Soundy

Just because they're expensive, doesn't mean they're not CHEAP

Gotta agree with Survtech - cameras are generally pretty robust with regard to their power, especially those that use AC power. Remember the electronics themselves don't run on AC, they still require DC, so the cameras have to at the very least step down and rectify the power internally. If the camera also says it can run on DC power, as many do now, then one would have to expect it already has some form of internal regulation as well. In fact, a bridge rectifier and simple voltage regulator are so cheap, there's no excuse not to just use them in any camera design (except maybe those with really tight size restrictions). A bridge rectifier across the power inputs not only makes for universal AC/DC support, but negates polarity concerns when using DC. Design the camera electronics to work at 12VDC, slap in a 7812 regulator for about 50c (probably a quarter that if a mfr. is buying them wholesale), and you can feed it anything up to 35-40V with no issues. Yep, this one's on the camera manufacturers. A cynic might suggest they wouldn't want to spend the extra buck or two to make their cameras more robust, because they wouldn't be able to sell as many replacements for the blown cameras. But yeah, I have run across a few CHEAP board cameras that want regulated 12VDC and are very fussy about over-voltages. But again, those are CHEAP.

Yes, depending on the DVR. You need an analog capture card - there are a number available. The main thing is the software - it needs to support both analog and IP cameras. Or you need a ready-built "hybrid" system - both 3xlogic and Video Insight make them, and have representatives on this board. It is - that's pretty ambitious though. While there are lower-resolution IP cameras out there, the main reason for using IP is to get beyond the 640x480 (or so) limitation imposed by analog video... meaning the cameras get into the megapixel and higher range, meaning a LOT more storage is needed than with regular cameras. A 1.3MP camera, for example, is 1280x1024 resolution... which is more than 4 times the resolution of analog capture at 640x480. Depending on the codec and compression used, that means approximately four times the space needed. 24 cameras like that, you're looking at multiple terabytes just to hold a week or two of video. There are also WiFi-capable IP cameras, but the range is so limited with any reliability, it's not really feasible for CCTV usage.

I deal with mostly Vigil and VideoInsight systems built around the HICAP and XECAP cards. The HICAPs use a pair of HD-15 VGA-type connectors with 8-channel octopus cables for input, while the XECAPs have consolidated them into a single 18-channel cable (16 in, two out) with DVI-type connector. Wondering if anyone knows the pinouts both of these use? I'd love to build a set of adapters... for example, to let me plug the VGA octopus cables into a XECAP card, or vice-versa... mostly for the purpose of swapping in loaner machines, so I don't have to keep swapping over the BNCs? Or maybe such adapters already exist?

There are arguments in favor of both types of systems, but overall you'll find PC-based DVRs are easier to use (full GUI interface) and are more expandable (add internal, external, or network-attached storage) than their standalone counterparts. They also tend to cost more, especially if you use quality hardware (as you should). I mean, you can buy a bargain-basement $250 PC and slap in a $50 card you got off eBay or something, but don't expect the same sort of reliability you'd get from a system costing 10 times the price. It mostly depends on your needs and your budget. For 32 channels, there are some cards that are 16-channel and have an expansion board available to add another 16, so you don't have to go all out right off the top. It will also depend on the sort of framerates you need - 32-channel, 120-frame cards are a lot cheaper than a 960-frame, 32-channel system that will give you a full 30fps on every input (which of course, also requires a FAR more powerful computer!)

BTW, that "cutoff switch" is probably better known as a "battery isolator" and they're readily available from most RV stores and suppliers, or truck-parts stores, as they're very commonly used for RVs, campers and travel-trailers to prevent their systems from draining the truck's main battery.

And the answer is: "Yes, no, maybe, it depends." Some DVRs will only allow remote access through their own client software. Some only support browser access. Some support both, and some support neither. IN GENERAL, from my experience, client software tends to be better-featured and less troublesome than browser-based viewing... but again, that will depend on a number of factors, starting with the DVR itself. One system I've used, for example, the client software only works properly on a LAN connection, and you have to use browser viewing for WAN/internet connections (or do some serious hacking to make the client work that way). The only salient advice here is to talk to the DVR manufacturer(s), ask them which method they support (if either, or both), and ask for a demo if possible, and determine which will work best for your specific needs.

