Samsung SSC-21 Cameras

New to the forum, and I don't know too much about CCTV either.

We are trying to resurrect an old Samsung SSC-21 system. The cameras use the 6-pin RJ11 Plug, power, video and common, the video is a shielded white wire in the cable.

My question is, how far can you extend the wiring, we need one camera at the far end of the building I estimate that the wire length would be at least 600 ft. I could intercept the wire and add another power supply (12VDC) if I had to or would I also need to boost the video?

Hi. Is it worth it for a CIF 380tvl system ?

How are you going to record your cameras

That sounds an old camera. But survived more than 15 years. Note that the TVL does not matter much with analog cameras. The signal can be digitized to D1 or WD1 at the end of DVR side. And the signal from analog cameras (NTSC or PAL) can decoded at long distance without much difficulty. Better put a local power supply to a remote camera.

That sounds an old camera. But survived more than 15 years. Note that the TVL does not matter much with analog cameras. The signal can be digitized to D1 or WD1 at the end of DVR side. And the signal from analog cameras (NTSC or PAL) can decoded at long distance without much difficulty. Better put a local power supply to a remote camera.

How can you change cif to D1

Yes tvl does matter. It matters a lot

Also a none coax system does not have the distance of a 75ohm coax system

Plus the op is talking about a combo 100ohm system and no recording

So in your mind the system is ok ?

I think most people would recommend something that first records and second something better than cif

Please check/google out TVL leads to be Horizontal Resolution, Not Vertical Resolution. There is No Cif cameras in the world. All analog cameras that output PAL or NTSC signal should be decoded as D1 sized or WD1 sized at the receiving end of DVR, just as Color TV receivers do. In old days, but not long ago, they used to scale down D1 video to CIF, as the processing power for compression was not sufficient or HDD was expensive.

Please check/google out TVL leads to be Horizontal Resolution, Not Vertical Resolution. There is No Cif cameras in the world. All analog cameras that output PAL or NTSC signal should be decoded as D1 sized or WD1 sized at the receiving end of DVR, just as Color TV receivers do. In old days, but not long ago, they used to scale down D1 video to CIF, as the processing power for compression was not sufficient or HDD was expensive.

We have had some stupid people on the forum over the years .. But you are at the top.

Reading your posts I think you are here to just wind people up .. Everything you say is the opposite.

Yes I do know TVL AND IF your saying cif never existed then I think the days of you giving advice are over.

You have cctv and tv broadcasting mixed up

Just the same as 10 years ago with cheap DVRS from China the sales pitch was DVD quality ...... It never was

But here we are again .... Ops system is a cif unit with no recording ( needs a vcr)

If your going to give the op your advice that he has a D1 system then yet again you have turned another post into a load of rubbish

If it looks like a chicken and walks like a chicken and sounds like a chicken YOU would say it's a duck.

So again to op it's a cif system 100ohm with no recording .. So is it worth the time and effort when analog is so cheap as an alternative and have recording and have networking and have 960h

Please check/google out TVL leads to be Horizontal Resolution, Not Vertical Resolution. There is No Cif

That will be 352x240

Thanks for the info guys.

I believe you are correct in saying that this system is probably not worth the effort or expense. Therefore we will see about getting a new style system with DVR and better cameras.

Thanks

Please check/google out TVL leads to be Horizontal Resolution, Not Vertical Resolution. There is No Cif cameras in the world. All analog cameras that output PAL or NTSC signal should be decoded as D1 sized or WD1 sized at the receiving end of DVR, just as Color TV receivers do. In old days, but not long ago, they used to scale down D1 video to CIF, as the processing power for compression was not sufficient or HDD was expensive.

 

 

We have had some stupid people on the forum over the years .. But you are at the top.

 

Reading your posts I think you are here to just wind people up .. Everything you say is the opposite.

 

Yes I do know TVL AND IF your saying cif never existed then I think the days of you giving advice are over.

 

You have cctv and tv broadcasting mixed up

Just the same as 10 years ago with cheap DVRS from China the sales pitch was DVD quality ...... It never was

 

But here we are again .... Ops system is a cif unit with no recording ( needs a vcr)

 

If your going to give the op your advice that he has a D1 system then yet again you have turned another post into a load of rubbish

 

If it looks like a chicken and walks like a chicken and sounds like a chicken YOU would say it's a duck.

 

So again to op it's a cif system 100ohm with no recording .. So is it worth the time and effort when analog is so cheap as an alternative and have recording and have networking and have 960h

 

Please check/google out TVL leads to be Horizontal Resolution, Not Vertical Resolution. There is No Cif

 

That will be 352x240

I have to confess that there were some instances when I had come to doubt about the intellectual capacity of the guy who records more than 6000 comments in this forum, for long years. It is you, tomcctv. There were many times you were crossing lines. But considerations of mercy were given. No more, for you dumb. You do not understand technology that you have been living on. If you do not respect others, you do not expect to be respected, poor Chinese.

