Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

They are now thinking of putting CCTV in. The general idea is two
outside cameras to cover the main and kitchen door, and one camera in
the entryway pointing through a glass door.

Does anyone have any suggestions on kit they should be looking at - both
for cameras, and a recorder?

Thanks in advance.

On 12/10/2016 22:40, Richard Colton wrote:
Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

They are now thinking of putting CCTV in. The general idea is two
outside cameras to cover the main and kitchen door, and one camera in
the entryway pointing through a glass door.

Does anyone have any suggestions on kit they should be looking at - both
for cameras, and a recorder?

Thanks in advance.

Budget?

Bill

On 13/10/2016 03:16, Bill Wright wrote:
On 12/10/2016 22:40, Richard Colton wrote:
Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

They are now thinking of putting CCTV in. The general idea is two
outside cameras to cover the main and kitchen door, and one camera in
the entryway pointing through a glass door.

Does anyone have any suggestions on kit they should be looking at - both
for cameras, and a recorder?

Thanks in advance.

Budget?

Bill


Not sure at this stage. Just trying to get them some ideas. although I
do suspect that when presented with that question that the answer will
be "as cheap as possible - within reason".

On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 10:39:18 PM UTC+1, Richard Colton wrote:
Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

They are now thinking of putting CCTV in. The general idea is two
outside cameras to cover the main and kitchen door, and one camera in
the entryway pointing through a glass door.

Does anyone have any suggestions on kit they should be looking at - both
for cameras, and a recorder?

After a potential intruder was trying several back doors in the village in the last few weeks, I just got a Swann 445502, 2 camera system with 1 TB DVR currently on offer from Maplin and Screwfix. 1080p wide angle cameras (80 deg) with IR illumination plus the DVR is web enabled (ethernet) and lets you monitor all the video feeds on your iPad, Android etc.
The IR LEDs have a bit narrower beam than the camera FOV but not too bad a compromise.

On 2016-10-12 22:40, Richard Colton wrote:
Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

They are now thinking of putting CCTV in. The general idea is two
outside cameras to cover the main and kitchen door, and one camera in
the entryway pointing through a glass door.

Does anyone have any suggestions on kit they should be looking at - both
for cameras, and a recorder?

Thanks in advance.


CCTV used to be based on coax cable with dedicated recorders (DVR).
However, this is now superseded by IP based systems.

Recently, I have built a 6 camera system, based on the Samsung
SNO-L6013R. These are Cat5 IP and include Infra-Red (IR) for night vision.

A PC can be used for monitoring and motion capture (with iSpy for
example), and/or the cameras can store motion capture on a micro SD card
and their own software (SmartVision) can be used for play back.

Fit some extra IR lights too.

(https://www.amazon.co.uk/BW-Illumina...ords=ir+lights)

On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 1:57:12 PM UTC+1, WeeBob wrote:
On 2016-10-12 22:40, Richard Colton wrote:
Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

They are now thinking of putting CCTV in. The general idea is two
outside cameras to cover the main and kitchen door, and one camera in
the entryway pointing through a glass door.

Does anyone have any suggestions on kit they should be looking at - both
for cameras, and a recorder?

Thanks in advance.


CCTV used to be based on coax cable with dedicated recorders (DVR).
However, this is now superseded by IP based systems.

Recently, I have built a 6 camera system, based on the Samsung
SNO-L6013R. These are Cat5 IP and include Infra-Red (IR) for night vision.

A PC can be used for monitoring and motion capture (with iSpy for
example), and/or the cameras can store motion capture on a micro SD card
and their own software (SmartVision) can be used for play back.

Fit some extra IR lights too.

(https://www.amazon.co.uk/BW-Illumina...ords=ir+lights)

IR lights attract scroats like moths to a flame, indeed mount some extra IR illuminators and mount pinhole or concealed cams, where scroat is laible to be trying to disable visible cams and lights...

pay less though, before pound crashes further

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/48-LED-Ill...-/311104808858

IP/Network cams much better bet than analogue cams nowadays unless lag is an issue.

Used a few of these, need a passive PoE power adaptor , a bracket and some self amalgamating tape. Been reliable.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/121866696076

CMS software supplied with cam fubctions well, but dedicated NVR more reliable long term choice.

On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 03:16:07 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

Budget?

Recordings to be used in evidence?

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 14/10/2016 09:22, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 03:16:07 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

Budget?

Recordings to be used in evidence?


