GrouchoBoucho

testing one of these right now... not bad, has an outdoor kit available... and goes for about 1/3 the price of the mobotix. http://www.axis.com/products/cam_p1214e/

the wall can has individual fuses for each channel. it also looks a lot more professional to have all the wires just run into the box, than to have the block and tails dangling on the wall.

i remember utp being an option in a bunch of pelco is90s i installed years ago. too bad they're shyte cameras.

it depends on the nvr software - at its most basic, all it needs to do is receive the video data and save it to disk; all the heavy processing is done by the vms (video management software), which you can run on your fancy desktop system. an older machine like this should have no problem doing that for a number of cameras. something like exacq would probably work well... the catch is whether the cameras are supported by it. and the other catch with almost all nvr software is, you usually pay a per-channel license fee. between $50 and $150 is not uncommon... but with 8 cameras, that drives your cost up by at least $400 right there.

hahahahah i love that! i think i'll borrow it the fact is, the user interface is something that's very often overlooked when people compare dvrs, especially low-cost dvrs. comparing specs-on-paper will only tell you so much about how the dvr functions... it tells you nothing about what it's like to actually use. many people don't think it matters... until they run into something with a really hideous, complex, frustrating user experience, like you did with nightowl. unfortunately, because they don't think it matters, it's hard to explain the differences that you've learned the hard way. if they can get the nightowl for $20 less than the q-see (assuming all other specs are equal), most will go with the cheaper one regardless of how much you tell them the interface sucks. you answered your own question: dahua-made units come with the pss software.

never tried it... but it wouldn't surprise me that an analog camera would work through a catv splitter, and i would definitely expect sdi wouldn't, although i wouldn't expect to see the strange symptoms you're getting. either way, give your average catv tech, such a thing is entirely possible - you would still see proper continuity end-to-end. too bad nobody has actually come up with an sdi cable certifier (or at least, not one that doesn't cost as much as a car) - even the hdcctv alliance's "official" recommendation for testing cable runs it to connect a camera and see if it works.

I haven't been on the roof yet. The air handlers are at ground-level. I'm sure anything metallic on the roof is bonded, but there isn't anything visible/metallic on the outer edge of the parapet that would require bonding. I don't want to get involved with adding lightning rods, bonding, etc. if I don't have to. i wonder if you could use something that just "clamps" over the parapet and provides a mounting surface below? kind of like those towel hooks that hook over top of your bathroom door. something made out of a sturdy plastic would be non-conductive and it would look better not sticking up above the roof line. using a proper adhesive may work as well, after all, they work to hold car mirrors to their windshields, sometimes for decades. as for getting the wire to the camera, the panes of glass probably have some sort of soft seal between them, so you just need to find an appropriate seam to push through.

i would suspect a wiring fault of some sort, possibly a ground issue or ground loop, possibly interference on that one line, possibly even a damaged sheath on the one line that's allowing the shield to touch something it shouldn't. have you tried connecting the "non-working" camera directly to the dvr with a short cable? try connecting the camera to its run without actually mounting it to anything (especially if it mounts to metal)? how about connecting an analog camera to that run and switching it to an analog input, see if the same problem arises?

it's possible (likely, even) that your sat provider is blocking port 80...

Those look promising, but here in FLA they would be considered "lightning magnets". I want to avoid going above the top edge of the building with anything metal, if at all possible. does the building not already have lightning protection in the form of lightning rods? i don't think i've ever seen a large building that didn't have some sort of structures on the roof already, such as hvac units, elevator machinery, radio/cellular antenna arrays, etc. - are these not 'lightning magnets' as well? wouldn't they have some sort of associated protection?

if you have a new router, there's a good chance your dvr has a new ip (ie. not 192.168.0.100). if you have that number hard-coded, it's also possible the rest of your network has a new address range (such as 192.168.1.*) which means nothing on it would be able to communicate with the dvr at the old address. if you're now using a satellite internet service, i can tell you right now, you won't be happy with the remote viewing speeds - sat service has very low upstream bandwidth and you'll be lucky to get one static image per 2-3 seconds. as for ie9, well... that's just because ie9 is a piece of $#!t.

good, they're hard enough to come by as it is - more for those of us that actually know what we're doing.

actually, no, i called your post stupid. it displays a seriously distorted thought process. no, it's not. you used mp cameras because you want the best image quality you can get... but then you're crushing that image down to d1. whether it's cropping or not, you're buying high-def cameras and then *intentionally* reducing the image quality. don't be stupid - get an nvr and take full advantage of the cameras' capabilities, and stop whining about stupid $#!t.

i'd go with some sort of roof-mounted arm, possibly something using a satellite dish stand. i've used this style mounted to the back-side of the parapet: this sits on the roof and can be anchored by concrete bricks or flagstones: both are made by pelco.

and you still have a job???? that is true. it also means you're stuck with the geovision software, as i'm not aware of any other nvrs that support them (and gv probably prefers it that way). axis cameras, on the other hand, are supported by nearly every other vms in existence. go with axis, and your successor will thank you when he wants to upgrade the company to a *real* vms.

why not just use a balun like this, with both male and female barrels (in parallel): or these that come in pairs, with one male and one female: yakky is right, these types are all over the 'net, and in almost all brick-and-mortar stores. as far as a power supply, look into something like this: combines power supply and multi-channel baluns into one unit - just plug one end of the cat5 in here, the end into any one of the baluns above, and away you go. 4-, 8- and 16-channel versions available.

this is definitely a ground loop problem, and it's caused by the cameras having a common video and power ground. quality cameras with built-in regulators avoid this problem, as do dual-voltage and ac-powered cameras. there's a good description of the issue here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=23788&p=142487p142487

you have two considerations: the *upstream* bandwidth speed required to get a smooth stream and image quality required... and the maximum amount of data the account allows per month. the latter factor is often overlooked. a steady 500kbit stream amounts to 90 megabytes per day, or 2.7 gigs per month.

wait... you're paying extra for a megapixel camera, but then only running the analog output to a regular dvr?? and then complaining because it crops the image? this is not off-topic, this *is* the answer: you're choosing the wrong equipment for the job, and trying to use it in a way it's not designed to work - the fault is *yours* if it's not performing properly, not the manufacturers', not anyone else's. this is stupid on so many levels. it's like buying a v-8 pickup to haul your groceries around, and then complaining because you're spending more on gas than on food. start with analog cameras. if 3.6mm is too tight a view, *put in a wider lens*. better yet, *buy an analog camera with varifocal lens*. better yet, trade up to an nvr or hybrid that will actually make proper use of all those extra pixels, instead of simply counting on them for a miniscule improvement of the analog recording.

as much as most of us hate the credit card companies, one thing you gotta appreciate is that there's no internal politics or jurisdictional bull$#!t when it comes to them protecting their assets. a lot of other types of companies might have just said, "oh, that's a u.s. account, you'll have to contact the u.s. branch, sorry we don't have a phone number for you...", but these guys, there's no screwing around - anywhere in the world, it's right to business. the global marketplace would be a lot nicer place to live and work if more companies operated this way.

picture gone all blue... probably a failed sensor. non-repairable.

i've never know insects or wind to trigger a pir motion detector.

depends on the quality of the cable. proper rg59 or rg6 is usually good for a 200m or more.

see if the camera has a "flicker control" setting... then try playing with the shutter speed.