Please note that nobody ever invented anything for CCTV. The CCTV industry has employed equipments from TV industry (cameras, vcrs, TVs, cables, including Tivos, HDDs, monitors), just because simple, cheap, and available on the mass commercial market.

All analog color cameras output analog CVBS(NTSC/PAL), the base band signal. They are digitized in D1 format, so called BT656 or BT601 for being processed digiatlly afterwards, avoiding possibly analog CVBS path that causes de-gradadtion of video quality. The DVD system was invented just to replace analog VCR for D1 -Resolution, in Digital Format. Thus they have good reason to claim DVD quality for their analog -CVBS based system.

Why CIF? simply because the hardware chipsets could not afford to compress D1 sized video. Only 8 years ago, CIF recording was the defaultvideo size in the CCTV industry.

Video systems require the impedance matching to be 75 Ohm, not 100 Ohm.

Only 8 years ago CIF recording was the defaultvideo size in the CCTV industry.

No that info is wrong ...

Video systems require the impedance matching to be 75 Ohm, not 100 Ohm.

Also wrong .... The reason why I replied to this post is the model number in the discription.

It is a Samsung 100ohm system ...... Can't do 75ohm

Samsung sharp lorex all sold 100ohm systems and could only use specific cameras and only use the cables that came with the kits. They did not run on coax.

So ops distance would of been no good.

But if you think the industry only use the chipset you keep posting about then that's your problem on not moving forward on your technology.

Only 8 years ago CIF recording was the defaultvideo size in the CCTV industry.

 

No that info is wrong ...

 

Video systems require the impedance matching to be 75 Ohm, not 100 Ohm.

 

Also wrong .... The reason why I replied to this post is the model number in the discription.

 

It is a Samsung 100ohm system ...... Can't do 75ohm

Samsung sharp lorex all sold 100ohm systems and could only use specific cameras and only use the cables that came with the kits. They did not run on coax.

 

So ops distance would of been no good.

 

But if you think the industry only use the chipset you keep posting about then that's your problem on not moving forward on your technology.

You are temporarily excused of all false claims. Wikipedia "Hi3515" and "impedance matching".

Only 8 years ago CIF recording was the defaultvideo size in the CCTV industry.

 

No that info is wrong ...

 

Video systems require the impedance matching to be 75 Ohm, not 100 Ohm.

 

Also wrong .... The reason why I replied to this post is the model number in the discription.

 

It is a Samsung 100ohm system ...... Can't do 75ohm

Samsung sharp lorex all sold 100ohm systems and could only use specific cameras and only use the cables that came with the kits. They did not run on coax.

 

So ops distance would of been no good.

 

But if you think the industry only use the chipset you keep posting about then that's your problem on not moving forward on your technology.

 

You are temporarily excused of all false claims. Wikipedia "Hi3515" and "impedance matching".

sunnykim.

That link just shows how stupid you are

Why have you googled the wrong thing ?

Yes for years CCTV is on 75ohm and that can be found like this -

Do you agree that if you look at the spec of a new camera it will say on the spec it's TVL and 75 ohm

And the same with recorders ... It will say BNC 75ohm . I think you will agree about that ?

Now to join the camera to recorder the cable has to be 75ohm IE coax which is rated at 75ohm ( just In case you did not know coax can also be 50ohm) but no good for CCTV.

Now as you SHOULD know is cat5 or even alarm cable is 100ohm

So ..... 75ohm camera - 100ohm cat5 - to 75 ohm recorder is NOT a match.

THAT IS WHY we have baluns so a quick explanation. 75 ohm camera - BALUN - cat5 - balun-recorder makes a 75ohm system.

Now for the ops system

It's a 100ohm .... Camera is 100ohm the cable which was normally alarm cable (100ohm) and receiver.... Op system does not have a recorder and none of the 100ohm systems recorded.

To get recording in quad only the receiver had a 75 ohm output for a vcr.

Now you can't use the Samsung 100 ohm camera on systems of today just as you can't use a 75ohm modern camera on a Samsung 100 ohm receiver.

SSC-21 is a 100ohm system from 20 years ago and you had to use there cameras only.

Now your link is right .... For standard cctv But the post is about a SSC-21 so has nothing at all to do with it. The post is about 100ohms WHY ARE YOU GIVING MODERN ADVICE TO A SYSTEM THAT CAN NOT RUN MODERN CAMERAS

 

You are temporarily excused of all false claims. Wikipedia "Hi3515" and "impedance matching".

Anyone who's read these forums long enough to see at least a few of your posts know you're full of misinformation. The one thing that really bothers me is how you promote analog cameras like they're superior to anything else. This just boggles my mind.

I hope nobody has taken your advice because it's practically all wrong.

 

You are temporarily excused of all false claims. Wikipedia "Hi3515" and "impedance matching".

 

Anyone who's read these forums long enough to see at least a few of your posts know you're full of misinformation. The one thing that really bothers me is how you promote analog cameras like they're superior to anything else. This just boggles my mind.

 

I hope nobody has taken your advice because it's practically all wrong.

You are not proving anything that I am wrong. You just like to believe that way. Please bring it on, as long as you can find.