Possibly I suppose. Depends on the requirements and legalities.

--
Unlock Your Phone's Potential
www.UselessInfo.org.uk
www.ThePhoneLocker.co.uk
www.GSM-Solutions.co.uk

On 13/10/2016 20:19, Adam Aglionby wrote:
On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 1:57:12 PM UTC+1, WeeBob wrote:
On 2016-10-12 22:40, Richard Colton wrote:
Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

They are now thinking of putting CCTV in. The general idea is two
outside cameras to cover the main and kitchen door, and one camera in
the entryway pointing through a glass door.

Does anyone have any suggestions on kit they should be looking at - both
for cameras, and a recorder?

Thanks in advance.


CCTV used to be based on coax cable with dedicated recorders (DVR).
However, this is now superseded by IP based systems.

Recently, I have built a 6 camera system, based on the Samsung
SNO-L6013R. These are Cat5 IP and include Infra-Red (IR) for night vision.

A PC can be used for monitoring and motion capture (with iSpy for
example), and/or the cameras can store motion capture on a micro SD card
and their own software (SmartVision) can be used for play back.

Fit some extra IR lights too.

(https://www.amazon.co.uk/BW-Illumina...ords=ir+lights)

IR lights attract scroats like moths to a flame, indeed mount some extra IR illuminators and mount pinhole or concealed cams, where scroat is laible to be trying to disable visible cams and lights...

pay less though, before pound crashes further

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/48-LED-Ill...-/311104808858

IP/Network cams much better bet than analogue cams nowadays unless lag is an issue.

Used a few of these, need a passive PoE power adaptor , a bracket and some self amalgamating tape. Been reliable.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/121866696076


I have failed to see any reference to PoE in the link. Further, I would
like a camera that, when motion is detected, can record the picture on a
samba network drive.


--
Michael Chare

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 12/10/2016 22:40, Richard Colton wrote:
Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

They are now thinking of putting CCTV in. The general idea is two
outside cameras to cover the main and kitchen door, and one camera in
the entryway pointing through a glass door.

Does anyone have any suggestions on kit they should be looking at - both
for cameras, and a recorder?

Thanks in advance.



suggest the cheapest camera you can get, lowest resolution and very
grainy images ........... because every time CCTV footage is shown after
a burglary that is what is available.

On 13/10/2016 13:56, WeeBob wrote:

CCTV used to be based on coax cable with dedicated recorders (DVR).
However, this is now superseded by IP based systems.

Nonsense. Analogue HD via coax to a DVR is the best system.

Bill

Bill Wright wrote
WeeBob wrote

CCTV used to be based on coax cable with dedicated recorders (DVR).
However, this is now superseded by IP based systems.

Nonsense. Analogue HD via coax to a DVR is the best system.

Not if you want to have a look at what is going on when the alarm system
goes off.

"Richard Colton" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 14/10/2016 09:22, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 03:16:07 +0100, Bill Wright wrote:

Some friends of mine own a restaurant in a bit of a rough area.
Consequently, they are having problems with vandalism.

Budget?

Recordings to be used in evidence?


Possibly I suppose. Depends on the requirements and legalities.

https://www.gov.uk/can-i-use-cctv-at...rcial-premises

As it is a business, why diy it? If the problem is really a problem, get a
professional installer in.
https://www.gov.uk/capital-allowance...u-can-claim-on

On 15/10/2016 05:17, Rod Speed wrote:
Bill Wright wrote
WeeBob wrote

CCTV used to be based on coax cable with dedicated recorders (DVR).
However, this is now superseded by IP based systems.

Nonsense. Analogue HD via coax to a DVR is the best system.

Not if you want to have a look at what is going on when the alarm system
goes off.

What? You use the DVR matrix screen. Feed it into a DVB T2 modulator and
it's available on every telly and monitor. The resolution is easily good
enough for a 16 camera matrix display. And of course the DVR is
controllable from your PC or smartphone or whatever, and any camera
picture is instantly available there. Our customers seem delighted.

Bill

On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 03:48:48 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 13/10/2016 13:56, WeeBob wrote:

CCTV used to be based on coax cable with dedicated recorders (DVR).
However, this is now superseded by IP based systems.

Nonsense. Analogue HD via coax to a DVR is the best system.

Bill

Please explain?

I know lag can be a problem with IP cameras but I have also found
reviewing footage can also be a bit slow. Can the disc from a DVR/NVR
be swapped and viewed with software like VLC at high speed?

