MaxIcon

If you don't want to go IR, the best bet would be to find a 1/2" camera with excellent low-light performance (lots of recommendations for those around here), and put the fastest lens you can on it. I have an old Panasonic WV-CL924A with a F/0.95 lens that gives pretty durn good low light performance, but it still needs some ambient light. It's a fair bit more expensive used than your Ultrak, but they show up used on ebay pretty regularly (where I got mine, back in the day), and can be found for well under $200, often with lens (but maybe not the lens you need). Lots of used 1/2" lenses going cheaply, too (stick with the good brands), as 1/3" is a lot more popular these days. Another option, if IR washout is an issue, is to reduce the output from the IR emitter, or put a diffuser over it to reduce the glare (but reducing throw at the same time).

I guess my point is that there's very little hard data I can find (beyond what I've posted) that low level IR is especially harmful, and the light therapy, whatever one may feel about its effectiveness, has been FDA approved - not a trivial task. Not to discount anyone's unfortunate experience, it seems that this would be a pretty common topic if it were as harmful as, say, UV, which is well documented. Hanging out in a lawn chair in the sun is a known hazardous experience, but the hazards are mitigated by sunblock pretty effectively. At the same time, you're being bombarded with pretty powerful IR, including through the closed eyelids, and this has never been identified as a danger, except through potential secondary effects like dehydration. Even the UV danger of sunbathing is long term, not short term, with the exception of staring at the sun or a painful sunburn. Serious damage takes years to accumulate and manifest. If the IR from an inexpensive Chinese camera could cause eye damage through closed eyelids, it would seem that the much stronger IR from the sun would cause even more severe damage, and you'd think that there would be plenty of stories of IR induced vision problems. I'd love to see more data on this, but can't really find much.

Here's the best way to get rid of poltergeists, succubi, and gremlins: Take the camera apart, and clean both sides of the front glass. Remove the lens, and carefully clean the front and back surfaces of it as well. It's not a bad idea to hit the sensor with a quick sideways blast of canned air, in case there's dust floating around there too. Lots of inexpensive cameras come with smudges or dust on a variety of the optic surfaces, and cleaning them is always helpful, as they reflect a lot of IR. You have to keep up with the front glass cleaning, but the rest should stay clean once re-assembled. Next, it's good to direct the camera such that the IR doesn't reflect off the walls, but that's not always possible while maintaining a good field of view, so do what you can there. I've tried extended shields (like a sunshield, but on the side where the IR hits the wall), and they didn't do much good. Another option is to disable the built-in IR and use a separate IR illuminater, which can run from $15 to $500 and up. This is a lot more flexible when you're dealing with wall reflections. Seriously, though, lots of people use IR to hunt ghosts, so you may well be infested.

Yeah, I had never heard of them before I started seriously getting into IP cams and hanging out here again. Even now, I don't know much about them. If you google Avigilon vs Arecont, who are also not well known outside the industry, you get 10x the page hits for Arecont. The lowly Vivotek? 40x, with a lot of user feedback that's not just press releases. Add that they've got this secret squirrel thing going on with prices, which makes a lot of people (like me) stop looking due to the assumption the prices will be high and you can't comparison shop, and they just don't have much visibility outside the industry pros. I'm a hobbyist, and a comparison shopper, so Avigilon just isn't on my radar. I hear their software and gear is fine, but there's little buzz about them around the web, and I have no idea where they fit in the price/performance spectrum. I suppose I'm not their target market, but who knows?

You can also buy auto iris converters for pretty cheap. Here's one: http://www.defencemeasures.com/dm-5590.html or you can google "auto iris converters" (with the quotes) to find more.

If anyone's interested in a technical study, here's one from the WHO: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/euro/es/EURO_SERIES_25_(chp3).pdf The gist of it is that there are risks from extended IR exposure, however, these are mostly due to heating, and from sources with high irradiance (above hundreds of watts/square meter). No onboard IR devices will be anywhere near these levels, as evidenced by the lack of heating from a camera's IR devices. Virtually all of the at-risk results were due to exposure to welding, furnaces, heaters, etc. Staring directly into the LEDs up close might get you there, but you'll also damage your eyesight staring directly into a 3W white light LED. In addition, there are FDA approved IR LED treatments for pain, inflammation, wrinkles, and such, frequently used on the face. The product is typically several panels of IR LEDs (with some red LEDs mixed in so people know they're on), and are used very close or right against the face. Google "deep penetrating light therapy" for more info.

