Soundy

Sounds like you're getting dropped B-frames and things clear up once there's another I-frame. I had the same problem when I tried it on a Vigil V6 system (the first version that included generic support for custom RTSP streams), and it got a lot better with V7's implementation. See if Aver has an update for their RTSP support.

Try playing with the framerate, bitrate, and CBR vs VBR, to see if it's a bandwidth problem, and try reducing the I-frame interval.

If the software has a pre-buffer setting (I'm not familiar with the Aver software), try matching the pre-buffer time to the I-frame interval; note that the camera specs it in number of frames, so for example, at 10fps, a 10-frame interval would equal one I-frame per second... so you'd want a 1s pre-buffer.

^Yup... same idea:

CMOS cameras by nature are progressive-scan, AND are direct digital-to-digital output (addressing the Mpix video's "digital-analog-digital" claims).

The vast majority of megapixel cameras you find will use CMOS sensors. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

Rewire with Cat5e and your total cost for IP drops by about $1000. Plus, you can use your analog cameras with it initially and then upgrade easily.

I recently purchased a 4 cam kit from a big box store. Yes, I know it's "cheap/poor image quality/junk/limited/etc etc" but it will get m off the ground and a idea of how these systems work (to upgrade in the future).

Too late now, of course, but for future reference: the only problem with this thinking is that many (most?) of these types of kits use cameras, DVRs, and pre-made cables with proprietary connectors... making it virtually impossible to upgrade just one thing at a time. If this system is like that, upgrading will be an all-or-nothing venture ("all" including the cables).

I need to at least replace an analog camera right away. I can use the existing cable as it is 95% copper braided 18/2 siamese, and I do want to go megapixel on at least 4 cameras, 2 megapixel each. I can only switch 1 camera at a time due to budget for camera and dvr at once.

 

I will appearently need the converters to ip over coax, but will they fit in a electrical gangbox? Is there one that will still use the power siamese side or is it only over same cable?

Most (but not all) require you to power both sending and receiving units. Most tend to be a bit on the larger side - might fit a dual-gang, but would need a single-gang to be fairly deep. Keep in mind these things normally start around $100/set and prices go up sharply from there (realistically, plan on $250-$300/set).

I picked up a little Android media player for $89, does the job as well - same "IP Cam Viewer" app as on my phone.

These guys are quite "image-conscious" and are pretty set on using dome cameras. The Axis I used was a box style, just because that's all that was available to me to test... they let it slide because it was only temporary. I'm not aware whether there's a dome version of the 3MP Dahua box.

 

I thought you were testing the Dahua 3MP Box cam with a Fujinon lens on it?

 

Or am I confused again, after my recent heart attack?

 

Den

I used four of the ES 3MP box cams on another site. Didn't test them on this particular site, although I did test the 2MP ES dome.

If your TV runs Android, then you should be able to use the same app as you would on a tablet or phone.

Otherwise, your choice of cameras will depend entirely on the capabilities of your TV's browser. On my Sony Blu-Ray player, for example, my IQEye cameras' interface doesn't work (uses ActiveX or Java), but I can pull a direct still JPEG image from it with http://(camera ip)/now.jpg; however, and a live MPJEG stream with http://(camera ip)/now.jpg?snap=spush.

If the browser supports H.264 RTSP streaming, you should be able to view most H.264 cameras on it.

The MP lenses are worth the expense, even more so with a 3MP camera.

 

I've tried one standard lens that looked good on a MP camera, the rest looked so-so.

And in fairness, a high-quality "SD" lens will probably give better results (up to a point) than a really cheap "MP" lens. But then, that's the case with cameras themselves as well.

Lenses really need looking at carefully. Especially if using with IR, some make the image look like it does not have as much contrast.

IR is a whole other matter too, as IR light focuses differently than visible light, and if you have a TDN camera, you really want a IR-corrected lens that has optics designed to compensate for this fact. Without, you'll often find the image goes soft when switching to night mode, as the IR spectrum of the image will be slightly out of focus.

I agree that better glass will get you better results, I'm just not sure that a lens touting "mega pixel or HD" isn't just marketing hype.

It's not.

Stick a known brand like Fujinon, Pentax, Bosch, Tamron or a lens from the camera manufacturer and you'll be OK.

All of those make MP-specific lenses...

So, what visual difference will i notice? Would I notice a picture quality difference or anything else?

I believe I already explained that:

With color sensors, though, the ambient IR can adversely affect the color balance and even the exposure level. So color cameras have an IR cut filter that blocks the IR wavelengths. However, this lowers their effectiveness at night.

 

"Standard" day/night color cameras are usually just color cameras without the cut filter, so at night they get the extra light (and switch to B&W for clearer image and less noise), but tend to have poor color rendition in the day.

 

"True" day/night cameras have a movable IR cut filter that sits in front of the sensor when it's in color mode, but moves aside when the camera switches to night mode.

What Soundy is saying is you need a lens matched to the sensor size. For example, if you get a camera with a 1/2" sensor you need a lens rated for a 1/2" sensor and one made for a 1/4" sensor may vignette or have other issues.