As an aside, multimeters can be had for as low as $10, depending on where you live and what sort of stores/supply houses are in the area. Even at regular retail stores, you shouldn't have to pay over $20. There's no excuse not to just own one of your own http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10051&langId=-1&catalogId=10053&productId=100013868&N=10000003+90401+502726

That's why I said, "something LIKE this"

I think he means something like this: http://www.axis.com/products/cam_292/

Friend of mine serviced a DVR in the back office area of a restaurant... he found the grease in the air (from the kitchen) had collected on the heat sink fins, and that collected all the dust in the air into a thick fuzz that he couldn't clean off no matter what he tried.

Second that - heat is the biggest enemy of ALL components in a computer. Proper cooling is essential - not just the fans, but the placement of the system. Always make sure there's good unobstructed airflow around it, and keep the dust to a minimum. Better cases will have filters on the air intakes, to prevent dust getting into the machine. Also, when it comes to PCs, don't leave blank plates out, either the ones on drive bays or the ones for the slot cutouts in the back. And don't run with the case open - it actually isn't cooler that way. Proper airflow, with sufficient fans, needs to move air through the case steadily, blowing out the hot air so cool air is drawn in. There's a great article on case airflow strategies here: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1835927,00.asp

The DVR itself would need to support IP cameras, and it would need to support the specific IP camera you're using.

Your router's remote-configuration option is probably set to port 80. Find that option and either change the port, or disable remote configuration.

I would imagine you need to register an account first... prices may vary depending on whether you're an end user, reseller, installer, etc.

You could try a "faster" (ie. wider aperture) lens on it. That camera comes with an f/1.8 lens... if you can get one that's f/1.2, that allows twice the light through (and they should be readily available down to f/0.85 or so).

What you're talking about is "field of view", also sometimes referred to (incorrectly) as "zoom factor". It's a direct function of the focal length of the lens used: the longer the focal length (usually expressed in millimeters), the tighter the field of view will be, and the closer the objects will appear. For a complex, technical explanation, check here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length There's a simpler guide here, including some examples: http://www.ezcctv.com/cctv-lens-guide.htm Since you're probably using 1/4" CCD cameras, you'll find the most common lens lengths are 2.8mm, 3.6mm and 8mm. You should be able to obtain different lenses and swap them out in most cameras, but you'll have to focus them yourself, and some cameras will be easier than others to access the lens. Be particularly careful with outdoor cameras that may be weather-sealed - you don't want to damage the seals.

BTW, on the issue of customer expectations vs. cost, keep in mind this extends to the cameras themselves, too. When he was just starting out with his own company, my boss made a pitch to the local port authority: they listed all their specs for the types of views they wanted, and those were pretty extreme. He demoed a camera for them that did everything they wanted, including reading the text off the side of a building several kilometers away. They were blown away. Then he told them what it would cost - I think the one camera alone was about $3k (and it wasn't even a PTZ). They were expecting the whole system - cameras, recorder, installation, everything - would be about a third of that. In the end, he had them pretty much convinced, but then management changed (ah, bureaucracy) and the new guard decided they didn't need that kind of sophistication. What can ya do? Point is, extreme tastes come with extreme costs; that's just the way it is, and your first three points demonstrate this nicely. Large amounts of storage, however, don't have to be "extreme" if you can settle for more reasonable "needs". Once your needs (or wants) move from the "reasonable" to the "extreme", expect the costs to inflate accordingly. That applies to everything in life and business.

