Security Cameras - A Newbie's Observations

[MarkGilmore]

I strongly recommend AXIS netcams (the 207 is around $200).
Its internal software supports video motion detection
(so you can record only when something moves in a desired area of the image).
Mark Gilmore
OmnipotenceSoftware.com

 

[Neurorad]

I strongly recommend AXIS netcams (the 207 is around $200).
Its internal software supports video motion detection
(so you can record only when something moves in a desired area of the image).
Mark Gilmore
OmnipotenceSoftware.com

Thanks for sharing that rec, Mark. What problems/drawbacks does the 207 have?

 

[pete_c]

I liked Axis because I was able to use the root password and customize the OS a bit years ago. (2001-2002)

 

[nonumnos]

In terms of using something like ZoneMinder, can anyone recommend solid DVR cards that are supported on modern Linux distros?

I was looking at the ZoneMinder Wiki, but it seems to be woefully outdated in terms of supported Linux distributions (they list Fedora 5, when Fedora 11 is already out!)

I'd rather steer clear of Windows for a function such as this to avoid the "patch, reboot, pray" cycle.

Any input on:

1) ZoneMinder
2) Favorite Linux/ZoneMinder-friendly DVR cards
3) Aposonic A-CL1616R1-PB



-Chris

 

[pete_c]

I use ZM.

I bought a generic HK 8 chip - 8 port a few years ago on Ebay and it is still working well. I built a second ZM server with another generic 8 chip card a few months back and had no problems building newest version of ZM. I put heat sinks on this last card.

 

[signal15]

Here you go:

http://www.dealextreme.com/feedbacks/Brows...ws.dx/sku.15758

Under $14, 4 channels, works with linux AND Zoneminder according to the reviews. They have some h.264 encoder cards also, no idea if they work.

 

[batwater]

Check out Blue Cherry They have generic capture cards that are ZoneMinder compatible. They also publish a ZoneMinder turnkey build for their hardware.
-Ben

 

[drvnbysound]

Acti makes some very good megapixel cameras for the price, and they give you a copy of their NVR software for free with any camera that you purchase. The software is pretty great for a bundled product, and should do everything you need for a home system.

As for running it on windows, as with most things, if you have the machine dedicated to a single task, and don't screw around with it, it shoudl be very stable.

I read this and visited the Acti website shortly after. I would still like to browse their site more for particular cameras. But what I did find is a page that has their NVR software - as well as a FTP link to download it. I am likely going to do so tonight when I am at home, but I was curious if anyone knows if the downloadable version on their website is a full or trial version?

 

[drvnbysound]

So I have done some more research on the ACTi software available through their website - I think this is the same as what is provided with purchase of their cameras.

The "Professional" version allows up to 64 cameras for free. However, it does not support remote viewing, but I image there has to be a way around this.

The "Enterprise" version allows up to 64 cameras, but only 16 are free. But it does support remote viewing through a client application.

More details are here:

http://www.acti.com/download_file/Product/...fessional_2.pdf

Other questions I have, is if their software supports other IP cameras. I know that many IP cameras still have proprietary codecs and/or software, so whether or not the ACTi software would interface with an Axis, Pelco, or other IP camera is still unknown to me.. Does anyone else have additional information on this? The PDF linked above, does show that it does support the Pelco D and P protocols for PTZ control, which leads me to believe it should work with Pelco branded cameras.

 

[twilo123]

like everyone else this is just my opinion based on my experience on integrating all these different ip cameras into our mobile phone cctv apps.

1. most ip have trouble with low light conditions. this seems to be rampant in the industry.
2. axis is the world market leader for ip cameras and for good reason.
3. mobotix has great outdoor cameras and great video quality (in the top 3 IMO). they have a hemispheric camera with virtual ptz if you need that.
4. acti are entry level ip cameras but are probably 6th or so in overall ip cam sales in the world. we have had trouble integrating them into our apps but they are starting to realize some of their shortcomings and are working with R&D to overcome them. they are strictly single stream cameras. i.e. you setup what codec, resolution, etc. you want via web page and that is what you get no matter what client you use to view it. other cameras such as axis you can call remote stream variables on the fly.
5. for non professional line the panasonic hcm series are pretty decent cameras. i especially like the bb-hcm381. works great in a dome with a blower outside. quality video, support for multiple codecs, great optical zoom, etc.
6. vivotek are a good bang for the buck.
7. stay far away from dlink and linksys although the cisco cameras are well designed.
8. trendnet can be a pita but people buy them like crazy because they are cheap. them and airlink sky ip cams.
9. lots of chinese cams coming from ebay lately. they all tend to really come from the same manufacturer but with different firmwares and sometimes different housings. they all tend to freeze, have bad picture quality, etc. big headaches so far IMO.
10. newer y-cam are actually decent little cams for straight video.
11. sony has great cameras IMO for their Ipela/SNC line. they are not cheap though.
12. aviosys has a new 9070 line which are decent and in the $200-300 straight cam price range.

