Neighborhood CCTV

[rory 0]

-That EB1304 looks like a good DVR! Anyone have first-hand experience? How about compression?

Looks like I would have to buy hard drive separate? Looks like they have a good list of recommended models.

Ive used the EB1304NET and wouldnt again, especially at the price.

Not sure if they changed it yet, but no motion masking.

Evidence Sharing is mediocre at best. Network client and browser app is rubbish.

Its a basic DVR at a big price, you are better off with a Dahua DVR for half the price and 10 times the features

[tomcctv 187]

-I agree that I should have 30FPS on at least the LP camera, and preferably on the WDR cam as well.

 

-So sounds like most DVRs will auto-restart.

 

-I will go with a UPS, sounds like its worth it.

 

-That EB1304 looks like a good DVR! Anyone have first-hand experience? How about compression?

Looks like I would have to buy hard drive separate? Looks like they have a good list of recommended models.

 

 

EB1304 has not been made for a long time ........... and remember any thing avers make shure you have net at the end i.e eb1304 net. or it will not be networkable.

 

the new replacement is the eb3004net-plus. but i would look at the SEB it is a lot faster in fps http://www.avermedia.com/AVerDiGi/Product/Detail.aspx?id=232

[tomcctv 187]

-That EB1304 looks like a good DVR! Anyone have first-hand experience? How about compression?

Looks like I would have to buy hard drive separate? Looks like they have a good list of recommended models.

Ive used the EB1304NET and wouldnt again, especially at the price.

Not sure if they changed it yet, but no motion masking.

Evidence Sharing is mediocre at best. Network client and browser app is rubbish.

Its a basic DVR at a big price, you are better off with a Dahua DVR for half the price and 10 times the features

 

 

 

sorry rory you need to go buy an avers again .......... same price as Dahua and in features it kills the Dahua.

[rory 0]

sorry rory you need to go buy an avers again .......... same price as Dahua and in features it kills the Dahua.

Have you used a Dahua DVR?

How is it the same price when the EB1304 SATA+ costs twice the price at ALL US Distributors?

And what features? The EB1304NET barely had any, the SATA+ doesnt appear to be much different.

[tomcctv 187]

sorry rory you need to go buy an avers again .......... same price as Dahua and in features it kills the Dahua.

Have you used a Dahua DVR?

How is it the same price when the EB1304 SATA+ costs twice the price at ALL US Distributors?

And what features? The EB1304NET barely had any, the SATA+ doesnt appear to be much different.

 

the EB1304 net is a 4 year old unit (blue steel case) the sata and plus was a much faster dvr but again stopped 12 months ago. have a try of the new SEB or EB3004 plus

[Dirk_D 0]

sorry rory you need to go buy an avers again .......... same price as Dahua and in features it kills the Dahua.

Have you used a Dahua DVR?

How is it the same price when the EB1304 SATA+ costs twice the price at ALL US Distributors?

And what features? The EB1304NET barely had any, the SATA+ doesnt appear to be much different.

 

OT: Rory, I'm looking for a good, low-priced DVR. Which Dahua model should I look at? I googled "DH-DVR0804HE-S" but no pricing came up, they don't appear to be going to ISC West so I can't see them there. Post or PM links if you would. TIA.

[rory 0]

OT: Rory, I'm looking for a good, low-priced DVR. Which Dahua model should I look at? I googled "DH-DVR0804HE-S" but no pricing came up, they don't appear to be going to ISC West so I can't see them there. Post or PM links if you would. TIA.

They're sold under various names in the US including Intellicam, XTSvideo, MACE, and others, even Q-see uses one of their entry level models. I only use the slim line (1U) models right now, thats the size we want around here and being the cheaper model is what is easier to sell here (we pay 50% customs duty BTW). We use their entry level one as a kit (when we buy it we have to buy 4 cameras, but they and the DVR are all dead cheap), and the step up from it that has the HDMI (I have the 4-channel with HDMI hooked up here). Like everything there are things I wish were better, but for the price they work and work good, or better than others. We get ours from XTSvideo but they dont sell retail. They also come out with updated versions of the firmware and network software frequently, infact I started with PSS 4.01 and its now 4.04 after only 3 months - they added a couple features and seem to be continuously doing so. Also you can get the firmware direct from Dahua even for the units you get from the US, in fact Ive got good support from Dahua so far, bypassing the distributors in the US. Oh yeah another thing I like is they have a free SDK download on their site. All kind of mobile phone support also, tested on the ipad took seconds to install and connect.