If you want to try out an inexpensive IR illuminator before springing for the good stuff, Amazon has one called the YY Trade IR30 that is under $20 and works very well for the price. It doesn't come with a PS, but runs from a standard 12v camera power supply, and has a photocell to turn it off at night. I get pretty good range and illumination from mine. Read the reviews on Amazon to see people's experiences. ETA: There's a link to Stanislav's awesome software in his sig.

I'm changing over from analog to IP cams, and have mostly switched to outdoor cams with built-in IR. I've had good luck with the Vivotek 1MP IP8332 (outdoor) and FD8334 (indoor). They have their flaws, but are a great upgrade from analog, the built in IR works well, and mine have been easy to use, reliable, and stable. The non-intelligent IR is likely to wash out faces up close, if you don't have a lot of room in your doorway. I'm not sure you'll do any better for the money, but if you don't mind spending more, there are better cameras, or if $300/cam is too much, analog IR domes are a good alternative. The higher resolution of MP IP is a great thing, and it's hard to go back to D1 resolution. I have a couple of D1 IP cams, and they work great up close (like in a doorway), but if you need to cover more territory, MP is a big improvement.

I like the Vivotek IP8332s a good bit more than the FD8134, even though the specs are nearly identical. I mostly use outdoor cams, so that part is a no-brainer, but the mounting issue is the other big part. Mine came with an extra insert for the cable gland nut that let me switch to a single network cable quickly and easily. The included mount is decent, but not industrial grade, and it took a good bit longer to run the cable than to mount the cams. They light up the pitch dark, no problem. I had my 8134 propped up on top of a bookcase in the living room while we were on vacation a while back, and we could watch the cats sleeping on the couch with pretty good clarity. Which is the Acti model you're looking at? I've heard their image quality is better, but haven't found any in the same price range as the Vivoteks with similar features. I'm always up to try out another cam.

I have the FD8134 (not the V, but the indoor model), and it's a pretty good camera for the money (less than $300). Daytime picture quality is very nice, nighttime less so - it's grainy with mediocre dynamic range. I haven't upgraded to the latest software, as people report the night quality drops using it, but may try it at some point. The built-in IR is good for non-intelligent IR, though some people have halo problems with this camera. Mine has a very slight halo, but I ignore it. It washes out when you get too close, like most non-intelligent IR. I like the software, which is flexible and responsive. It's easy to set up, and it and my IP8334s are stable and robust, with very few problems. Overall, the Vivoteks are among my favorites, mostly because I don't have to mess with them much, and running at 10 fps, the frame rates are stable for me. I haven't tried them a lot higher, due to CPU load. I'll try to post some screen caps and clips over the next few days.

I've been playing with a lot of different cameras, and here's what's important to me: - Ease of setup, but not low complexity. That is, it's important to be able to quickly and easily tweak camera settings and see the results, without using proprietary software, and ideally using any web browser. Some cams take a long time to update after setting changes, or need special software, and that's a problem. - Flexible camera settings, especially in terms of streams, resolution, compression, etc. Some cams will only let you run certain combinations of streams (for instance, h.264 on stream 1 disables mpeg4 on stream2, only allowing mjpeg, and limits the resolution to boot). I like to be able to adjust each stream independently for whatever I'm using it for. In general, more setting flexibility is better, as they help you solve problems and optimize settings. - Flexible cabling. I'm getting to hate cameras that have a bundle of cables that can't be removed, if you don't need the alarm signals, DC power, analog out, whatever. Being able to go easily from a single network cable to any combination is a good thing. Having an actual RJ45 jack inside the camera is awesome. - Connect strings and ports listed in the firmware. If I want MJPEG, RTSP, snapshot, whatever, I should be able to log on in a web browser and read the connect strings to get the stream I want. I hate having to dig through manuals to find out what the NVR connect string needs to be. - Frame rates that can actually meet the specs at full quality and resolution. If not that, at least tell me what it can really do in the specs. - Easily changeable lenses. Don't make me take half the camera apart to swap the lens. I'm sure I'll come up with more, but these are some of the things that annoy me when I can't do them right.