To my mind the cameras and infra red illumination are a deterrence.

What I would like to add is a few simple things like door/gate open
detectors and PIR activated lights with recording of time stamps so
the DVR can be viewed for that time, sounding an alarm in the house.
Does such a thing exist?

Also a few cameras without infra red in strategic well lit areas.

AJH

On Sun, 16 Oct 2016 14:54:30 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

snip

What? You use the DVR matrix screen. Feed it into a DVB T2 modulator and
it's available on every telly and monitor.

snip

Are any available at 'reasonable / domestic' prices please Bill?

Cheers, T i m

On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 11:50:19 +0100, T i m wrote:

On Sun, 16 Oct 2016 14:54:30 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

snip

What? You use the DVR matrix screen. Feed it into a DVB T2 modulator and
it's available on every telly and monitor.

snip

Are any available at 'reasonable / domestic' prices please Bill?

Cheers, T i m

I get the impression Bill has given up with this thread!

I'm just about to buy 4 cameras and a DVR and was going the POW IP
route but now wonder about this

https://www.jmcsecure.co.uk/proddeta...?prod=T3-821-5

AJH

wrote
T i m wrote
Bill Wright wrote

What? You use the DVR matrix screen. Feed it into a DVB
T2 modulator and it's available on every telly and monitor.

Are any available at 'reasonable / domestic' prices please Bill?

I get the impression Bill has given up with this thread!

I'm just about to buy 4 cameras and a DVR and was
going the POW IP route but now wonder about this

https://www.jmcsecure.co.uk/proddeta...?prod=T3-821-5

Main downside is the price IMO.

Not keen on farting around with the cabling either.

In article ,
scribeth thus
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 11:50:19 +0100, T i m wrote:

On Sun, 16 Oct 2016 14:54:30 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

snip

What? You use the DVR matrix screen. Feed it into a DVB T2 modulator and
it's available on every telly and monitor.

snip

Are any available at 'reasonable / domestic' prices please Bill?

Cheers, T i m

I get the impression Bill has given up with this thread!

I'm just about to buy 4 cameras and a DVR and was going the POW IP
route but now wonder about this

https://www.jmcsecure.co.uk/proddeta...?prod=T3-821-5

AJH


Worth a look some decent info on there..


https://www.hdcctv.co.uk/
--
Tony Sayer

On 17/10/2016 11:50, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 16 Oct 2016 14:54:30 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

snip

What? You use the DVR matrix screen. Feed it into a DVB T2 modulator and
it's available on every telly and monitor.

snip

Are any available at 'reasonable / domestic' prices please Bill?

£117 from Technomate

Bill

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:25:00 +0100, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 11:50:19 +0100, T i m wrote:

On Sun, 16 Oct 2016 14:54:30 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

snip

What? You use the DVR matrix screen. Feed it into a DVB T2 modulator and
it's available on every telly and monitor.

snip

Are any available at 'reasonable / domestic' prices please Bill?

Cheers, T i m

I get the impression Bill has given up with this thread!

Or not (as it happens). ;-)

I'm just about to buy 4 cameras and a DVR and was going the POW IP
route but now wonder about this

https://www.jmcsecure.co.uk/proddeta...?prod=T3-821-5

I think the problem 'these days' is one of too_much_choice. In general
I think you get's what you pay's for but you may need to look out for
cheap stuff that's overpriced.

Because I have played with quite a few system ITRW and been party to
the installation of some, you really can see how much of a compromise
it all can be. Not only trying to get the best value / quality for
your money but the right viewing angle and focal length to be of
whatever use you were hoping for.

A classic example of this would be someone requesting to be able to
cover a wide area with one camera but also to be able to capture the
details of a face or number plate. You can probably do that but it may
be that the one camera would cost more than most people would be
wiling to pay for a complete system.

Then it's (ITRW), the 'what are you going to do with the
information?'. If it's just to prove next-doors cat was killing your
fish then that could be easy. To get a good facial image (of someone
who may know the camera is there) to hand to the Police may be less
so. Again, getting a video of a carerer stealing your granny's money
could be easy with a covert camera in a well lit small room.

A mate has 5 cameras of different types / costs in his shop and
another has 3 on his house and it's interesting to see how well
different makes / models (costs) compare, especially at night. It's
only when you see a good night vision camera against some less capable
ones do you realise what the differences can be.

