Soundy

Thank you, I'm here all week... tip your waitress! Well, I guess I meant more, equipment designed for broadcast (TV/cable) as opposed to surveillance - things like full-motion HD feeds to multiple displays and the ability to do overlay text will be easier to find, and with greater variety, if one shops under "broadcast TV equipment" vs. "surveillance CCTV" equipment. If he wants to be able to switch between multiple cameras feeding the TVs (or even control which camera feeds which monitor on a one-by-one basis), then he's getting even more into either the broadcast realm, or the commercial-A/V realm. Like the restaurant chain we have cameras in: they have some really nice systems for controlling multiple sources (DVD, satellite, cable) to multiple TVs... and can even switch audio and video separately. It's kind of like... if you wanted to put a stereo in your car, you'd shop under car audio, not home audio: same basic function, but you want something better suited to the specific task; for example, you won't find a lot of home audio gear that will run on 12V. Similarly, you could do this with CCTV equipment, but it will be difficult to find stuff that will perform ALL the functions well.

It shouldn't cause a problem... it may even be beneficial to the cause, as it would provide more consistent exposure despite varying daylight conditions: you could just lock the camera's exposure to work best with the IR, rather than changing with the ambient light. Almost all IP cameras will give you a stream using either MJPEG, MPEG-4 or H.264, so you just need to be able to receive and process that. Where it might get tricky is actually interfacing with the camera - you want something with a good SDK, or depending on how you write your software, even just something that can be easily controlled via the URL command line. IQEye cameras, for example, let you alter a lot of their output and display parameters just by putting modifiers in the URL. They also allow you to upload some fairly extensive scripts to the camera's memory to run internally. On the other hand, I'm told by one NVR developer that Arecont's SDK is a nightmare to work with and constantly changing specs means they've had a *** of a time keeping their software working properly with new cameras when they come out. In short, you'll probably have to do some investigating into which brand's functions or SDK are best suited to your own coding skills.

Good lord, DO NOT buy this garbage... I wouldn't recommend this for someone's home setup, let alone something for a client who is obviously looking for a fairly high-end solution. Bunited2 is on the right track - cameras with HDMI outputs along with some form of HDMI switching and distribution will be one of the most effective places to start for this. How many cameras are you planning on having in this system? Why do you want to record them? Are you expecting to produce multi-angle DVDs of any proceedings? If so, you'll need something that records in a standard format (most DVRs don't) that can be edited by commonly-available editing systems.

Point out to the decision makers that if they'd listened to you in the first place instead of just barging ahead into a field they knew nothing about, they'd be $390 closer to having a working system, rather than proud owners of $390 worth of doorstops...

Yeah, not gonna happen for that price, or anywhere near it. Honestly, for even a "half-decent" upgrade (a couple mid-level DVRs, one 32-channel, one 16-channel) , you're probably looking at $2000 *to start*. You COULD spend less than that... but honestly, if you're protecting your business, this is not the place to cheap out.

Lots... HOW many cameras total, and are they all running to the same location? How much are you prepared to spend?

Again, the DVD recorders won't properly process the output signal from the multiplexers, and you won't be able to playback the video. The only way you could do it, even swapping discs regularly, would be to have a separate recorder for every camera. Your ONLY way to effectively get rid of the VCRs is to replace them *and the multiplexers* with DVRs.

Unless you're recording a single camera to a DVD... no, it won't work. Time lapse VCRs don't work the same as standard VCRs; they're designed to work in conjunction with the multiplexer to record multiple cameras on sequential video tracks, and then allow playback of those multiple cameras. A consumer DVD recorder doesn't have that capability. Plus, a 4.7GB DVD maxes out at 6-8 hours recording at the lowest quality level: you'd be swapping discs three to four times a day. Time-lapse VCRs can also automatically rewind a record over the tapes again if you forget to change the tapes, so at least they key recording... DVDs can't do that, so once a disc is full, until you swap it, you're no longer recording.

Pretty much all of what you're looking to do would be better served by a broadcast solution rather than a surveillance type solution.

