John_lin78

Hi, you will not be able to view any image from that HDD with your computer. Because the way the images were recorded is MJPEG format and it's different from the regular HDD you use with your computer. You cannot take the HDD and simply plug to your computer and expect to see anything. In order to view it with your computer, the only way is to view it through internet and back up the file to your computer through Internet. Your system AVC777W is capable to connect to the internet, once you are connected, open the Applicaiton Software and then back up the file to your computer. Hope it helps.

I would suggest another model, same price (depending where you get it), and much better performance. AVC783. http://www.avtech.com.tw/english/product_13_783.htm Why? coz I just know it's MPEG-4 and real time recording and playback (30 fps per channel), Network ready, and the picture quality is really alot better than 780W. It's a pentaplex meaning you can view live image, recording, view playbacks, back up files and access network function all at the same time without stopping the recording or slow down its recording speed. check the website for more info. It's a great system for the money.

John is here

Hey guys, have any of you heard of this compression technology? is it any good compare to MPEG2 or MPEG4? I remember seeing an ad showing a DVR with this compression, but I forgot the brand. Does anyone know about it?

thanks Rory, how's going? ajdedo, please check below for spec of CPD503, might suit your need http://www.cpcamcctv.com/507.htm

http://www.cpcamnewyork.com/cpd507.html take a look at this.

Oh man Hermin, you just blow my under cover identity...

Dear Shawn, My name is John and I've sent you a private message in regard to your problem with the DVR AVC780W. Please check. Thanks.

I've read through all the links Rory posted here http://www.cctvforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=1204, and I noticed that alot of brand and models include CDR/W or DVDR/W as built-in features or add-on optionals. are they really all that important? I mean, it looks good on paper, but when it comes to actual uses, is it really that great of a feature?

Hey all, it's has been a discussion within me and a couple friends. What do you think is more important: picture quality or recording speed? People nowadays all looking for real time recording, but we all know that faster recording speed = poorer picture quality. Personally I would go for picture quality, so what's your call?

as title, I would like to know everybody's dream 16ch MPEG-4 DVR and what kind of features it should have? brand and price are not taking into consideration, just the product and features and specs. should be a fun thread to see. My would be - real time (480fps ntsc / 400fps pal) - big storage (expandable preferrable) - dvd r/w for easy file back - network functions - remote control - motion detection - fashionable look (is it really that important?) - something else I can't think of right now what's yours looks like?

http://www.avtech.com.tw/english/product_13_776W.htm it's from AV TECH, 9ch with network budget-wise should be ok depending where you are buying from. it might be interesting to you. John

Hermin you already know where

yeah picture quality is THE most important thing in terms of evidentiary proof. but if that true, then why people now all focus on "real time" aspect of the technology? is that because we have already reach the limit or simply recording speed is easier to improve?

http://www.avtech.com.tw/english/product_13_784w.htm This 4CH MPEG2 DVR from AV TECH may be just what you're looking for. Good performance, inexpensive (depending where you are buying from).

yeah, what size is your HDD? say you are recording with only 4 cameras and other 5 were turned off (no accidental recording due to motion). If you are recording using 30pps (CIF)across 4ch (a typical MPEG2 4ch DVR), so that's about 7.5pps per channel, if you use a 250GB HDD and recording non stop (not motion trigger recording), it will normally give you recording time of more than 10 days. 10 days are "usually" more than enough for any evidentiary recording. Hardly no one report to authority after 10 days of incidents happened, they usually do it "immediately" or within a couple days. Plus most DVRs now have overwrite function that allows you to overwrite the early data in your HDD when the capacity of your HDD is full. So basically, you got endless recording time.

Rory, can you explain what does Wavejet really do? I know it uses 50% less storage space, but does it sacrifice image quality? do you know exactly how it works? Thanks.

Thanks Thomas. But if you said nothing prevents it from being used now, why we don't see JPEG2000 in the main stream technology now? Right now the market is still full of MJPEG, MPEG2, or MPEG4. Any other new technology that's under experimenting and might become a main stream in the future?

I did some studies the past weekend. Is this true that the difficulty of using JPEG2000 is because we do not have a good enough camera to work with this compression? From what I know is that JPEG2000 has really good image quality but it's not categorized by either NTSC nor PAL. It uses RJ45 as mean of transmission. Also because JPEG2000 has good picture definition, even the best camera in the market now cannot fully display the best picture quality. Plus the compression for JPEG2000 is very big, it takes up too much storage. That's why this technology is not popular at the moment. correct me if I am wrong. thanks.

Hi all, I know this must has been done before, but what do you think is better? PC base or Standalone? what's the pros and cons about them? and who is the best PC base manufacturer in your opinion?

would this be something similar to "motion detection"?

haha good one yah, I think it's them.

I know for some brands, if the DVR is connected to Internet for remote surveillance using computer AP, you can also have the option to use your mobile phone or PDA phone to access live images or even control the DVR. But I believe you will need to have a GPRS phone with Java J2ME MIDP2.0 protocal for streaming images. When you set your DVR to an IP address, you can use your mobile and log in to that IP and you can view the images, or even control DVR. But not all network DVR has this feature, only some high end MPEG-4 I believe due to the requirement for faster transmission. Also if you are connecting this way, the cost for GPRS might be overwhelming for some people.

Can anyone here tell me the differences between MJPEG vs MPEG2 vs MPEG4 in their recording quality and web transmission speed? Can anyone here also recommend a DVR for each of the above type and give me a rough idea of their prices? thanks.

Thank you Rory, I heard MJPEG has the clearest picture quality among the 3, is that true? How about MPEG4? I understand MPEG4 has better compression so the transmission speed is faster, but does faster speed = sacrifice of picture quality? about prices, say what would you recommend for a 4ch DVR with price range MJPEG > $500, MPEG2 > $1000 and MPEG4 > $2000? Thank you very much.