Soundy

True story!

For what that type of software costs, you'd be better off to go with megapixel IP cameras and just get better quality right from the start. Advanced software may be able to do impressive things with the image, but they're still generating data that doesn't exist in the image - better to simply get all that data in the first place. The main part of your problem is likely that your DVR is recording at low resolution, such as 320x240; some even default to 160x120. Bump that up to the maximum, likely 640x480 or 720x480, and it will help a lot.

You don't, not with that cable - the five BNCs are for the video component signals: red, green, blue, horizontal sync, and vertical sync. Your DVR's BNC is outputting a full composite signal. You need a composite-to-VGA converter. I've used some before, can't remember what brand they were though. This one is kinda overkill, but it's along the lines of what you need: http://www.nti1.ca/vga-converter.html Another example: http://leosecuritycctv.com/shop/item.asp?itemid=638 And a whole series of examples: http://www.nextag.com/video-to-vga-converter/search-html

^Ah yes, I see that now! Good thinking I hope you added a hefty "annoyance surcharge" to the no doubt already steep hourly labour charge on their bill...

Maybe a stupid question, but can you not just plug the DVR into one of the other "clean" outlets? Specifically, I'd pick the one farthest away from the DVR in the room, and run a big thick gaudy orange extension cord to it. Right across the middle of the floor. Make a point of the fact that this is required for stable operation of the DVR, and the only fix for it is to have the other outlet properly repaired. Once someone with some clout trips over it, it should get fixed in short order

Actually, almost every router I've seen has DynDNS.org support built-in... the really good ones have a few different services supported, or even allow you to configure your own (like the latest D-Link DIR-series).

1. Yes. It's not cheap and doesn't accept standard cameras. Also the pricing I saw for such systems put it in an extremely high price range. When something makes putting megapixel cameras in look cheap....that's pricey. I've never seen an HDTV surveillance-type capture card... could you provide a link (just for morbid curiosity)?

For ANALOG capture, not really. It could be done with an HDTV setup, but those aren't really designed for multi-camera surveillance-type use. For that size, you need to go to megapixel IP cameras, which connect via ethernet and don't require a capture card. Realtime, uncompressed video takes a LOT of space to store. For most purposes, DVR users want to store a lot of footage (most sites I deal with want 30 days' worth). The way to achieve that is by using lower framerates (regular video is 30fps) and high-ratio lossy compression. And with cheaper units, it's partially due to crappy capture cards as well. If you really want the "best" picture, go with megapixel IP cameras. That may require a different DVR, though, as I don't know if GeoVision supports IP yet (a friend's company just lost a big account because they use GeoVision and they couldn't supply the IP-cam support the client wanted... we could, so we got them). You really don't need to run 30fps - even at 15fps, most people would have a hard time telling the difference. 10fps should be more than enough for perfectly usable surveillance video. And if you do go with IP cameras, remember that they take a LOT more storage space than analog - some four times the space at 1280x1024 vs. 640x480, depending on the compression used. I dunno where you've been reading about RAID, but your information is incorrect: the whole point of RAID 5 is to avoid data loss due to disk failure. The catch is, you have to be on top of it if and when a disk in the array does fail. If you use all individual disks, one disk dying will destroy all the data on that drive. If you use RAID 0, striping the data across all drives, one disk dying will destroy ALL your data. With RAID 5, you won't lose and data if one disk dies, but you need to replace that disk to maintain the redundancy. If you don't replace it, and another one dies, THEN you lose everything. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID_5#RAID_5 for more details. We just set up a RAID 5 system for a client: 32-input, 480fps VIGIL system, 23 analog cameras mostly running a 640x480 and 3fps, and five 1.3MP IP cameras, initially running at 5fps. The machine itself has 3TB storage and was barely keeping three weeks (closer to 19-20 days). We added an 8-bay Enhance RAID case with eight 1TB drives in a RAID 5 configuration, giving an additional 6.5TB, for a shade under 9.5TB total. That gave them about 82-83 days' worth... they wanted 90 days, so they dropped the IP cams back to 3fps as well. The other trick to saving space is to configure it to only record on motion, rather than recording constantly. In low-traffic areas, and after-hours, that can save a TON of storage.

