Soundy

It's never NECESSARY... it really depends on the needs of a specific installation.

Whereabouts in Oregon are you located? Talk to SEANHAWG, maybe he can get you started with some of his used equipment.

A polarizer is what you'd use to cut reflections, but you'll need to adjust it carefully for best effect... and keep in mind that you'll lose 1.5-2 stops of light (ie. light level will be reduced by a factor of four), which could result in the need for slower shutter speeds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizing_filter_(photography)

^Depends on the dome design... with the VCM-24VF, the wire entry into the main camera section is sealed with a rubber grommet; I've never yet had a problem with leaks at this entry point. We DO make sure to seal where the wire goes through the cooler wall or ceiling, whether there's a conduit or just a hole straight through to the back-box, to prevent condensation from just dripping out around the housing (looks unprofessional!)

He bought domes, he got domes... imagine that...?

A smaller sensor allows for a smaller lens... a smaller lens is lighter and thus easier to move around at high speed. I don't know how BIG a factor that is in designing them, but I'm sure it's a part of it.

Shouldn't matter with a properly sealed dome - a heater will only address condensation forming on the inside of the dome; wind coming in the door, if anything, would cause it on the outside, where it can be wiped off anyway.

^Good analogy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_mount#CS_mount

In most cases, presets, tours, patterns and the like are stored in the camera once they're setup up, so they'll continue to work without a controller connected.

I've put a couple dozen VCM-24VFs inside walk-in coolers and freezers now, not once have I needed to use a heater (although if you really think you need one, there's the VCM-24VFH variation - the H stands for Heater).

The ideal alternative is a high-megapixel camera that can simply record the entire coverage area, all the time, so zooming in live OR recorded gives the same results. A great example is this Avigilon demo: http://avigilon.com/products/samplefootage/images/airportCheckIn.html (wave your mouse over the picture). Of course, that particular solution will cost you about 20 times what a cheap PTZ will...

I addressed that in an earlier post: "most DVRs with web clients use at least two ports: HTTP on port 80 for the initial incoming connection, and a second separate data port that the web client actually communicates and receives video on." If you're running a "thick" client app, then you shouldn't need the web port - that's typically just there for a "thin" (browser-based) client, so the browser can connect and download the (usually ActiveX) client script.

How many of those demos are staged events by the manufacturers to make their product look good, though?

Auto-tracking looks like a good idea... until you have more than one object to track. Then you'd better hope it chooses the right one. Or hope that there IS only one.

Several liquor stores we service have their own "wall of shame" with pictures of undesirables ... right up in their front windows. Usually with captions detailing their crimes.

The biggest trick in a nightclub would be motion blur from too-slow shutters. I would also think that cameras with built-in IR might cause problems with the recognition because of the "glowing eyes" effect. I wonder if it might work to deploy a few wide-angle IR illuminators throughout the room, either over darker areas or in particular trouble spots, to provide a broader IR illumination for the cameras that wouldn't affect the ambiance of the club lighting? Maybe place them near other light fixtures so they'd "hide" behind the brighter visible light?

Don't know about that, but I'd think it wouldn't be hard to install a board camera with a pinhole lens inside the thing. The hole required for it would look like little more than a mark on the mirror (you could even scratch the silver off in a few spots to camouflage the hole)

You could always just use good TDN cameras and lock them in B&W (night) mode. I like the CNB Monalisa cameras for low-light performance, myself - we use the VCM-24VFs extensively in a chain of upscale restaurant/lounge sites that tend to really dim the lights at night (not the same as a nightclub, granted).

Just google "BarWatch" - first hit should be a Wikipedia article on it, followed by a number of links from various police departments on how they like it As the Wiki article notes, "BarWatch is sometimes mistakenly used to refer to the ID scanning software used by the members of the BarWatch Association. However, the ID scanning software is actually offered by separate private companies such as Servall Data Systems." - who knows, it might be something 3VR does already, or may be interested in implementing along with you.

I'd be interested to know how facial recognition works on a broad scale - accuracy is usually reliant on a fairly steady, straight-on shot (this ain't CSI), which would mean cameras with tight shots on entry/exit points. I've seen a few of the clubs around here that are on BarWatch that have low-mounted cameras on either side of the ticket/coat-check window to get facial images from multiple angles, although I don't know if they're actually doing any computer-based recognition. The system has patrons present their driver's license or ID to be scanned into the database, and pictures added to it from the cameras; other clubs on the system can then share the database, and troublesome customers can be "flagged" so all participants will know to be aware.

Never used one... probably never would. My preference would be external motion-activated white light, or if necessary, external illuminator (I suppose the type of housing with a big-ass illuminator attached to the outside would count).

Doesn't work that way. You need actual IP-over-coax adapters, such as this or this.

You just posted in it!

The tough part of all this is the area you need to cover. Unfortunately, any camera in that price range that covers the entire area, won't give you any usable level of detail: you'll see people moving about and might even see them perpetrating, but it will be virtually impossible to identify anyone. Unless you have someone watching and monitoring the live video who can call the cops when they see something hinky going on, I'm afraid there's a good chance the results will be useless. Remember that a PTZ will only record what it's looking at, and without a person operating it, it will be of very limited use in a situation like this: even if you have it on a constant tour, it will still only catch a small area at a time and miss the rest.