I met a guy who installed CCTV for a living. (as an independent). He
had some software on his laptop where you could draw the rough outline
of a building and it's grounds and then position cameras and 'see' the
view you would then get from each camera and use sliders to give the
required detail and visual range etc. At least that way the customer
would start to get an understanding that a camera set to display the
entire yard, would also be able to resolve a number plate as it came
though the gate (so two cameras or one more expensive HQ one may be
required).

Cheers, T i m

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 09:18:38 +0100, T i m wrote:


A classic example of this would be someone requesting to be able to
cover a wide area with one camera but also to be able to capture the
details of a face or number plate. You can probably do that but it may
be that the one camera would cost more than most people would be
wiling to pay for a complete system.

Yes I have installed a hikvision POE IP system with 7 cameras at my
old work, most of the cameras are 4mm focal length but 2 I mounted
high on a building are 6mm. The IT guy put them on their own subnet
so I could access them directly from the office or via windows X or
android at home. They are OK for recording who bumped what in the yard
and I can easily identify people I know but detail isn't good enough
to identify a stranger. Similarly one can occasionally read a number
plate but not most of the time.

I did wonder about stacking software to use multiple images and make a
number plate legible but couldn't find anything to try.


A mate has 5 cameras of different types / costs in his shop and
another has 3 on his house and it's interesting to see how well
different makes / models (costs) compare, especially at night. It's
only when you see a good night vision camera against some less capable
ones do you realise what the differences can be.


Yes but what I was after was why the analogue cameras should be
preferable to the IP ones on a like for like basis.

I know ip ones can have a lag of minutes so not much cop for live
action but then we are unlikely to monitor live so the recordings are
more useful.

AJH

On 10/17/2016 11:26 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 03:48:48 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 13/10/2016 13:56, WeeBob wrote:

CCTV used to be based on coax cable with dedicated recorders (DVR).
However, this is now superseded by IP based systems.

Nonsense. Analogue HD via coax to a DVR is the best system.

Bill

Please explain?

I know lag can be a problem with IP cameras but I have also found
reviewing footage can also be a bit slow. Can the disc from a DVR/NVR
be swapped and viewed with software like VLC at high speed?

Yes

On 19/10/2016 10:46, wrote:

I know ip ones can have a lag of minutes so not much cop for live
action but then we are unlikely to monitor live so the recordings are
more useful.

How do you get such a huge lag?

My 5M pixel cameras only have a lag of about 2 seconds and thats viewing
the recording as it happens on the NVR over ethernet using IE.

The 720p cameras have less lag.

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:46:25 +0100, wrote:

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 09:18:38 +0100, T i m wrote:


A classic example of this would be someone requesting to be able to
cover a wide area with one camera but also to be able to capture the
details of a face or number plate. You can probably do that but it may
be that the one camera would cost more than most people would be
wiling to pay for a complete system.

Yes I have installed a hikvision POE IP system with 7 cameras at my
old work, most of the cameras are 4mm focal length but 2 I mounted
high on a building are 6mm. The IT guy put them on their own subnet
so I could access them directly from the office or via windows X or
android at home.

Ok.

They are OK for recording who bumped what in the yard
and I can easily identify people I know but detail isn't good enough
to identify a stranger. Similarly one can occasionally read a number
plate but not most of the time.

And that's the thing isn't it, one would assume that any competent
system would let you see all such things under most circumstances.

Like, I *expect* any answering machine to tell me how many messages
have been left when I just look at it (as in an illuminated digital
display) and from across the room. Like I'm guessing DART / DVLA would
assume any vehicle passing under their cameras *would* be read
correctly into their systems, assuming it was physically possible
(like the number plate was not obscured by another vehicle or using
bad font etc) and the same with any camera protected car-park etc. So,
it can be done (obviously) but at what cost?


I did wonder about stacking software to use multiple images and make a
number plate legible but couldn't find anything to try.

That's a clever idea. Is it already done do you know (is that why you
generally see two cameras doing this sort of thing)?


A mate has 5 cameras of different types / costs in his shop and
another has 3 on his house and it's interesting to see how well
different makes / models (costs) compare, especially at night. It's
only when you see a good night vision camera against some less capable
ones do you realise what the differences can be.


Yes but what I was after was why the analogue cameras should be
preferable to the IP ones on a like for like basis.

