Soundy

WHO CARES?! Seriously... unless you go absolutely over-the-top with all kinds of grounds and gadgets to protect every inch of every circuit and every device plugged in anywhere in your building (and spend thousands to hire either westom or bud, depending on which one you believe, as a consultant to make sure you didn't miss a trick anywhere), there's always a chance lightning will still find its way in to kill your gear and there's f-all you can do about it. My advice is to stick to the simple, BASIC PRECAUTIONS, and just live with it - by the time you finish implementing everything these guys suggest, you could have just replaced any gear that gets zapped, ten times over, IF it actually ever gets zapped. Yeesh. Get a grip, people.

This is your problem.

http://www.cnbusa.com/en/html/product/product.php?seqx_prod=1073 - fits all your requirements except IR, but they do so well in low light you likely won't need it... and if you do, adding outboard illuminators is probably preferable anyway.

The router has no bearing on the DVR/cameras, only on the internet connection, so unless you need to improve your wireless signal or something, I don't see any reason to replace it.

The more drive space you can afford, the better - how much time you get on that will depend on a lot of factors, including various quality settings and how much motion there actually is.

I wouldn't say "back feeds" really, since a network is bi-directional anyway. Essentially, the DVR sends a command (or commands) to the camera requesting a stream, and the camera replies by sending the video data. The DVR then receives that data and writes it to disk. Functionally, it's no different than watching a video on YouTube - you plug the URL into your browser, connect to the site, click the link for the video you want, and the site sends you the video stream until it ends.

You got it, Pontiac!

You are way over exaggerating bandwidth issues Do u so confident that? Yeah Mike, you sure about that? I couldn't even understand what he wrote there...

hi take a look at the T-EYE it has been around for some years and is a very good reliable little unit. 2 cameras/google maps/speed I don't think that's quite what he's looking for - "Unique in-car system that records video and audio up to three minutes before and one minute after a collision." Sounds like he wants an ongoing, running recording while he's driving around. I know a number of guys who do this using a simple flash-memory camcorder or even pocket camera mounted to the dash. I've done it using my phone on a windshield mount. Lotta discussion on it here: http://www.revscene.net/forums/650435-how-many-you-drive-video-cam-rolling.html

You only need to post once. Is your DVR set to use DHCP to get an address from the router, or is its IP hard-coded? If the latter, you need to make sure your router's LAN IP range is the same as the DVR's. For example, if your DVR is 192.168.0.* but your new router's LAN uses 192.168.1.*, they won't be able to communicate - you'll need to change one or the other. Make sure your internet IP hasn't changed, as well. You say it's supposed to be static, but some ISPs may give a new one if you connect a new device. Use a computer attached to the same router to go to www.ipchicken.com to check.

IP cameras record via the network, so the DVR must be connected to the same network as the cameras. In its simplest form, you could have one camera plugged directly into the DVR's network port - just think of the switch as being a "splitter" for that port, allowing you to connect multiple cameras. A PoE switch *is not required* - almost all cameras can be powered normally (12VDC/24VAC); PoE just makes it more convenient since you don't need a separate power supply or power wiring. A router *is not required* - that's normally used between your network and your internet connection.

Unless a camera specifies that it's PTZ (pan/tilt/zoom), assume that it's fixed. Unless someone is sitting and operating it in realtime, PTZ is not usually worth the cost - it can still only view a limited area at any one time, and Murphy's law dictates that when any incident happens, the camera will be pointing in a different direction. If you're ONLY using IP cameras (or analog cameras with encoders), then you need an NVR (network video recorder) to record them. There are a number of standalone options out there, such as NUUO, Exacq, QNAP, and so on. Something like the QNAP NVRs have a benefit in that they're basically built around a RAID array, so if you want to use something like RAID5/6/10 for data redundancy, it's there ready to go. There are also some "turnkey" PC-based systems that, from a setup perspective, are really no different from a standalone: just unpack it, plug it in, fire it up, and configure it to the specifics of your network. Vigil is a good one, although a little on the pricier side.

If it's a Windows-based system, you can get a fair idea by pulling up the Task Manager and looking at the Networking tab. Otherwise: http://www.wireshark.org/

If your DVR is Windows-based, there's no reason the HD Viewer software wouldn't run on it (although it may prove excessively CPU-intensive). Two main problems I see with a simple decoder box: one, it would need to support any cameras you want to display through it; two, all the ones I'm aware of output composite video only, and that will look like crap on any LCD monitor. You need something that outputs VGA, DVI or HDMI if you want to use full native resolution on the monitors (HDMI splitters and extenders are relatively inexpensive), and you need something that will accept streams from a wide range of cameras. HD Viewer will do that... I wouldn't be surprised if the likes of Exacq, NUUO, etc. have something similar as well. Only thing I don't know is if 3xLogic will sell JUST the HDV software, or if you'd need to buy the whole machine, but worst case, it's going to be a mid-size tower box - not a SMALL footprint, but not a massive one either.