Really impossible to say without more info - make and model of camera, maybe some pictures, etc. If I were to make an educated guess, though, I'd say the shielded wire is power and video, with the shield being a common ground... but which is which, is hard to say: yellow is commonly used for video connectors, but in this case, black would be an odd color for power. Most often, power would be red and black (12V and ground respectively). The red COULD be power, and again, using the shield for ground. Other wires might be for audio, or for serial control (ie. RS-485 for on-screen adjustments; I'm assuming this isn't a PTZ camera). All that's guessing, though...

I have six-year-old 16-channel Vigil systems out in the field still running happily on their original P4/1.6GHz 512MB RAM machines...

Motion blur is caused by low shutter speeds, period. It has nothing (directly) to do with the resolution of the camera or the transport method used. It may present more in SOME megapixel cameras, because the smaller pixel size (more pixels for the same size sensor as an SD cam) means more light is needed for equivalent exposure, and the easiest way to get that is by slowing down the shutter... motion blur, in that case, is if anything, a side effect of the higher resolution. A "slow" lens (too small an aperture) will lead to blur as well, on ANY camera, because closing down the iris means you need a slower shutter to get the proper exposure. A "faster" lens (f/1.2, for example, lets in twice as much light as f/1.6) can help mitigate the effect. Most of the MP lenses I see that come with cameras (particularly 1/2" cameras) seem to be f/1.6 or f/1.8, while f/1.2-f/1.4 is much more common with "standard" lenses.

Looking at the page for that card, I'd be more worried about the card and/or software not measuring up. Note that they don't provide software with the card, only the drivers, and they don't offer much support unless you're using their own Linux installation and software, so if you run into problems, you could be SOL. If you're going to build a Windows machine, you may find that various third-party software may or may not work well with it, too.

KVM extenders give you keyboard, mouse, and video (and sometimes USB and audio as well). If all you want is the video, you don't need KVM extenders, you just need a pair of VGA baluns, which you'll probably find for about $100/pair. Or if your DVR has HDMI or DVI out, and your TVs have HDMI or DVI in, for maybe $50-$70 you can get HDMI extenders.

Radio Shack used to sell their own re-branded version of the Crown PZMs, years ago, for a lot cheaper... the PZM design itself is excellent for this sort of use (several companies make similar boundary-zone-type mics).

Lots of options that will get you MUCH closer... the question is, how much are you willing to spend for them? There's something like this, at the extreme end: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=11322&start=82

Like ak357 said: most likely it means that the camera will not be visible on the live or playback display unless you log into the unit with the administrator account/password - any regular user fiddling with the DVR would think that there's simply no camera on that channel. This would normally be used in something like, say, a retail installation where an owner might put a hidden camera above a cash register or safe drop to catch employee theft, skimming, or other forms of dishonesty, particularly if the DVR is going to live somewhere that's readily accessible to the employees.

Stumbled across this today: http://forensicphotoshop.blogspot.com/2008/01/can-you-zoom-in-on-that-license-plate.html

Yes, although if there are already TVs there with working cable, you may want to run your modulator feed back to before the existing split that goes out to all the TVs.

Thanks for the advice....after thinking about it for awhile, the PTZ may not be such a good idea because of expense and also it involves moving parts which theoretically could be a potential weak spot over time with breakage. Only really an issue with cheap PTZs... the quality ones are well-designed and well-built to last for years with no maintenance. Of course, those also cost substantially more than the cheap ones... as with most aspects of this industry, you do get what you pay for.

Depends on the country, state... maybe even city or county. Your best bet is to check with your own local law enforcement or a lawyer. There's a good overview here of each state's laws: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=13492

i disagree. i think the goal should be to stop it all together, not give the problem to somebody else. That's a nice thought, but how are you going to do that... sneak onto the neighbor's property and install cameras, alarms, steel bars and signs while he's not looking?

If the video pins on the camera are a balanced signal, then you need to un-balance it at the other end... with a balun. Something like this: The signal IS polarity-sensitive so you may have to reverse it if it doesn't work at first. DO NOT try using the type of baluns with RJ45 connectors - the pinouts won't be the same as your Samsung connectors.

No.