I would like to know as well, assuming they are. Personally I think
you are likely to get better value if there isn't the cost of the i/p
/ video capture / storage / server bit, but maybe that is very cheap
(comparatively)? But maybe it's not the video quality that is better
but the feature set? Or maybe it is better video because it's being
digitised nearer the source so less likely to suffer transmission
losses?

I know ip ones can have a lag of minutes so not much cop for live
action

Oh, I didn't know that and that would probably be a deal breaker for
me. I would consider any CCTV system as being able to offer me some
real-time remote 'eyes', cot 'catch-up eyes. ;-)

but then we are unlikely to monitor live so the recordings are
more useful.

But you would still have the recordings on your DVR / NVR wouldn't
you?

Cheers, T i m

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 19:17:17 +0100, dennis@home
wrote:

On 19/10/2016 10:46, wrote:

I know ip ones can have a lag of minutes so not much cop for live
action but then we are unlikely to monitor live so the recordings are
more useful.

How do you get such a huge lag?

I don't know, currently it's 15 seconds but I have known it to be
minutes, I assume it's something to do with other traffic on the LAN.

AJH

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 19:20:32 +0100, T i m wrote:


They are OK for recording who bumped what in the yard
and I can easily identify people I know but detail isn't good enough
to identify a stranger. Similarly one can occasionally read a number
plate but not most of the time.

And that's the thing isn't it, one would assume that any competent
system would let you see all such things under most circumstances.

Well this is quite clever in that the instantaneous live view is at
lower definition for transmission over the internet, the stored video
which one can view online is much better but still not brilliant.

Trouble is if you increase the quality of recording either with better
cameras or more of them at wider angles the retention of the recording
drops. I like to have 4 weeks retention, using motion detection. In a
large ish yard it's often some time before you become aware something
has happened which you need to see. Last month one of our chaps left
his van correctly parked in the yard whilst in Portugal and came back
to see it had been shunted back 2ft. It was possible to see the change
in position and isolate an incident where it had been hit by a
reversing vehicle and trace the drier, who is seen examining the
damage before moving off.

My biggest bug is spiders webs reflecting the IR, it's great after
heavy rain and then they start weaving. They are not visible until the
infra red lights come on.

Like, I *expect* any answering machine to tell me how many messages
have been left when I just look at it (as in an illuminated digital
display) and from across the room. Like I'm guessing DART / DVLA would
assume any vehicle passing under their cameras *would* be read
correctly into their systems, assuming it was physically possible
(like the number plate was not obscured by another vehicle or using
bad font etc) and the same with any camera protected car-park etc. So,
it can be done (obviously) but at what cost?

Yes there are some ANPR add ons but last I looked it cost £5k.

Anyway as far as I am aware vehicles only arrive at a burglary in the
closing stages and sure as hell their number plates will be iffy.


I did wonder about stacking software to use multiple images and make a
number plate legible but couldn't find anything to try.

That's a clever idea. Is it already done do you know (is that why you
generally see two cameras doing this sort of thing)?

Yes the software is used in astronomy and forensics but as I say I
have not seen any.

Yes but what I was after was why the analogue cameras should be
preferable to the IP ones on a like for like basis.

I would like to know as well, assuming they are. Personally I think
you are likely to get better value if there isn't the cost of the i/p
/ video capture / storage / server bit, but maybe that is very cheap
(comparatively)? But maybe it's not the video quality that is better
but the feature set? Or maybe it is better video because it's being
digitised nearer the source so less likely to suffer transmission
losses?

I actually prefer the NVR but as I said I need a faster way of
reviewing the recording

I know ip ones can have a lag of minutes so not much cop for live
action

Oh, I didn't know that and that would probably be a deal breaker for
me. I would consider any CCTV system as being able to offer me some
real-time remote 'eyes', cot 'catch-up eyes. ;-)

but then we are unlikely to monitor live so the recordings are
more useful.

But you would still have the recordings on your DVR / NVR wouldn't
you?

Yes as I said we aimed to have 4 weeks of recording on the spool
before it starts overwriting.

AJH

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 20:05:15 +0100, wrote:

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 19:20:32 +0100, T i m wrote:


They are OK for recording who bumped what in the yard
and I can easily identify people I know but detail isn't good enough
to identify a stranger. Similarly one can occasionally read a number
plate but not most of the time.

And that's the thing isn't it, one would assume that any competent
system would let you see all such things under most circumstances.

Well this is quite clever in that the instantaneous live view is at
lower definition for transmission over the internet, the stored video
which one can view online is much better but still not brilliant.