 

Anyway, sticking with it for now, havent seen anything else that is so much better that makes me want to beg the person with the $$ to go buy it to test .. yet. HDMI output and a list of mobile phone support .. is a big selling point also.

[Birdman Adam 0]

So how about the Nuvico AL-400?

 

It does 120FPS at D1, so I can easily do 30FPS on each of the two channels. Compression is h264, supposedly better than the others. USB backup appears to be easy, as I read through the manual. Networking looks nice, with what appears to be a client program that can be set up on others' computers.m

 

A little bit about the Siamese I may be getting: It comes with pure copper center conductor, but the shielding is pure copper with an aluminum foil underneath that. Will the aluminum be a problem? May be a pain to peel back, but I don't see any other problems, as the copper layer is still on top of that.

 

Its funny that the siamese with the extra aluminum shielding costs more than the siamese without it...

[bpzle 0]

Be careful not to make assumetions based on spec sheets... Just because the DVR has "spare" fps on unused channels, does not mean they are availible for use on other channels. The vast majority of DVRs I've used have max, per channel fps limtations...regardless of what's happening with the rest of the channels.

 

Lots of twists and turns on the road to license plate capture... are you sure you don't want my company's help?

[rory 0]

never used the Nuvico so cant say. Wasnt happy with their cameras so That kind of put me off them. Ofcourse they rebrand them from a source in Asia. Its kind of pricey though for a 4 channel .. but still cheaper than GE and others. Maybe try it out and let us demo the network video? I judge a DVR by more than just the fps ;D

[bpzle 0]

Agreed... I've never seen/ tested ANYTHING from Nuvico (or Everfocus for that matter) that I was impressed with.

[tomcctv 187]

-Even on the separate post, The max height of the LP camera was going to be ~3', with the normal camera above it at ~4'. We have some people who like to play mailbox baseball, so having the valuable camera lower on the pole reduces risk of damage. The vandal-resistant dome should kick away a bat easily:

 

-This post would be mounted fairly close to the road, on the neighbors land. Probably 1-3' from the edge of the road.

 

-I know I'm only catching plates in one direction, because NC only requires rear plates. Our neighborhood is a straight entrance street, with a 1 mile loop at the other end of it. This is the only road in or out.

 

 

-Both the DVRs I have suggested so far will record both channels at 15FPS each D1 resolution.

 

-I really don't need any networking capabilities, as there isn't a point in live viewing a license plate camera.

 

-Once I get familiar with what ever DVR I choose, I will be making a simple 'instruction manual' on how to retrieve data, so anyone can get the video even if I'm not there.

 

-Can DVR's be set to start back up after a power outage? This is really necessary as we have a lot of power blips long enough to shut computer and the like down. I know in computers you can set auto-power-restart in BIOS?

 

-Oh, and I know this only shows who came and went. Coupled with the multiple separate systems individual homeowners have (including mine), identifying cars shouldn't be a problem. In the event of a crime, we can eliminate cars one by one until we have a list of unknown cars left. Would only really be 1-2 at the most.

 

 

 

 

most dvrs will auto reboot now. the problem you are going to have is what make to use.

 

and i will go back to the bosh camera again. am reading the spec for the camera and the engineers set-up

 

dvr should record 2cif or 4cif ............ the camera will not work with D1 and will need to run 30fps.

 

 

this system design is going to cost a lot of money if it was your own then yes TRY it out. but upto now nothing matches the camera and dvrs that have been listed are not compatible.

 

 

 

and also the points of the camera being stolen or damaged. this is only because you have to mount it low because of the type of camera you are using. no camera should be installed in arms reach.

 

What DVR do you recommend? (version 3.0)

 

What is the effective difference between 4CIF and D1? Why will 4CIF work but D1 not work?

 

If he goes with an EB1304 SATA for about $350 then he had 60fps D1 and can set the LPR channel to 30fps, and the car ID channel to 30fps, leaving the other 2 channels unused.

 

You can't jsut keep saying "This DVR won't work, that DVR won't work..." without telling us which DVR you think *will* work.

 

the reason is the EB1304 net is only 15fps on each camera, and the other reason is it has not been made for 2 years. it was replaced by the EB3004 net and replaced again by the EB3004net plus.

 

why not to use D1 .............. because it says in the manual for the camera dont use D1 as artifacts (datalace) will result in bad image. cif is recommended. with good bitrate.

 

the SEB 3104 is a much faster dvr 30fps on all 4. looking at the drawing of the camera placement . the max is 7m bosh say from 4 to 7m 30fps is needed by the time the camera is set-up in the area needed from the picture it already looks like it will be 5 m away from its target ......... giving only 2m left and a car going 30-40 miles. bosh are saying it will pick up a number plate at 50miles between 4 and 7m at 30fps. its going to be a hit a miss with that camera. and the youtube video is daytime that is how that camera works everything is black except number plates.