Well, in that case more storage is going to be an issue regardless of how much you need. That's something the customer has to weigh from the start (or something his salesman should bring up): if you're going to need a lot of space for your requirements, is it cheaper to get a $1500 dedicated system, where adding space is going to cost you $500/TB... or to just go with a $3000 PC-based system where you can drop in multiple TB at $100 a pop? Oh, for sure... but there you're running back into your first three points regarding resolution, compression, frame rates, motion detection, and other such considerations. It goes back to unrealistic customer expectations, and it's been an issue since long before megapixel cameras and terabyte drives. Heck, these same issues of balancing cost with customer expectations existed even with time-lapse VCRs: do you want to pay more for a 16-channel MUX to add more cameras when four will really do, for example? And no, you don't have to pay $600 for a time-lapse VCR... you could pay $80 for an off-the-shelf home VHS machine, and get smoother motion, but you won't get multi-camera ability and you'll have to change tapes every few hours. And sure, now you've shelled out for time-lapse... now you have to decide whether you want smoother motion and higher quality but only get two hours on a tape, or very jerky motion and very degraded quality but you only have to change tapes once every four days... And so on.

I largely agree with your points, particularly the first three. What I don't fully agree with is this: IMHO this over-simplifies... or over-complicates, depending on how you look at it. Specifically, the way you inflate 1TB of storage from $100 to $750+ is... well, 'alarmist' describes the attitude of it, I guess. Adding 1TB to most machines is easy: open it up, plug in the drive, configure the OS/software to use it. In fact, with most decent motherboards these days including multiple SATA channels and onboard RAID controllers, putting 4 or 5 extra TB into a system need not necessarily cost more than the price of the drives themselves (unless you're using really cheap motherboards, which isn't advisable for a DVR in the first place). Even external USB, Firewire or e-SATA drives can be had for $50 or less over the cost of an internal. Really, you don't usually get into the NEED for expensive NAS solutions until you're talking a half-dozen drives or more... at that point, you're probably talking about a pretty expensive system to begin with, for pretty high-end customers, where the additional money for the NAS system is not as big a concern. The only other reason for such a system is redundancy and data security - RAID5 and RAID6, for example. If the data is that critical, the cost of the hardware to make it happen probably isn't a major concern - that will apply whether you need 10TB or 100GB. At that point, the cost of the space itself is almost negligible: once you pay, say, $4000 for a RAID5 NAS enclosure, whether you're paying $50 each for 80GB drives or $100 each for 1TB drives becomes pretty much irrelevant; it's a mere fraction of the total cost. In fact, it's far cheaper to go with the bigger drives in this situation - three 1TB drives at $100 will give you 2TB with RAID5 redundancy at the same cost as six 80GB drives for only 400GB/RAID5. The point of all this, is that I think you greatly overstate the cost of storage. By the time it really becomes a factor, you're getting into fairly high-end and expensive installations anyway, at which point it's a relatively small percentage of the overall cost.

What a horror story! In fairness to the installers, the power molex connectors should normally be included with the cameras (I would expect, anyway). The data connectors, maybe not, but as an installer, that's the sort of thing I'd keep on hand, and things like that are normally built into the cost of the job. But $125?? Either they're marking up the connectors about 1000%, or they're charging you for the time for BOTH installers to go pick them up (which is retarded; one could just as easily stay and keep working while the other goes shopping), or the parts depot is two hours away... Hey, it's easy to make up for, though: hand them a bill for $125 for the repair of your drywall and plaster. At this point, they're probably operating at a loss for all the extra labour time (or if not, they're close to it).

This is no different than an IQEye... and those don't even require a login to simply view the video (unless you set it up that way).

Unless there's a real concern about people trying to take these cameras down, or they're just really heavy, I'd just use the appropriate length of wood, metal, or deck screws, probably about #10 size screws, with washers if necessary.

If this is more than a temporary thing, you may want to consider going through a streaming-media service, like the "Puppy Cam" above does. That way you're only feeding one "client" with your stream.

Nobody here has heard of the recent "Puppy Cam" craze? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27724451/ And the actual feed: http://cdn1.ustream.tv/swf/4/viewer.49.swf?cid=317016