Soundy

Yeah, that's the best advice - if you're building a PC-based DVR, you really want it to be a dedicated machine used ONLY for the DVR. DVR activity can significantly slow the machine down for other uses; other activity can also affect the DVR's recording. And of course, if you crash the machine, you're not recording until it reboots; if you get a virus or spyware on it, you could end up with a pooched DVR. New systems can be had around here for $250 or less, and they're more than powerful enough for a basic home DVR. Or upgrade your home machine and turn the old one into a DVR.

I'd be amazed if that thing ever had a "make and model". What sort of info are you trying to find on it? Pinouts for its cable?

Alas, this is true - make anything idiot-proof, and the universe will always come up with a better idiot.

Yes, you can run multiple cameras on a single Cat-5/6. Each camera needs only two pair - one for video, one for power. Be aware though, that with the thin wire, you may see significant voltage drop over longer runs, especially with cameras that draw more current. In an extreme pinch, you could even run three cameras with power over a single Cat-5/6, using three pair for the cameras and one pair for power to all three... but that will make the potential voltage drop even worse. This is POSSIBLE, but not really recommended. Also, I don't know how these practices would work with NVT's hub and transceiver products, as I've never used those - all my use of baluns has been single runs.

Agreed, especially since space is so cheap these days ($200 for 1TB). The only catch is where you run into other limitations in space - on the last one of these I did, 8 1TB drives in an 8-bay rack, RAID 6 would have been nice, but the 6.5TB we got from RAID 5 (with system and parity overhead) was bare minimum for the retention we were trying to achieve; RAID 6 would have cost another 1TB of that, and the next step up would have been to a 16-bay rack at substantially higher cost. Most good enclosures/cards, though, will give you a pretty hard-to-ignore warning if a drive fails, so you can swap it out before anything further happens...

Well, that partially depends on the software you're using - I know the latest versions of the Vigil software, you can specify the amount of space to reserve for Alarm and POS Alarm triggers, but aside from that it will record until it fills the designated drives. Capture allows you to specify how much space to use on each of your defined drives, and Video Insight allows you to define how much free space to keep on each drive. But really, drive space is so cheap these days (1TB SATA drives start under $200) and with PCs it's usually easy to add all the space you can afford, whether with additional internal drives, USB/Firewire/eSATA drives, or with a variety of SAN solutions (I just recently set up a system with 3TB storage internally, and an 8TB RAID-5 network array).

Well, it seems most agree... never having used an AverMedia anything, I can't say one way or the other. I know I've installed a lot of really cheap, really lame standalone DVRs for people who didn't want to spend any money, and then were unhappy with the results. One standalone I've used that I do like was a Digital Watchdog (couldn't tell you a specific model offhand). But that aside, I'm a fan of PC-based DVRs in general. IMHO controlling and searching with a point-and-click interface is worlds above navigating a bunch of buttons and maybe a wheel, especially when you have to keep looking back and forth from the screen to the panel.

Nothing to do with inert gas (never heard that one, myself)... the wires are generally sealed (rubber grommet, blob of silicone, whatever) coming out of the camera, AND the camera generally doesn't cover or enclose the hole where the wires go through to the warm air (either outside the cooler, or inside the building). Remember, the trick in both cases is not NOT have warm moist air on one side of the glass (or Lexan or plastic) and cold air on the other side...

An NVR by definition works only with IP cameras ("NETWORK Video Recorder"), so the first thing you need to do is figure out if you're willing to shell out for all IP cameras; if you're wanting some IP and some analog, or all analog, then you need a DVR or DVR/NVR hybrid. And NVR by itself will probably be cheaper (because there's no capture hardware required), but the cameras will tend to cost more, so you need to balance those requirements. Also, NVRs are not limited by hardware when it come to expansion - you get an eight-channel DVR, and load all eight inputs with cameras, and you won't be able to add another camera without a significant hardware upgrade. NVRs are entirely software-based (well, not including the machine they're built on, but they don't require specialized video hardware), and if anything are simply limited by license - need more cameras, upgrade your license. Need to go from eight to ten cameras, you just add two more to the license, rather than needing to bump up to 16-channel hardware. Thomas has a good question here - is this ABSOLUTELY necessary, and what is your internet connection like? Doing this can chew up a TON of bandwidth and very likely wouldn't be able to happen in realtime. If, for example, you have a DSL connection with a 128kbit upstream, you'd be lucky to be able to upload a couple of images per minute (PERIOD, not per camera!), forget about live full-motion video. Pretty much all of them will do this. Some will only allow you one camera at a time, with a sequence switching between your specified cameras; others will give a multiplexed, split-screen output (at additional cost, usually), but any of them should allow you to select which cameras are and aren't displayed. Some will also allow you to "hide" cameras on your office monitor as well (in case you don't want employees seeing that covert camera you have over the safe, for example). I have yet to run across one that SPECIFICALLY supports sending an SMS, but most wireless carriers will let you email an SMS to a phone - usually it's in the format of @... for example, for me, you can email 6045551212@text.telus.net (not my actual number, of course) and it gets delivered to my phone as an SMS. Check with your wireless provider for details. Yes. A very few (very cheap) standalone DVRs I've dealt with only output composite video, but the vast majority have VGA output available. Computer-based DVRs, of course, always use VGA as their main output. That would depend on the machine... none of the VGA-capable standalone units I've seen support widescreen properly. All of the CURRENT PC-based ones I work with do, since it's dependent on the video driver more than the DVR/NVR software (a few older ones are more rigid - some only work at 1024x768 resolution, for example, but those are largely obsolete anyway).