Did you ever find the f-stop numbers on any of the webcam optics? I've searched some, but haven't come up with anything. This is a fairly important number for those of us who do low-light monitoring. So, let's look at the numbers. 1080p is 1920x1080 pixels. At 3um/pixel, that gives sensor dimensions of 0.227" x 0.128", which gives a diagonal of 0.26". Maybe there's a border on each pixel and it takes it up to 0.33"? Hard to say without more detailed data. Next, the S/N ratio of 39 dB isn't up to what you get from analog or digital cctv sensors, which are typically in the 60 dB range, give or take a few dB. This spec is what will make a difference between really noisy performance and less noisy low-light performance. Even expensive IP cams struggle with this, due to the small element size. Finally, the blurb says it operates "...to nearly complete darkness below 15 lux." This isn't a very low lux rating for CCTV gear. Many manufacturers exaggerate this number, but it's rare to find one that doesn't go below 3-4 lux for white light. I'm not sure why the hardware specs are so hard to find for these, but this may be part of the reason. IP cams are a pretty competitive business. If someone could make a useful 1080P IP cam for under $100, I believe they would. Certainly, people like Foscam push the lower price envelope aggressively, but everyone who tries them knows the tradeoffs of cheap gear. Heck, Logitech makes inexpensive VGA IP cams, and I don't think they offer them in 1080p or even 720p - who better to exploit these inexpensive webcam sensors?

Does the jitter always happen on the extension card cams? I've got an NV5000 with 4 IP and one analog, and the analog cam started jumping the other day. I switched it back to one of the first 4 inputs, and it's fine there. I haven't dug into this yet, as this is a backup system, and am curious if it's the same with yours.

Pull a fan and google the model number and brand, or search on ebay (search in body as well as description). You should come up with a number of hits. Otherwise, just measure the diameter and depth, and search for a fan that size that runs on the same voltage. Most fans are standard sizes.

What's the Lifecam's sensor size? It's not easy to find that in the specs, so I'm not sure what to compare it to. How does the image quality compare to a middle-low IP cam like a Vivotek, which is a good bit more expensive than a $50 webcam? That's a pretty key piece of data. Regardless of the lens quality, you can't change it without a custom adapter. It's designed to show headshots of someone sitting in front of the cam, so is pretty wide-angle. What is the F-stop and lens size? Doesn't seem to be in the specs. Again, hard to compare. I don't know about the Lifecam, but the webcams I've used don't have great dynamic range (shadows don't have much detail), and don't handle widely varying lighting well (washed out vs too dark). Maybe the cams you mention are much better. It has a built-in non-switched IR filter, so that limits it a bit as well. You could probably remove the filter to use with IR, but then you'd have color distortion. I suppose you could come up with a way to mount it in an external enclosure, as long as it's within 15' of the PC. The differences between a proprietary USB interface and an IP interface have been discussed before, so we'll leave that. So, you could use one as a security cam if you don't mind it being within 15' of the PC, don't need IR illumination, don't care about changing the viewing angle, and don't need to use it outdoors. I just don't see it replacing any outdoor IP cams more than 15' away from the NVR.

I've been tracking IP system power requirements recently, just because I like to measure stuff, so here are some typical numbers. I've found most of my 1-5MP cams run 3-6W without the IR on, and IR adds another 2-3W, depending. Newer cameras typically run lower power than older, but that's not a hard and fast rule. My main NVR PC pulls about 90W (Core i3, 2TB HD, mini-ITX, running about 70% CPU utilization), and the monitors I've tried all run about 30W when on. I have a couple of old laptops I'm using as remote viewers, and they pull 30-60W, depending. My plan with those is to have them running full time with the display disabled, driving an external monitor that's turned off when no one's there or at night. When I want to see what's up, I turn on the monitor for fast response. I can post more specific cam power numbers later, when I'm near my notes, and can grab some analog cam readings as well. I've also considered the backup recording plan, since PCs aren't as reliable as the dedicated NVRs I ran for years, and the current plan is to go with two separate systems for redundancy. This is easy with NVRs, and since each is different, the likelihood of both failing at the same time is low. Everything's on a UPS, including the POE switch, which adds more power use, of course.

