aibudo

I wouldn't run any camera over-voltage! Even more so, that much.

Here we go again, an individual is happy with his Floureon and they are put-down and then that is followed with spam.

Definitely, if you don't have the DVR connected to a network, do what Securame suggested. Of course, if the system is connected to a network, you can use a smart phone.

That's also what I thought might be going on too. Maybe NTSC setting. It was listed as PAL, but,,,,,,

Distorted how? Twisted, double image, dark, etc.?

Acquire your WAN address by going to "whatismyip.com" or something similar, then try using that address with ":81" after that. Example: http://123.456.789.01:81 in Internet Explorer

Ok, I'm not acquainted with a Sky Router, so I'll exit the thread.

Are you using 2 routers, chained together?

Stay with Tomcctv on this. You have to initially set your network setting to DHCP, power down, power backup and change DHCP to Static. If you wish, you could then power down and backup again, go to your network menu and make sure that it was saved properly. Use the IP Address as your router access address.

Are you using any http port other than "80"? If you are, you have to add your http port after the LAN address. Say, if you are using http port 81, ie; 192.168.1.5:81 When I first got into the business way back when, I was initially told that I didn't have to open ports when on the LAN, when using Internet Explorer's browser, but that's not true. Such as when having multiple DVR's on the same network. Say you have 3 DVR's connected for remote access. Let's say that your IP addresses for the DVR's are: 192.168.1.5 192.168.1.6 192.168.1.7 If you chose the 2nd and 3rd DVR's http ports to be 81 and 82, then: The first DVR's address could be 192.168.1.5. The second DVR's address could be 192.168.1.6:81 The third DVR's address could be 192.168.1.7:82 If using a CMS software, that would not be the case and you would ignore the added ports. You may have already considered this and if you have, then I've been no help.

It's not just with surveillance DVR's that has this issue. The same thing occurs with some cable TV set top converters. I have been in the TV servicing business for 50 years, so I know what I'm talking about. When I read this post, I looked at the TV in the room that I'm in right now and there is a loss of video on the left and right, no matter the screen setting that I change it too. So, don't totally blame your DVR, no matter what it is. "Big, big name" money DVR or "cheap" money. Even some monitors will overscan too. In some instances, I don't even like to call it overscan, because even adjusting the raster to the screen, you will be missing some of the video.

I think that someone may have set "Live Channel Shield" for that camera.

Recommendations are only opinions. Everyone has one and generally different.

My personal opinion on "wireless". NO

Kind of off the point, but the only "cat" that I use anymore is cat5 for LAN networking and cat6 to network CCTV between buildings for a central location control.

Are you running both camera's off of one cat5?

Make and Model?????

With the advent of the newer AHD/TVI systems, I'm staying with Siamese RG59/18-2. Not going to fight the issues with what you have found also.

What is the make and model of the DVR? Has someone "hid" the camera view for that camera in the DVR software?

Doubt that there is anything wrong with the DVR! Pretty sure that I know what your issue is. Sent you a PM.

The camera's by chance aren't pointing at each other are they? That's generally caused by an external 60hz interference, which is common when fluorescent lamps are present, but that can't be the cause in your situation.

I probably won't have an answer for you, but for someone else to be able to help you, they will need a model number.

On this forum, I'll get "slammed" for this but,,,,,,, I deal with 3 CCTV company's and one of them is the Zmodo product. The other 2 are the higher end products and honestly have had more issues with them. I have sold a good many of the Zmodo DVR's over the past 3 years (not NVR, IP) and have only had three issues out of the dozens. 2 hard-drives and one lightning strike. What I have found with on-line complaints, that I have had are just "ignorance" of the industry. After they do all of the stupid stuff trying to set them up, they got mad and returned it. During that experience they learned what they did wrong and purchase something else of which they are now educated and things go pretty smooth. Now I know, with what I have experienced on this forum that I'm going to catch "crap" for this post, but it's the truth as I have found it in my business. When it comes to the IP and Wireless stuff, that was a nightmare for me with the higher end stuff as well as attempting to help others with all kinds of manufacturers. The disconnects and intermittent stuff drove me nuts and I got away from even trying to service existing systems of those formats. Overloading routers and insufficient bandwidth and trying to explain it, was just too much grief. The first thing the consumer wants to blame is the "new DVR" and not any thing to do with their existing system/equipment. The incompatibility and mismatch of IP camera's is enough to cause one to retire from that part of the industry. OK, I'm done and ready for the,,,,,,

Just did another installation/upgrade for a business that had a retail location that was 400' from the main office location. The owners wanted to be able to monitor and access their 16 channel "analog" DVR in the retail location within their offices. They had "talked" to another CCTV expert who, evidently was trying to get into their "wallet" over and beyond what was necessary. That is becoming quite common in this industry. I explained how what they wanted done could be done at a fraction of what the "expert" was proposing. They also gave them the "option" of upgrading to an IP system or running 16 Siamese cables from the retail location to the office building. I told them that neither of what was being proposed was necessary. It could be done with only 2 individual cables or a compound of both. The also didn't want to dig up their parking lot to run cables. I also told them that that wasn't necessary either. There were existing poles between the locations that the power, telephone and cable company's were already using. With only a RG59 and cat6 cable, they could have what they wished and would not have to totally change their existing "analog" system of which they were happy with. I got the job and ran the RG59/cat6 cable between the locations overhead. The RG59 was connected at the output of the 16 channel DVR and connected to the video input(s) of existing wall mounted TV's within the office and anyone at anytime could monitor all of the camera's anytime they wished. Also the cat6 was connected from the DVR to the network router within the office location. Now any computer within the network could monitor and/or control the DVR within the retail location. A 10th of the cost of the "experts" proposal and relatively trouble free. This is not the first time that I have done something similar when separate, same business, locations were involved. Of course, as of an added note, the system is also accessible remotely. Now if money is no object,,,,,,, then go with the "expert(s)!

Camera's can be damaged with low power applied. Once they are damaged, then a new power supply won't help. Hope that that isn't what has happened.