Ah, ok ... whilst I was talking from a different POV (the general
quality available) that might explain why when reviewing some systems
remotely the speed is very slow?

Trouble is if you increase the quality of recording either with better
cameras or more of them at wider angles the retention of the recording
drops.

Yup, it's just maths eh. ;-)

I like to have 4 weeks retention, using motion detection.

None of the systems I've been part to use motion detection as I think
it was decided to KISS to start with at least. ;-)

In a
large ish yard it's often some time before you become aware something
has happened which you need to see.

Same in many instances of course ... like that BBQ that went missing
from your back garden etc.

Last month one of our chaps left
his van correctly parked in the yard whilst in Portugal and came back
to see it had been shunted back 2ft. It was possible to see the change
in position and isolate an incident where it had been hit by a
reversing vehicle and trace the drier, who is seen examining the
damage before moving off.

Lovely. ;-(

My biggest bug is spiders

nice pun ;-)

webs reflecting the IR, it's great after
heavy rain and then they start weaving. They are not visible until the
infra red lights come on.

Like, I *expect* any answering machine to tell me how many messages
have been left when I just look at it (as in an illuminated digital
display) and from across the room. Like I'm guessing DART / DVLA would
assume any vehicle passing under their cameras *would* be read
correctly into their systems, assuming it was physically possible
(like the number plate was not obscured by another vehicle or using
bad font etc) and the same with any camera protected car-park etc. So,
it can be done (obviously) but at what cost?

Yes there are some ANPR add ons but last I looked it cost £5k.

I was thinking more of the quality of the camera needed to be *able*
to read a number plate at that sort of distance but maybe it's quite
easy or done using other technology (like the image duplication you
mentioned).

Anyway as far as I am aware vehicles only arrive at a burglary in the
closing stages and sure as hell their number plates will be iffy.

Quite possibly.


I did wonder about stacking software to use multiple images and make a
number plate legible but couldn't find anything to try.

That's a clever idea. Is it already done do you know (is that why you
generally see two cameras doing this sort of thing)?

Yes the software is used in astronomy and forensics but as I say I
have not seen any.

Ok.

Yes but what I was after was why the analogue cameras should be
preferable to the IP ones on a like for like basis.

I would like to know as well, assuming they are. Personally I think
you are likely to get better value if there isn't the cost of the i/p
/ video capture / storage / server bit, but maybe that is very cheap
(comparatively)? But maybe it's not the video quality that is better
but the feature set? Or maybe it is better video because it's being
digitised nearer the source so less likely to suffer transmission
losses?

I actually prefer the NVR but as I said I need a faster way of
reviewing the recording

I wasn't completely sure how a NVR differentiated from a DVR, maybe
because although the recording devices I've used could have supported
IP cameras, I've never use one on one. So an NVR in DVR mode? ;-)

snip

Cheers, T i m

On 19/10/2016 20:51, T i m wrote:

I was thinking more of the quality of the camera needed to be *able*
to read a number plate at that sort of distance but maybe it's quite
easy or done using other technology (like the image duplication you
mentioned).

You don't need a good camera to read number plates.
What you need is the correct lens for the distance you are at and a
light source that doesn't reflect back and overload the sensor.

Easiest way is to have an external illuminator a few feet away from the
camera.

Anyway as far as I am aware vehicles only arrive at a burglary in the
closing stages and sure as hell their number plates will be iffy.

Quite possibly.


I did wonder about stacking software to use multiple images and make a
number plate legible but couldn't find anything to try.

That's a clever idea. Is it already done do you know (is that why you
generally see two cameras doing this sort of thing)?

Yes the software is used in astronomy and forensics but as I say I
have not seen any.

Waste of time, you can't get information back that isn't there.

On 19/10/2016 20:51, T i m wrote:

I like to have 4 weeks retention, using motion detection.

That's a bad thing. Have you tried laxidol?

Bill

On 19/10/2016 23:17, dennis@home wrote:

You don't need a good camera to read number plates.

The better the camera the better the chance of success.

What you need is the correct lens for the distance you are at

Problem is the narrower the view angle the less the coverage area, and
vehicles are mobile.

and a
light source that doesn't reflect back and overload the sensor.
Yes a light adjacent to the camera isn't good. However it doesn't need
to be far off-axis for the reflections to be much less. If it is far off
axis there can be problems with shadows.
The main problem with getting reg nos. from moving vehicles is shutter
speed and motion blur. This is a major problem at dusk or at night.