[Birdman Adam 0]

OK, so I must use 30FPS. I can do that. I don't see how recording D1 instead of 4CIF would be a problem. Sure there might be a few lines of noise at the top, bottom, or sides, but that doesn't matter. The camera's view is still there.

 

I realize the LP camera only views IR light. Thats why I aso have a WDR for getting car details.

 

I would say 80% of the cars going in go about 28MPH. Remember this is going to be viewing up a steep hill. The other 20% either go 20MPH or 35MPH. No-one looking for trouble is going to be going 50MPH into our neighborhood, before they have even done anything, especially up the hill like that.

 

The viewing dimensions at 20' are perfect to view the right lane up close, and the whole road farther back.

 

I am going to put the WDR viewing towards the main road, and the LP camera viewing up the hill. That way if anyone whacks it, the vandal dome should be able to handle it, with the LP camera recording plates from the back.

[Bean00 0]

Btw, Bosch(and Extreme before them) recommend that the DVR be set to 2CIF rather than D1 for LPR capture. However they changed the wording since it became Bosch, now stating "sometimes" 2CIF is better.

 

http://stna.resource.bosch.com/documents/REGL1LicensePla_SolutionBrief_enUS_T6224639499.pdf

Page 2, under DVR Settings Optimized for REG.

 

The Bosch LPR range specs are for ALPR. Simple capture only needs about 18% of the image and can a bit further away. Human eye is still a bit better at reading numbers than a computer .

[Birdman Adam 0]

That's very interesting that that could be a problem!

 

From the AL-400's specification sheet:

 

 

It looks like the DVR I've currently chosen would be able to switch to 2CIF if it is really needed. I'll also be sure to record at a full 30FPS with the picture quality setting maxed out. I'll only be using 2 channels with a 500GB HD.

 

Are there recommendations really for ALPR??? I'm kind of surprised. So I guess I have a bit more leeway than I thought.

[tomcctv 187]

Btw, Bosch(and Extreme before them) recommend that the DVR be set to 2CIF rather than D1 for LPR capture. However they changed the wording since it became Bosch, now stating "sometimes" 2CIF is better.

 

http://stna.resource.bosch.com/documents/REGL1LicensePla_SolutionBrief_enUS_T6224639499.pdf

Page 2, under DVR Settings Optimized for REG.

 

The Bosch LPR range specs are for ALPR. Simple capture only needs about 18% of the image and can a bit further away. Human eye is still a bit better at reading numbers than a computer .

 

 

 

LPR and ALPR (anpr) are not the same cameras miles apart from the way they function. bosh use the term ALPR only for the software that there LPR cameras work with (data base for opening gates)

[Birdman Adam 0]

But what he's saying is they base their distance recommendations on what a computer (presumably with their software) needs to see a plate accurately.

 

I do agree that us humans can still read plates better than computers, which means I have a little more room than what they say I do.

[Bean00 0]

Heres another good resource from them.

 

http://stna.resource.bosch.com/documents/REG-XClose-rang_ApplicationReference_enUS_T6006569227.pdf

 

Yeah, I don't recommend pushing the specified distance too much, but there is wiggle room.

 

and tomcctv, Bosch specifies the distances on their LPR cameras to provide optimum resolution for ALPR(automated license plate recognition) applications. So that "used in conjuction with ALPR software" it works flawlessly.

 

For standard plate capture, to be reviewed by a human eye, you don't need as high of a pixel density.

[tomcctv 187]

Heres another good resource from them.

 

http://stna.resource.bosch.com/documents/REG-XClose-rang_ApplicationReference_enUS_T6006569227.pdf

 

Yeah, I don't recommend pushing the specified distance too much, but there is wiggle room.

 

and tomcctv, Bosch specifies the distances on their LPR cameras to provide optimum resolution for ALPR(automated license plate recognition) applications. So that "used in conjuction with ALPR software" it works flawlessly.

 

For standard plate capture, to be reviewed by a human eye, you don't need as high of a pixel density.

 

 

automated license plate recognition is not the same as ALPR which in true terms means AUTOMATIC LICENCE PLATE RECOGNITION also known as anpr. the cameras dont see numbers its a very powerful algorithm set to read plates from upto a mile away and at speeds of over 100mph and your looking at $15.000 each.

 

 

information from a ANPR camera

 

licence number

colour and make

owners details

tag check

outstanding fines

insured or not

persons wanted.