I've been doing a lot of mix and match with IP cams and DVRs/NVRs, and yes, ONVIF needs work, but in general, it's off to a good start as a standard. Cams that are well designed and programmed are pretty much plug and play, though there are lots that aren't still, especially in the budget end of things. My main concern would be that these HD non-IP systems are all pretty proprietary, and will take reaching critical mass before you could swap gear between manufacturers. If you think ONVIF is immature, well, this HD CCTV is going to be years before it catches up with where ONVIF is now. Having owned more than a few orphaned proprietary systems of all types, I'm big on staying mainstream and broadly supported these days. Add that IP cam prices are coming down pretty quickly, and I'm a bit doubtful these will get much of a foothold in the big picture. I could be wrong, though - wouldn't be the first time! One thing I miss about analog systems is the overall compatibility, driven by the NTSC/PAL standards. With the exception of ground loops and such, cams are generally compatible with recorders. The limitations are pretty insurmountable, though.

Class ratings are notoriously unreliable. If it's a standard name brand card, you could check reviews on Amazon or Newegg to see what people say, but the best bet is to hook it up to your PC and measure the time it takes to copy large files to and from it. That still won't guarantee it'll perform the same in other systems, but it's a start.

If you have a POE source, I recently installed a TP-Link L-PoE10R for an older non-POE Vivotek IR dome that's been easy and inexpensive: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833997213&Tpk=poe10r This one takes a POE input and gives you a choice of 5V, 9V, or 12V DC output, and it's working fine after about 2 weeks. Installing it involved setting the switch to the right voltage and connecting the cables - it comes with short RJ45 and 2.1x5.1mm barrel power extenders. The POE switch I have feeding it shows that it uses 1W idle with nothing connected to it.

I have a front door cam installed off to the side, under the eaves - maybe 6' away from the door mat and about 7-8' high. This gives a good look at what's going on, both day and night. The camera's a Y-cam style IP cam with IR LEDs but no day/night filter, and the D1 resolution works OK because it's pretty close. This has a few plusses. It's not affected by sunlight due to the sideways view, and the front door light isn't strong enough to cause problems (23W CFL, I think). It's looking down, which would cause problems if it were right above the door and someone was wearing a hat, but gives a good facial view from the side. It also lets me see if something's on the doorstep, like a package or the paper (my mail just arrived, I see). If you got the OK to mount one between the left hand door and the middle door, you'd be able to see what's going on at both of them, with a better view of the right hand door than the middle door, and no sunlight issues because you'd be facing the wall. Whether the lights would cause problems would depend on the camera's flexibility with backlighting and such.

This may work, depending on how much output drive the mic has. Plugging it into 2 inputs at once (DVR card and speakers) may load down the signal, but it's hard to predict without trying. It's easy enough to test, though. First thing would be to check that the mic works plugged directly into the speakers. Also, I'd be inclined to use a splitter cable, rather than a hard adapter, as having long, inflexible adapters sticking out of the card makes it easier to damage something. They'll have these at radio shack too, though I order all my cables from monoprice: http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10218&cs_id=1021803&p_id=663&seq=1&format=2

Does it have an FCC ID on the label (assuming you're in the US, or a shared market)? Often you can google that and find more info on the OEM.

Yeah, you'll typically have 2 choices - mount an IR filter, which will make your colors better but you'll lose your IR capability, or switch to BW and don't worry about the color. Cams with switched IR filters are the solution to this, but always cost more, and you've got a moving part now.

Here you go: http://c.na5.content.force.com/servlet/servlet.FileDownloadPkb?file=00P70000009lNlZ&orgId=00D700000009813&pPid=50170000000ey8L If that doesn't work, go here: http://www.iqeye.com/support/faqs-tech-tips.html and type blink in the search field.

A lot depends on which NVR software you're going to run, and whether it's just a recorder or will be running client software as well. Decoding and viewing the video streams can use a lot of CPU cycles, so an all-in-one NVR or client/server combo requires more horsepower than a simple NVR. For that many cams in that MP range, I'd look at an i5 system, and would seriously consider an i7 if the incremental costs aren't a big deal, if you'll be running a client on the box. The camera and NVR costs will outstrip the PC costs quickly. The other big PC question is HD storage space and redundancy - how many hours of video you want to keep and what resolution, whether you want RAID and what level, etc. Also, you'll want to look at powering them. Assuming they'll be all running from a POE switch, you'll want to make sure you have power capacity for all the cams at once, including the night time load of any IR cams. Many inexpensive POE switches either don't supply POE to all ports, or can't supply full power to all ports at once. You'll also want to make sure the switch backplane has the bandwidth to handle all the cams.