typical issue i find with pc based systems is that each extra video input tends to take up resources exponentially, not equally. most standalone dvr are rated for a specific amount of video inputs for a reason.

ZM is the top (and only maybe?) open source linux cctv system. you could probably get some video inputs into linuxmce but i don't think they have a full fledged dvr/nvr system setup like ZM. main issue with linux based systems though is the learning curve usually. for instance on ZM some of the backend is actually scripts so to make a change many times you have to modify or make some scripts yourself.

on the windows side you have the usual issues like people tend to use the box for multiple purposes when they probably shouldn't, viruses, etc. you have the capture card type systems like geovision or even some avermedia or you have full nvr software with various ranges and pricing.

 

[drvnbysound]

they are strictly single stream cameras. i.e. you setup what codec, resolution, etc. you want via web page and that is what you get no matter what client you use to view it.

typical issue i find with pc based systems is that each extra video input tends to take up resources exponentially, not equally. most standalone dvr are rated for a specific amount of video inputs for a reason.

It is that reason that I really like the idea of using analog cameras with an external encoder - while Axis doesnt do this in their encoders (I dont think), Mango (www.mangodsp.com) streams MJPEG, MPEG-4, and H.264 simultaneously. Unfortunately there are quite a few downsides to this as well - lower resolution analog cameras vs. higher IP ones. Another is that I havent seen many software suites that support Mango and have heard that support (integration) for their encoders is a bit tricky compared to the Axis encoders for example.

I do like the idea of an encoder or IP camera direct vs. using analog cameras into a capture card for the PC load reasons you also listed regarding system resources.

However, the problem that I've continued to run into is finding (in my own terms) a reasonably priced DVR software suite that will integrate IP cameras or video encoders. Other than ZoneMinder, all of the ones that I have come across so far are in the $800+ range for software - whether they do licenses per camera or a single up-front cost.

 

[pete_c]

I started to mix in IP cams with my ZM setup as an experiement instead of a second 8 port video capture card. Recently (last couple of years) with the ability of using 3G on mobile phones I also use the ZM mobile streaming applications. They work well. Aside from this I also use XaP with ZM and the HA box in combination with both virtual motion / real motion sensors. What I've noticed recently (last couple of years) is that the doorbell is not always used so I created a "doorbell" event just based on very specific HW/Virtual variables and events.

IE:

The doorbell rings / very specific motion events (based on virtual and HW motion sensors) trigger video/still captures are done from a variety of cams using both virtual and HW variables. One of my projects on the to-do list is to redo the front door. The door / side panels will be replaced along with the installation of a new "porch like" structure. While this is being done a small cam will be installed by the doorbell for a "close-up" of whomever rings the door bell. While the entire door frame is removed it will give me a chance to install some cabling. Its a bit more difficult right now because of the brick surrounding the door.

 

[DotNetDog]

like everyone else this is just my opinion based on my experience on integrating all these different ip cameras into our mobile phone cctv apps.