There are lots of those solutions out there - all depends on what sort of "protection" you're after. There are programs like Deep Freeze, that will automatically restore your machine to a designated backup point every time it boots up (we used to use this when I worked in a tech school and students would do all sorts of insane things to the rendering workstations - just reboot, and the machine is back to its installed state). And there are programs like Transparent Screen Lock, that's invisible until you tap the mouse or a key, and then it throws up a login prompt - I use this one DVRs regularly, instead of a screensaver (or working AS the screensaver), because it leaves the desktop visible. It can be set to lock immediately upon bootup as well. Linux and *nix-based systems are much more reliable as well, because the filesystems can be locked down a lot deeper than with Windows, without causing other problems. Some Windows-based systems also replace the Windows Explorer with their own shell, thus blocking user access to the desktop, drive objects, and command prompts. Capture's IDR-series systems have done this for... probably ten years now (first IDR system I worked with was running on Windows 98 and even that was virtually impenetrable without using a boot disk). In the end, none of these solutions will block someone who's TRYING to do damage (and standalone systems are just as vulnerable to physical damage and the determined hacker), but they are very effective against your basic idiot just klutzing around trying to read his Hotmail.

Or just click here: http://scorpiontheater.com/Documents/CP%20Network_Setup.pdf Hint: web documents should not have spaces or punctuation in their filenames.

The DVR doesn't know what time of day it is, it just plays back what it records, and it records whatever it's fed. That narrows it down the cameras. If the camera has an auto-iris lens, the suggestion to focus it at night applies - when it's bright out, the iris closes down, and the depth of field increases, so there's a lot longer range where the camera is in focus. At night, when the iris opens up, the range of focus becomes a lot narrower and might require re-focusing. If you can post still shots of both day and night pictures though, it would be a lot easier to see what's going on...

Nope... it generally comes in where the wires come in, if it's not sealed well. Some domes have the wires sealed with a grommet where they enter the enclosure, but most I've worked with don't... so you have to be sure to seal them.

Pelco EH3508

I've installed both - usually the only time we go with heaters is if the client specs them. I haven't noticed a difference either way in any of the ones I've done. If you DO get condensation in the dome, a heater can help keep the view clear, but if that's happening because of warm air "leaking" into the dome, it's generally only a matter of time until the dome fills with water and kills the camera anyway - in other words, the heater in that instance is only addressing a symptom while not addressing the actual problem.

Seems to me IP would reduce your initial infrastructure costs, assuming there is no existing wiring in place to feed the cameras back to your central location, as it would allow you to use existing internet connections - even from different ISPs - close to each location. The main drawback of this idea would be the varying, and probably often limited, bandwidth available in the different locations. Wireless (RF video, no WiFi) still tends to be quite expensive for good quality, and may have limitations on locations and positioning - you may need repeater antennas in some cases, which would further increase the cost. More "typical" camera systems would have the disadvantage, again, of requiring the cabling be installed, which depending on the area could be a major capital expense. As for which is "preferable", that would really depend more on the exact location and situation... you'd very likely be looking at more of a hybrid system using a variety of the discussed technologies, and quite possibly multiple DVR/server locations. It's hard to say much else, though, based on what you've given - generic questions can only receive generic responses.

Back to the original question, I've used a number of different outdoor/weatherproof-type domes in walk-in coolers and freezers. As long as it's fully sealed, just about anything should work - where you run into problems is if warm outside air can get in and condense on the inside. As long as your wiring path is sealed properly to prevent that, it should be fine.

Dealing with both Vigil and Video Insight systems, I can tell you they use nearly identical hardware as well - HICAP and XECAP cards, mostly. However, each maker's software is specifically coded to only work with that manufacturer's cards - I can't run the Vigil software on one of Video Insight's cards, and vise-versa.