Your system has to have some sort of support for offline storage... without knowing what DVRs you have, it's impossible to say how or even IF it's possible with your current setup.

I have used a Pelco DX8000... wasn't impressed. Interface seemed clunky and convoluted. The site it was going into was previously running a Vigil... after about a week we ended up pulling the Pelco out and putting in a new Vigil. My two bits...

BTW, there are cheaper ways to do it... RAID controller card for your machine (most onboard controllers only do RAID 0 and 1), or a smaller/cheaper external array (Enhance makes four-channel units as well), and they certainly don't have to all be 1TB drives. I just linked to the R8S as an example - it's a beautiful system, but in itself is probably overkill for most people. RAID 5 itself, though, isn't.

I'd see if your router supports reserved DHCP - many will allow you to lock a given IP to a give machine's MAC address with their DHCP servers, so that IP is never given out to another device.

It's not "bad" - it's actually a good thing (RAID 6 is even better, by that token, because it uses dual-parity and you can suffer TWO failed disks without data loss). Whether it's the RIGHT thing, FOR YOU, is the only question. For most people it's not worth the added cost, but if your data integrity is important... Used to also be a question of whether it was worth the complexity to set it up, but new systems like I linked to above make it downright simple. Cost of disk space also used to be a big factor, given the "loss" of one disk's worth of space for parity, but disk space is so cheap these days (1TB drives for $200, 1.5TB drives on the way), that's not really a factor anymore either. If you're storing that much data, what's an extra 10-20% to ensure it's safe?

A couple: Swap your VCC4s for VCC4Rs, or... Mount the dome upside-down.

Not exactly... RAID 4 dedicates one disk to backup "parity" data; RAID 5 uses the same amount of parity data (one disk's worth) but stripes it across all the drives in the array. This way, any one disk can fail, and the array can still be rebuilt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID_5#RAID_5

How important is your data? RAID 5 isn't overkill if it's critical that your data be able to survive a disk failure. RAID 0 and 1 don't provide any kind of redundancy. RAID 5 allows one drive to fail, and allows you to swap it out without losing any data. Most RAID 5 controllers also allow hot-swapping of the drives, which means NO downtime. We just put an Enhance Technologies RS8-IP rackmount enclosure on a site, loaded with eight 1TB SATA-II drives, and set up for RAID 5... 6.5TB of usable space (with system overhead and parity space), all hot-swappable. Drive dies, pop it out, put in a replacement, and it rebuilds the array automatically. I think the enclosure ran around $3k (without drives)... not bad for what it does and the reliability it provides.

Pelco makes a number of housings with heater/blower/thermostat assemblies that you could "pilfer" parts from. I've used both Pelco and Capture outdoor PTZ enclosures as well, that have their own heater/blower/thermostat units... some are less conducive to mounting off-brand cameras but it may work with others. Check out Pelco's DF5-P and DF8-P housings: http://www.pelco.com/products/default.aspx?id=168 "The DF5 Series pendant models mount directly to any recommended mount, flush to a ceiling, or to 1.5-inch NPT female threaded pipe and are available for indoor and environmental applications. All environmental versions include a sun shield and heater kit and are suitable for use in temperatures to -60°F (-51°C). Heavy-duty pendant models (DF5HD-PG) are strengthened by a thicker sun shroud and dual wall construction." http://www.pelco.com/products/default.aspx?id=169 "The DF8 Series pendant models mount directly to any recommended mount, flush to a ceiling, or to 1.5-inch NPT female pipe threads. They are available in a black or gray finish for indoor applications or gray only for environmental applications. The environmental domes include a sun shield and heater kit and are suitable for use in temperatures to -60°F (-51°C)."

That's the other issue - the more you record (higher framerates, higher resolutions, more sensitive motion detection), the more it loads your processor, AND your I/O channel. I've seen significant dropped frames on some systems that are underpowered for the amount of data the users are trying to push through. Or have it record ONLY on motion-detect. Decent systems will pre-buffer a definable number of seconds or frames, and will continue recording a definable amount of time after motion ceases as well, so you don't miss any of the action.

