3512, so a variety of cameras can be mounted inside it as well, giving more flexibility. If you want HD, there are IP-based megapixel PTZ cameras available as well, although those will generally have some slight latency that may or may not be a problem for you. As shoreview notes though, these will not be cheap (I think the Spectras and Esprits run in the $3000-$5000 range), but you really do get what you pay for in this business.

Amen to that (and not just entry-level - a lot of the big guys make it difficult if not impossible to find documentation online, too.

Ah, that makes sense, thanks! I've seen newer PC-based systems using SSD drives, as well as those with the OS and software on a Compact Flash card booting via either an IDE-to-CF adapter, or just a card reader on an internal USB header. Either method achieves the same end: your system is on nearly-indestructible (compared to standard HDDs at least) flash memory. It's actually something that could be done relatively easily with almost any PC-based system.

Not familiar with that term... it could refer to POS data capture, input- and/or output-relay support, something related to IP camera support... Can you provide any more detail? Type of clients asking for this (retail, etc.)? They provide any examples of systems that have what they're looking for? Any of these tenders describe what they want to accomplish?

That would be my guess, too... try cycling the power to the camera. I had an IQ753 that did something similar: the cut filter was getting stuck partway through its move, and simply rebooting the camera cleared it up (until next time). A sharp tap on the camera may loosen the filter up as well, which may or may not be a permanent fix.

How about four separate wireless baby monitor systems? Just take the little homogeneous monitors they come with and duct-tape them all together in a quad-display layout Sorry, just my morning silliness talking. How about WiFi cameras, a basic draft-N wireless router (11n for better range and speed, even if the cameras are 11g), and a simple NVR? I know WiFi cameras aren't generally cheap in and of themselves, but compared to finding the four-channel receiver you're looking for, it may be a most cost-effective option overall.

One thing to keep in mind with diodes and rectifiers: you WILL lose voltage across them. A typical silicon diode will drop about 0.7V; since a bridge rectifier basically inserts two of them in series, that will drop 1.4V or so. If you're using a regulated supply with a solid 12VDC output, you'll be lowering what the camera sees to barely 10.6V... even less with line losses. I'd test it with a single diode, first... if that doesn't help, going to a rectifier probably won't either.

I see it as more of a camera problem and would suggest it's best to avoid those where it occurs. Any decent modern camera should have isolated power and video to get the best balun performance in any case. Having to use an isolated supply because it's tied to the balanced twisted pair seems a bit of a kludge. It IS a kludge, but that's a drawback of CHEAP cameras. Save money in one place, spend it in another...

ISTR something about them wanting the theme ported to phpbb3 before putting it online. Personally, I think expedited access the benefits to the new version would far outweigh maintaining the exact look... there are lots of third-party themes out there and some should be very similar to at least keep the look "close". Nothing wrong with a facelift now and then anyway

How about this one? I have a good half-dozen or so of these sitting in my garage...

Why do I have this urge to hack Scorpion's profile and replace his avatar with a picture of a VCR??

I just installed another DVR (NDC was the brand, I think) with the same options. Near as I can tell, "FRAME" to them is the same as 4CIF - referring to the full size of the video frame. If I get a chance, I'll export a couple video clips at the two different settings to confirm.

The good thing is, if you had a 120VAC version, it would work fine with a step-down transformer (such as you might use to run any other North American device on European power). You might be able to just swap out the internal transformer for something appropriate as well (check the existing transformer's secondary voltage and current rating, then find a similar one with a 230V primary). BTW, koolmer, if you do end up having to use individual supplies, see if you can get "switching" types rather than transformers. They're FAR smaller and run a lot cooler, so it's easier and safer to pack them onto a single power bar. Cost may be the only issue, but most of the ones I see are no more expensive.

Yeah, I've run into it before... spent a lot of time puzzling over it, experimenting with it, asking around as to why it was happening with nobody really having a definitive answer or even a good guess... but coming from the audio world, I'm quite familiar with path-length ground loop problems. Best solution I know of, in this case, is to use 24VAC cameras. Since they naturally have an internal power rectifier, they don't share a common ground between the power and video, and thus don't have two ground paths. The other solution that SHOULD work (although I've not had a chance to test it) is if you have 12VDC cameras with internal regulators - again, something that effective separates the power and video grounds from each other inside the camera. Dual-voltage (12VDC/24VAC) cameras SHOULD also be free of the problem when used with 12VDC power supplies, for the same reason. However, I've found that even having a mix of cameras that include cheap 12VDC-only cameras can cause induced noise on other cameras. The problem is, once the noise gets into the ground plane of the system, it can get into any of the channels. Is this proven to work? Do they also sell in Europe for 230V? Essentially what this requires is the power supply to have an individual rectifier and regulator for each output channel - again, something that separates that channel's power ground from the others. You'd end up with something that's effectively one big transformer with a whole bunch of regulator boards inside a single box. "Individually fused" will have no effect on the problem. I had one other idea, that it might help to insert a diode in the power ground, ideally close to or inside the camera, to separate that connection somewhat... haven't had a chance to test that yet, either.