That's not actually what I was saying... sensor size is a different issue. And as long as the lens is rated for a LARGER sensor than the camera has (eg. a 1/2" lens on a 1/3" sensor), you should have no problems.

I was talking about the "resolving power" of the lens - its ability to render detail. Or in short: the quality of the optics. Typical CCTV lenses tend not to be the highest-grade optics, because they don't need to be with the low-resolution cameras. As you get into higher resolution cameras, any flaws, software, aberrations, etc. in the lens become more apparent... and so you need a better lens to get the full benefit of the camera.

Camera sensors are sensitive to a wide spectrum of light beyond what human eyes can see, particularly infrared. With B&W sensors, the extra spectrum can be beneficial at night, as there's more ambient IR than visible light.

With color sensors, though, the ambient IR can adversely affect the color balance and even the exposure level. So color cameras have an IR cut filter that blocks the IR wavelengths. However, this lowers their effectiveness at night.

"Standard" day/night color cameras are usually just color cameras without the cut filter, so at night they get the extra light (and switch to B&W for clearer image and less noise), but tend to have poor color rendition in the day.

"True" day/night cameras have a movable IR cut filter that sits in front of the sensor when it's in color mode, but moves aside when the camera switches to night mode. That's why you'll hear a "click" when you power up your 24VF.

Main thing I can see is that the cheaper one is a video iris type, which most cameras don't support. With video iris, the camera mainly just provides power to the lens, and the lens itself controls the iris. Video iris used to be a lot more common, but not so much these days.

Most cameras that do auto-iris these days, use a DC iris lens, where the camera controls the iris.

One other consideration: for best clarity, you want to use a megapixel-rated lens, preferably one rated for the camera resolution you're using (ie. minimum 1.3MP lens if you're using a 1.3MP camera).

You don't use baluns with coax, you use it with twisted-pair. For coax, you want just BNC connectors. Exactly how you attach them will depend on the specific type, whether twist-on, compression, or crimp-on.

1. Don't do it.

2. Don't do it.

3. Especially don't do it if the camera has IR.

4. DON'T DO IT.

I'd put the original camera back up and if they have anything to say to YOU, tell them that you checked with the local police and they said not only was it ok, but they prefer cameras on residential and let them know if there is any problems. That will back off the morons. Anything they have to say behind your back, ignore.

Better yet, tell them if they have a problem with your cameras, they're welcome to file a complaint... with the police.

You don't need IR for good performance. The CNB 24VF series cameras do well with ambient light.

Seconded. IR is the hallmark of a low-grade camera that NEEDS the extra illumination. These are low-profile domes with smoked plastic bubbles, so they're unobtrusive, and it's difficult to see where they're pointing.

You need a hybrid if you want to add MP cameras. That's going to drive the price up a fair bit over JUST an analog DVR. You can get into a Dahua 16 analog + 16 IP hybrid for under $1000.

"Best" is subjective, especially since what's "best" for one situations won't always be "best" for another.

That said, I'm not aware of any VMSes that are specifically designed to take advantage of any GPU - doesn't mean they don't exist, but realistically, NVRs/VMSes have been doing this for years without needing high-end video cards. I'd suggest looking elsewhere for the source of your problem, possibly disk I/O on your server.

For that matter, there's a good chance it just doesn't like running in VMware.

Soundy:

 

While I would dearly love to take your advice I live in an area that has electrical storms powerful enough to knockout the sub station a quarter mile away on a regular basis. All of our local utility companies are aggressively incompetent and can't be relied upon.

 

I need to design in every precaution I can find.

 

Thanks.

 

Pat

Fair enough, but I can pretty much guarantee that the ground connection isn't intended to have anything to do with lightning protection, and I really don't think it would make any difference to it.

The only time I've seen a dedicated ground connection (terminal or wire) on another camera, it's been for one of two reasons: either because the manufacturer wants UL certification and that requires the ground for "electrical safety", or as part of some sort of signal I/O.

Given the context of the "reset" wire, I'd say the latter is the case here.

Grounding the wire probably won't hurt anything... but don't expect it to protect your camera.

I have tested various scenarios and have determined without much doubt this is simply a decoding bottleneck.

I believe you are correct. Have you tested this scenario: run the server on the Core2 machine and the client on the Xeon?

It's somewhat dependent on the NVR software, but in general, simply receiving the network stream and writing it do disk takes very little processor power; other members here have built 16-channel Exacq NVRs out of Atom-based machines.

A wigged-out GPU on the client will only be effective if the client can take advantage of it... otherwise, the client is where you really need the processing power, because in most cases (can't speak for this software specifically) it's what's actually doing the decoding... not the server. The server generally just pulls the video stream off the disk and spits it back out - again, very little processor work required there.

Stop beating yourself up, don't worry about the ground. Connect network and power and be done with it.

Vigil can capture POS data via serial port, IP, or read direct from an MSSQL database, and play it back synchronized beside a camera view... exported video from the server or client can then overlay the text on the display.