What are these for? An environmental camera enclosure? If so, first place I'd suggest is the enclosure manufacturer. Little hard to suggest anything else with such vague information.

Regular NTSC video (TV, DVD, etc.) is just a hair under 30fps (about 29.97, actually - google "drop frame" for more details, if you're really curious). In most cases though, even 15fps will appear to be smooth-flowing video (until you start getting into fast-moving objects). Dropping from 30 to 15 will approximately double your retention and most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference, or if they did notice a difference would have trouble figuring how or why it looks different. I'd even challenge that you would have a hard time telling the difference if you didn't know the setting had been changed Most systems we put in, we actually only run at 1fps, sometimes 2-3 for certain shots. For things like retail and fuel-service coverage, this is typically all that's really necessary.

There are some, but they tend to be fairly rare. Video Insight's analog system does support the Mozilla family and Safari but might be out of your budget range if you're looking at a 9 camera system. I do work for them, so feel free to take my words with a grain of salt. As a customer/user/reseller, I'll second that... we have a number of VI systems in place that clients are accessing with a variety of browsers, including "mobile" versions of IE, Mozilla and Opera on assorted mobile devices (Moto Q, HTC Touch, Palm Treo, etc.) Surprised Thomas didn't give you the link to their demo version: http://www.demovi.com

^Excellent advice, there... I got into CCTV coming from the IT field, just as my employer was getting into PC-based DVRs, so my skills were particularly attractive for him. Now that we've been moving into megapixel IP cameras, my networking experience has been even more valuable... to the point that we've "stolen" at least one major customer from my friend's employer, because the client wanted IP cameras, and the systems they sell don't have IP-cam support and nobody there (at least, nobody who has a say in things) cares to get into IP-based video. Access controls and alarm systems are more and more getting network support as well, so if you're making a jump from from IT, this is the perfect time to be doing it, because your current skillsets will be particularly valuable.

3.5 should improve that. Unfortunately the release date I have is....soon. Any idea what the upgrade path is going to be?

I've seen the Costco systems: one here on their website has a DVR and four cameras for a whopping $479. I routinely install cameras that sell for $450. Each. Without lens. It follows that a $450 camera is going to be better than a camera that you get as part of a full system that costs the same. Another Costco system I see is a DVR and 16 cameras for $3,800... one of the DVR lines we sell, the bottom-end machines alone sell for $4,000 (others they make sell in the $8,000-$10,000 range). The point is, you simply can't expect these low-priced systems to provide anywhere near the power, flexibility and quality of more expensive recorders and cameras. You wouldn't buy a Ford Matrix and expect it to have the gravel-hauling capability of a dump truck, or the raw speed of a $1.5M Indycar racer. It's pretty simple, really: you get what you pay for. If you're on a tight budget, there's nothing "wrong" with cheap Costco surveillance systems... just keep in mind that they are CHEAP. You won't get the detail, the clarity, the capacity, the low-light performance, or the features of higher-priced, professional-grade systems.

O RLY? I have PC-based DVR systems that have been in place and running solidly for 4+ years. I also have one site where they went through four separate standalone machines, each one either having serious issues or just dying outright, before we put in a PC-based system. There's no inherent reason either type of system is any better or worse from a reliability standpoint. A well-built PC DVR tends to have better cooling and thus less chance of hardware failure than a lot of standalone designs (and a cheaply-built PC will likewise be problematic). PCs have the advantage of being more easily upgradeable, especially for adding extra drive space. From my experience, the most common failures of PC-based DVRs are 100% user-caused, usually because someone is using the system for something OTHER than a dedicated DVR. I've rebuilt a number of machines that were infected with viruses and spyware because someone felt it necessary to check their porn sites on it, or use an unattended work machine for their torrent downloads. Another site, they kept calling because they'd come in to check video only to find nothing recorded... because someone was closing down the DVR software in order to use the machine for DVD authoring (because his home machine didn't have a DVD burner). Standalone machines have the advantage that they CAN'T be used for anything else... but a properly-built PC system can be locked down solid to the same end as well.