 

[rory 0]

automated license plate recognition is not the same as ALPR which in true terms means AUTOMATIC LICENCE PLATE RECOGNITION also known as anpr. the cameras dont see numbers its a very powerful algorithm set to read plates from upto a mile away and at speeds of over 100mph and your looking at $15.000 each.

 

 

information from a ANPR camera

 

licence number

colour and make

owners details

tag check

outstanding fines

insured or not

persons wanted.

 

Sounds like the software on the PC that does that, at least how most are.

Or you talking about cameras that have the software built in to do this?

 

Automatic number plate recognition can use ANY camera though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_number_plate_recognition

[rory 0]

http://www.licenseplaterecognition.com/

http://www.photocop.com/recognition.htm

http://visl.technion.ac.il/projects/2003w24/

[Scruit 0]

I didn't think the requirement for the license plates to be read and converted to text by a computer. I thought we were talking about recording a video image that woudl be read by a human?

 

18% is ok for a license plate. 20% is better. The bigger you get the more you you lose in focal width running the risk that cars will drive too far left or right and you'll miss the plate.

 

Depending on the license plate font, O and D look very similar. Same with Q. Don't be surprised is the license plate you give the police is "DWM1234 or OWM1234" The police will tell you if either of the options you give them match the make/color for that license plate.

[Scruit 0]

Heres another good resource from them.

 

http://stna.resource.bosch.com/documents/REG-XClose-rang_ApplicationReference_enUS_T6006569227.pdf

 

Yeah, I don't recommend pushing the specified distance too much, but there is wiggle room.

 

and tomcctv, Bosch specifies the distances on their LPR cameras to provide optimum resolution for ALPR(automated license plate recognition) applications. So that "used in conjuction with ALPR software" it works flawlessly.

 

For standard plate capture, to be reviewed by a human eye, you don't need as high of a pixel density.

 

 

automated license plate recognition is not the same as ALPR which in true terms means AUTOMATIC LICENCE PLATE RECOGNITION also known as anpr. the cameras dont see numbers its a very powerful algorithm set to read plates from upto a mile away and at speeds of over 100mph and your looking at $15.000 each.

 

 

information from a ANPR camera

 

licence number

colour and make

owners details

tag check

outstanding fines

insured or not

persons wanted.

 

 

 

ALPR does not mean 100mph a mile away. It just means a computer converts the video image of the plate to text in order to do some further processing.

 

Now, that *may* be a 100mph camera at a toll booth gathering plates of toll offenders... Or a 100mph camera on a police car reading the plates of oncoming cars to check for stolen/warrants etc Or it can be a REG-X in the entranceway of a gated community telling the gates to open becuase it's a known car, on on a parking enforcement car looking for scofflaws with outstanding tickets to clamp/boot them...

[Bean00 0]

automated license plate recognition is not the same as ALPR which in true terms means AUTOMATIC LICENCE PLATE RECOGNITION also known as anpr. the cameras dont see numbers its a very powerful algorithm set to read plates from upto a mile away and at speeds of over 100mph and your looking at $15.000 each.

 

 

information from a ANPR camera

 

licence number

colour and make

owners details

tag check

outstanding fines

insured or not

persons wanted.

 

Again, I'm not talking about the software itself. The Cameras are specified in order to provide the necessary amount of information for ALPR(or ANPR) to operate effectively.

 

The camera isn't doing the work - but ALPR/ANPR software requires more detail than the human eye to identify plates and Bosch/Extreme spec their cameras to provide that level of detail.

 

And again, I was only pointing out this fact to state that since he ISN'T doing ALPR, he has a little extra wiggle room on those distance numbers.

 

18% is ok for a license plate. 20% is better. The bigger you get the more you you lose in focal width running the risk that cars will drive too far left or right and you'll miss the plate.

 

More is always better. 18% is just the number Bosch uses. And since they tend to be conservative on LPR capture, I went with that number .

[Scruit 0]

I have found the 18% number is a good baseline for my own system too. At less than that you an't tell the difference between D, O and Q. N, M and W blur together too. At 25% I can get a read every time as long as the plate would have been visible to the naked eye.

 

I also have an LP cam (visible light) there the plate is 50% of the width of the screen. I can read your plate with no trouble at all. Heck, I can tell you what county you're in and tell if your stickers have expired! But unusual vehicles like the UPS truck with it's rear plate mounted hi-left pose a problem in that the plate does not pass through the tight shot.

 

My struggles tend to be mostly with blurry images at night due to slow shutter times. The *real* lpr cameras can maintain a fast shutter at night.