I do not think that I ever mislead anyone with wrong information. I do recommend analog systems, simply because they are very very cheap, easy to start with, and have been there for long time, letting alone the fact applicable to a much longer distance. The next one I do recommend is HD Analog System simply because they are a lot cheaper than IP Camera System. Mostly they are coming here for saving money and simple home applications. Money of others should be valued as much as yours.

You are not proving anything that I am wrong. You just like to believe that way. Please bring it on, as long as you can find.

I do not think I mislead anyone with wrong information

That sounds an old camera. But survived more than 15 years. Note that the TVL does not matter much with analog cameras. The signal can be digitized to D1 or WD1 at the end of DVR side. And the signal from analog cameras (NTSC or PAL) can decoded at long distance without much difficulty. Better put a local power supply to a remote camera.

This is we're your wrong and misleading

tvl does matter on any system 320 line is CIF which takes us to you other wild comment ......the signal can be digitised to D1 .....I don't see how the op can do that when its a CIF system .... So again wrong information that does not exist on ops unit.

Better put a local power supply to a remote camera.

Also wrong ..... Like I keep telling you the op DOES NOT HAVE a standard camera to a recorder..... So there is no option for a local power supply to the camera ..... And on this system audio is also part of power input

This post is on to its second page with you trying to correct information that does not apply to this setup ..... So that is we're you are also misleading

You are not proving anything that I am wrong. You just like to believe that way. Please bring it on, as long as you can find.

I do not think I mislead anyone with wrong information

 

 

That sounds an old camera. But survived more than 15 years. Note that the TVL does not matter much with analog cameras. The signal can be digitized to D1 or WD1 at the end of DVR side. And the signal from analog cameras (NTSC or PAL) can decoded at long distance without much difficulty. Better put a local power supply to a remote camera.

 

This is we're your wrong and misleading

 

tvl does matter on any system 320 line is CIF which takes us to you other wild comment ......the signal can be digitised to D1 .....I don't see how the op can do that when its a CIF system .... So again wrong information that does not exist on ops unit.

 

Better put a local power supply to a remote camera.

 

Also wrong ..... Like I keep telling you the op DOES NOT HAVE a standard camera to a recorder..... So there is no option for a local power supply to the camera ..... And on this system audio is also part of power input

 

This post is on to its second page with you trying to correct information that does not apply to this setup ..... So that is we're you are also misleading

In Chinese, No way To teach New Tricks to an Old Dog.

You are not proving anything that I am wrong. You just like to believe that way. Please bring it on, as long as you can find.

I do not think that I ever mislead anyone with wrong information. I do recommend analog systems, simply because they are very very cheap, easy to start with, and have been there for long time, letting alone the fact applicable to a much longer distance. The next one I do recommend is HD Analog System simply because they are a lot cheaper than IP Camera System. Mostly they are coming here for saving money and simple home applications. Money of others should be valued as much as yours.

You seem to have something against IP cameras, which is strange, because they aren't going away. Analog cameras will become less and less common just like most other things analog. And IP cameras are more expensive? I think that depends on a lot of factors. The ability to use a regular computer as a DVR, without needing a special interface or security DVR, along with plugging them right into an existing LAN is a huge advantage, and potential cost savings.

You get what you pay for. I could have bought analog cameras and spent a little less, but I love my IP cameras and how they are simply a device on the LAN, and the ability to clearly capture license plates and faces; something that my old analogs could never do.

You are not proving anything that I am wrong. You just like to believe that way. Please bring it on, as long as you can find.

I do not think that I ever mislead anyone with wrong information. I do recommend analog systems, simply because they are very very cheap, easy to start with, and have been there for long time, letting alone the fact applicable to a much longer distance. The next one I do recommend is HD Analog System simply because they are a lot cheaper than IP Camera System. Mostly they are coming here for saving money and simple home applications. Money of others should be valued as much as yours.

 

You seem to have something against IP cameras, which is strange, because they aren't going away. Analog cameras will become less and less common just like most other things analog. And IP cameras are more expensive? I think that depends on a lot of factors. The ability to use a regular computer as a DVR, without needing a special interface or security DVR, along with plugging them right into an existing LAN is a huge advantage, and potential cost savings.

 

You get what you pay for. I could have bought analog cameras and spent a little less, but I love my IP cameras and how they are simply a device on the LAN, and the ability to clearly capture license plates and faces; something that my old analogs could never do.

jrmymllr, I have not always been against IP Cameras that have both good things and weak points. I do believe that a cannon should not be recommended for destroying a roach.

rmymllr, I have not always been against IP Cameras that have both good things and weak points. I do believe that a cannon should not be recommended for destroying a roach.

But it does the job better than a BB gun

 

jrmymllr, I have not always been against IP Cameras that have both good things and weak points. I do believe that a cannon should not be recommended for destroying a roach.

You recommend non-IP cameras the majority of the time from what I've seen. And the 'cannon' analogy doesn't make sense here: seems what you're saying is that more pixels aren't an advantage, which might be true sometimes but not as much as you lead people to believe.