Costco should have a number of options in between those extremes - if they don't have them in stock at your local store, they should be able to get them in. Checking their website, they show this four-camera Q-See system for $500: http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11298383&whse=BC&topnav=&browse=&lang=en-US&s=1 And this four-camera Lorex for $800: http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11228996&whse=BC&topnav=&browse=&lang=en-US&s=1 They also list four-camera systems with a capture card you can add to your own computer: http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?ec=BC-EC25149-ProdID11228996&pos=0&whse=BC&topnav=&prodid=11273790&lang=en-US The downside with these is that you need quite a bit of free drive space, and you ideally want to use a computer dedicated to that task. Lots more stuff in their Security & Monitoring section - again, your local store should be able to bring in anything they don't have in stock... worst case, you just need to order it online.

You can't really get much more than 4CIF out of standard NTSC video, is the point, so capture resolutions higher than around 720x480 are next to meaningless until you move into the HD (720i/p/1080i/p) realm. At that point, the cameras get much more expensive, the analog capture devices get much more expensive (and hard to find), the wiring requirements get much MUCH more expensive, and you're far better off just going to megapixel IP cameras. If you DID go above 4CIF on standard analog capture, it would also get much more expensive, because you no longer have the economy of scale: cards these days benefit from a glut of mass-produced digitizers, like the Bt848, so they're cheap to build and easy to support (generic drivers, etc.). Building cards that capture above that would require different, more expensive, non-mass-availability components and probably more hardware, driver, AND software development cost... and only up to the maximum capabilities of the cameras (max 520TVL for most NTSC cameras). For the relatively minimal improvement you'd see, it really wouldn't be worth the additional cost to the end user, especially not with megapixel IP cameras getting so cheap. And BTW, HikVision is far from "the best" available right now...

Hi, I have learned about Megapixel IP Cameras, definetly HD. There are IP megapixel cameras which produce higher quality than 1080i. The best i've seen is the 16Megapixel Avigilon Pro IP Cam. IQ Invision is also good Megapixel CCTV cameras aren't technically "HDTV", despite this overused buzzword being tossed around all the time. I'm just saying... Anyway, the key phrase above is "capture card" - ie. hardware that takes analog HD video input and digitizes it. Yes, they exist for "consumer" markets, but I've never seen one designed for CCTV use (particularly not multi-camera).

^Good points, rory. Another thought: if the cameras support progressive-scan, you might try using that as well. I've put in some Pelco cameras with this option, and depending on the codec, progressive-scan video can also be compressed a lot more than standard interlaced video.

Is it the one pictured about 1/3 of the way down this page? http://www.global-view.com.tw/dvr.html

You simply may not be able to do what you want with the equipment/budget you have... that's a problem we all run into, the people paying for it want the kind of things they see in the movies and on TV, and they think they can get it all for next to nothing... and then they get upset when you tell them they'll have to spend more money just to get something marginally acceptable. You didn't list the make/model of your DVR - have you looked into upgrading its storage space to allow you to increase your recording quality and still keep the desired 30 days? What other adjustments have you made to the record settings? You may be able to reduce the framerates, or go from constant to motion-detect recording, to save some space while increasing resolution. More details on your complete record settings would help as well.

They are like any other camera in that they are a tool. Sometimes they are the right tool for the job, other times they aren't. Well put. There are several POTENTIAL benefits to IP cameras; not all designs will take advantage of them: 1. NTSC analog video capture is limited to about 720x480 pixels. IP cameras have no such limitations as they don't have to transmit analog video. Cheaper ones may not be higher resolutions, but the potential is there. 2. Easier future upgrades: start with low-cost, low-resolution cameras if budget dictates, but as the technology of megapixel cameras gets cheaper, you can simply plug in better cameras as the budget allows. 3. Because they're network devices, they can be attached like any other network devices. Say, for example, you have a half-dozen cameras in the opposite end of the building from your DVR - with analog, you typically have to run a separate video cable from each camera back to the DVR (unless you're using some sort of multiplexor solution, which can be very expensive). With networked cameras, you can run all the cameras into one network switch nearby, and then have a single network cable to connect that back to the DVR. In a pinch, you can even use an existing network (although the cameras can take a lot of bandwidth, so it's generally recommended they have their own physical network). 4. If the cameras support it, you can power them using Power-over-Ethernet, with an appropriately equipped switch or PoE "injectors". This eliminates the need for a separate power wire/supply for each camera - all that's required is a single Cat-5/5e/6 cable to the camera. 5. Direct network viewing: many (most?) IP cameras have built-in webservers so that you can view them from any browser on the network. In fact, if all you need to do is view them, you don't even need a DVR or NVR. As Thomas notes, they may not be the RIGHT tool for every situation... but with the cost of technolgy dropping, they become a more attractive solution in a lot of instances.