That picture looks like a failing camera.

Most, if not all, Mobotix and VideoIQ offerings will be megapixel. There are other brands that do onboard storage, mind you, those are just two that came immediately to mind. VideoIQ has the added benefit of built-in video analytics (think: really advanced, intelligent motion detection) so you can more precisely control what gets recorded and what gets ignored. Of course, they're correspondingly more expensive. Consider motion-activated flood lights instead. Besides the fact that these are often a deterrent in themselves (bright light comes on, prowler scurries away), the other most likely response when a light snaps on is to look for the source of the light... if you have a camera mounted nearby, that means you've enticed your prowler to look more-or-less directly at the camera... and it means you'll get a nice, clear, full-color picture, rather than the ghostly pale faces and glowing eyes you get with IR. Precisely. Just connect it to a switch and plug in whatever else you want to connect to the network. Or if you want WiFi in the area, connect it to the LAN port of an appropriately-tweaked router (as has been covered in your other thread.

They look like the same unit... whether they're made by GEM, or if GEM OEMs from someone else, or someone just copied the design, I can't say...

You keep making the point that with a standalone you cannot add storage to a standalone. I never said you couldn't, I said your options are extremely limited. Rory says you can. Thus my question above. Specifically: You can do that with standalones today, so whats the question again? Which ones? I'm talking multiple terabytes in a RAID5/RAID6 format, mind you... name some standalones that support interface via iSCSI, SAS, or other such high-capacity interface. And that limits your options as well. Few if any RAID arrays have eSATA interface to their host systems, so you're generally limited to a single drive with no redundancy. It's nothing to do with "storage that can only be configured by a computer". The point is that if you need more space, very few standalones give you the option to add more, and those that do have limits on what you can add. A PC-based system allows you to add almost any sort of external storage you like, generally with no practical limits on how much. Want to save three years' worth of video? It'll cost you, but it can be done.

IP is definitely the way to go if you want to put cameras in remote buildings - they work over the same type of network as your internet connection, so once you use Nanostations to link the buildings, it's a simple matter to drop a couple IP cameras in a building and link them all in to a central recorder. It's a little more expensive up-front, but something you might want to look at to get started are cameras with build-in storage, like Mobotix or VideoIQ - then you can get started recording some key areas without needing to link them in to a central location (that can come later). As you build your infrastructure between buildings and add your internet connection, you're then ready to just tie those cameras in. There's also the benefit that they'll keep recording internally if the wireless link goes down for any reason. The other thing that might work for some buildings is ethernet-over-powerline adapters, which will give you a good hardwired connection (probably not as suitable for buildings with heavy electrical machinery, as large loads and noise on the circuit tends to affect speed).

I know an outfit in Lithuania that makes one... Not entirely clear what your end goal is - are you trying to display select cameras on separate remote displays? If it's just analog cameras, you could chain them through a mux or quad. You could also look at Vigil hybrid DVRs - the DRX series uses a software-compression card with software MUX output that can display any mix of analog and IP cameras on a composite monitor. Vigil also has an HD Viewer module that can output any mix of IP cameras and analog channels (re-streamed from the Vigil DVR) on multiple VGA/DVI/HDMI monitors, using multiple video cards either in a separate machine, or in the DVR itself.

Hit her with one of these:

Welcome! As you can tell if you've browsed the board, questions about portable, temporary, or off-the-grid systems that require batteries do come up fairly regularly - I'm sure your experience and insights will be appreciated!

At that range, you don't need megapixel to get a clear ID. If you have choke points on these approaches (stairs or hedges, for example) it's easy to tighten up the view on just that area, and get more detail. The day/night issue is being overstated by far. We're installing dozens of the VCM-24VFs, over 60 of them in the last three months, and have yet to run into a problem with them switching modes. This would be a good choice for all your needs, as they do great in low light, and the 2.8-10.5mm lens gives you a lot of flexibility in your views.

I suppose, worst case, there's the software provided on the website: http://www.intellinet-network.com/downloads/7054-ipsurveillance_2_8_5.zip Might be possible to make an NVR like Vigil work with it - Vigil supports a level of generic HTTP and RTSP stream support, IF you know the URL the specific camera uses. The manual lists a few options for this, so it's probably do-able (if you want to send me one, I can test it). Ultimately, these don't look like very good cameras - they're VGA only, 1/4" sensor, lousy low-light performance (0.5 lux). Your friend might do himself a favor and look at keeping the NVR he's already got and use better cameras.

Sorry, not the same phase... the same leg (used the wrong terminology, my bad). In North America at least, most houses have single-phase power with two legs - you get 120V across one leg to neutral, or 240V between the two legs. Some outlets are split - in a kitchen in particular, the top and bottom of an outlet will be on separate legs. In the breaker panel, each alternating breaker will be on a separate leg. So it's quite possible to be on the same leg at opposite ends of the house.