1. most ip have trouble with low light conditions. this seems to be rampant in the industry.
2. axis is the world market leader for ip cameras and for good reason.
3. mobotix has great outdoor cameras and great video quality (in the top 3 IMO). they have a hemispheric camera with virtual ptz if you need that.
4. acti are entry level ip cameras but are probably 6th or so in overall ip cam sales in the world. we have had trouble integrating them into our apps but they are starting to realize some of their shortcomings and are working with R&D to overcome them. they are strictly single stream cameras. i.e. you setup what codec, resolution, etc. you want via web page and that is what you get no matter what client you use to view it. other cameras such as axis you can call remote stream variables on the fly.
5. for non professional line the panasonic hcm series are pretty decent cameras. i especially like the bb-hcm381. works great in a dome with a blower outside. quality video, support for multiple codecs, great optical zoom, etc.
6. vivotek are a good bang for the buck.
7. stay far away from dlink and linksys although the cisco cameras are well designed.
8. trendnet can be a pita but people buy them like crazy because they are cheap. them and airlink sky ip cams.
9. lots of chinese cams coming from ebay lately. they all tend to really come from the same manufacturer but with different firmwares and sometimes different housings. they all tend to freeze, have bad picture quality, etc. big headaches so far IMO.
10. newer y-cam are actually decent little cams for straight video.
11. sony has great cameras IMO for their Ipela/SNC line. they are not cheap though.
12. aviosys has a new 9070 line which are decent and in the $200-300 straight cam price range.

typical issue i find with pc based systems is that each extra video input tends to take up resources exponentially, not equally. most standalone dvr are rated for a specific amount of video inputs for a reason.

ZM is the top (and only maybe?) open source linux cctv system. you could probably get some video inputs into linuxmce but i don't think they have a full fledged dvr/nvr system setup like ZM. main issue with linux based systems though is the learning curve usually. for instance on ZM some of the backend is actually scripts so to make a change many times you have to modify or make some scripts yourself.

on the windows side you have the usual issues like people tend to use the box for multiple purposes when they probably shouldn't, viruses, etc. you have the capture card type systems like geovision or even some avermedia or you have full nvr software with various ranges and pricing.

Thanks! This is exactly the kind of info I need.

 

[batwater]

My opinion, millage will vary... As with anything else, you get what you pay for. If you purchase a $40 4 port capture card rated at 30fps sure it will capture 4 video streams but it is at no more than 7-8fps per channel and it will chew up your CPU because it is relying on the PC CPU to encode and process the video.

As DotNetDog pointed out, IP based cameras have a ways to go. The fundamental problem is that the IP camera has to do too much to be good at everything. If you think about what it is doing, in such a compact form factor, quality camera that works in both bright and low light situations, video capture, motion detection, transmit the video, web server, etc, it quite a bit to ask of a device. Secondly you are paying for redundancy, that is, you are duplicating that functionality for each camera you install.

I started out with ZoneMinder a cheap 4 port capture card and really cheap cameras on an old dell desktop I had. The result was I had video, with not very high quality results, but hey, it was less than $200 total.

I'm now running the following: (switched from consumer to professional grade)

Intellicam USA These are Sony sensors cameras built in Korea, excellent quality. (I'm running the last generation of this camera) IP66 weather rated, etc, roughly $200. Whatever camera manufacture you go with (there really are only a handful of OEMs for these cameras) the better ones are going to have Sony CCD video sensors in them

HIKVision This card is made in China, has a Texas Instruments DSP chip called DaVinci that does all of the video processing, motion detection, encoding, etc on board. Roughly $800 for 8 port version (full 30fps on each port) with 3rd party professional CCTV software.

The card is plugged in to a desktop pc with a TB hard drive. Currently I have 8 of 16 channels installed with 21 days of recordings taking up roughly 300gb of disk space. CPU runs around 5-10% ($450 HP desktop) a bit higher when clients are connected. So it's not the architectural approach, it is the quality of the capture card.

Whether you run IP or Analog you still have to run cable for power and connectivity (network or video signal). In my case I am using cat5e with video baluns at each end; power is also run over the same cable. Cables are home run to a single 20amp digital power supply and capture card.

At the end of the day it will come down to how much you are willing to invest to achieve a result that you can live with.
-Ben

 

[pete_c]

The "import" analogue cameras and DVR multiport / multistream cards have improved much in the last few years.

I would tend to call these Ebay specials or clones of cards of established MFG's.

The first 8 chip / 8 port DVR card that I purchased was about $200 years ago. The design of said board mimic'd what I found here selling for $500 at the time (Grandtec, Kodicom, etc) and BT878 video chips. The same cards today (8 chip / 8 port) can be had for as little as $30-$40. You can still purchase a 4 port / 1 video chip DVR card for about $10 even though some sellers push the 4 port thing and don't really mention the one chip thing.

The quality isn't all there but testing today I can get 5-10 fps with a 640X480 pixel size streaming image for the 8 camera inputs without major CPU utilization on a cheap DIY'd PC.