Anyway as far as I am aware vehicles only arrive at a burglary in the
closing stages and sure as hell their number plates will be iffy.

Not always. They often park round the corner, so cameras in 'surprising
' locations can be good.


I did wonder about stacking software to use multiple images and make a
number plate legible but couldn't find anything to try.

That's a clever idea. Is it already done do you know (is that why you
generally see two cameras doing this sort of thing)?

Yes the software is used in astronomy and forensics but as I say I
have not seen any.

Waste of time, you can't get information back that isn't there.

In fact the police use such a system. I've seen it and it works.

Bill

On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 03:17:00 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 19/10/2016 20:51, T i m wrote:

I like to have 4 weeks retention, using motion detection.

That's a bad thing. Have you tried laxidol?

Bill

Thanks for the irreverent reply even if you got your attributions
wrong

How about an explanation why analogue is better than ip?

AJH

On 20/10/2016 03:25, Bill Wright wrote:

Waste of time, you can't get information back that isn't there.

In fact the police use such a system. I've seen it and it works.

I have used registax too and you can't get back what isn't there.

On 20/10/2016 15:50, dennis@home wrote:
On 20/10/2016 03:25, Bill Wright wrote:

Waste of time, you can't get information back that isn't there.

In fact the police use such a system. I've seen it and it works.

I have used registax too and you can't get back what isn't there.


It is there, but it's distributed across a number of frames.

Bill

On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 15:50:21 +0100, dennis@home
wrote:

On 20/10/2016 03:25, Bill Wright wrote:

Waste of time, you can't get information back that isn't there.

In fact the police use such a system. I've seen it and it works.

I have used registax too and you can't get back what isn't there.

I'll have to try that as it seems to be freeweare, thanks for the
heads up.

With most people agreeing that IP cameras are a better bet than
analogue I'll get some frames off the IP cameras to try it on.

AJH

On 21/10/2016 17:07, wrote:

With most people agreeing that IP cameras are a better bet than
analogue

It's only because they're more familiar with IP than with analogue. We
get this all the time, young architects specifying IP for TV
distribution in large buildings when it's patently unsuitable. It's
because they think they know something about IP, and they fear RF
because it is a 'black art'.

Bill

On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 02:56:20 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 21/10/2016 17:07, wrote:

With most people agreeing that IP cameras are a better bet than
analogue

It's only because they're more familiar with IP than with analogue. We
get this all the time, young architects specifying IP for TV
distribution in large buildings when it's patently unsuitable. It's
because they think they know something about IP, and they fear RF
because it is a 'black art'.


I'm not biased or familiar with networks, just happy to buy what works
best for the price.

Is there any differnce in the captured video in any way?

BTW I am getting some progress with stacking for number plates, it's
only on parked cars at present and you seem to need about 20 frames.
This is with a series of images with a 6mm focal length camera at 20m.

AJH

In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
On 21/10/2016 17:07, wrote:

With most people agreeing that IP cameras are a better bet than
analogue

It's only because they're more familiar with IP than with analogue. We
get this all the time, young architects specifying IP for TV
distribution in large buildings when it's patently unsuitable. It's
because they think they know something about IP, and they fear RF
because it is a 'black art'.

Bill


As maybe Bill but IP is a very flexible system especially for CCTV in
that its already in the digital domain and is suitable for recording
without another conversion let alone being web accessible.

In fact we look after a system that has a couple of 5.8 Ghz links in it
to do that in an analogue fashion would mean ever more conversions etc
let alone running cable in difficult to access places.

However distributing digital TV in buildings co-ax distribution is good
enough.
--
Tony Sayer

On 22/10/2016 11:06, wrote:


Is there any differnce in the captured video in any way?

There can be, I have some 5M pixel cameras and you don't get them on
analogue.
You are lucky to get 1920x1080 on analogue.
analogue 960H is not HD.


BTW I am getting some progress with stacking for number plates, it's
only on parked cars at present and you seem to need about 20 frames.
This is with a series of images with a 6mm focal length camera at 20m.

It may work if you are just removing noise caused by a too low
illumination level but you can't get resolution back.

On 22/10/2016 13:15, tony sayer wrote:

In fact we look after a system that has a couple of 5.8 Ghz links in it
to do that in an analogue fashion would mean ever more conversions etc
let alone running cable in difficult to access places.

That's a completely different issue.

Bill