Thanks for the advise!  

If I buy the unit I will pull the stock 250-GB out and add the two biggest units it can handle.  I can always use the 250gb in a tray for my desktop PC so no loss there.  The litereature is not clear what the maximum HD size is but I will call the manufacturer and verify before investing big bucks on a pair of monster HDs.

Another nice thing about that DVR you listed is that it's Linux under the hood.  

Pretty tough to break a *nix box.

UPDATE:

Remember this setup, and in particular the illuminator on the right?






I'm going to have to recommend a different illuminator.  Here is why:



Note the two illuminator elements to the right, and the highlighted area (the left-most one is brand-new and unused).  Both of those illuminators have died in last month or so.  When the first one went Tango Uniform, I thought it might be a fluke, so I waited before posting this update.  Once the second one died, I knew these illuminators had a problem.  My guess?  It's the heat.

They get fairly hot when they're operating, and they've both been up for about six months or so.  They're cheap, and now we know why... no durability.  I suspect they're driving those IR arrays pretty hard, and hence the longevity suffers.  They also make an even higher-powered version of this same illuminator, and it's for sale on Ebay from the same vendors.

For future reference, I think I'd avoid all iterations of this product.  I'll let you know when I've got something else deployed in its place.

Grey, those illuminators use an IR "star" as it's called [ckt bd with LED soldered to it] and are easily replaced.

The IR LED 'star' should be available on ebay, maybe a better one.

http://cgi.ebay.com/1W-IR-High-Power-LED-Light-Lamp-3-2-3-6V-350mAh-17-515_W0QQitemZ130315649943QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item1e576b0397&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A10%7C66%3A2%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A1%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50

Or maybe the guys on Candlepower forums can suggest a source. I'm sure they would be interested in your info.

All you do is unsolder the two wires to it, remove it from the heat sink compound and attach a new one, and resolder.

They clearly are being overdriven or poorly heatsunk or both.

Ahhhhh... thank you for that info.  I may try to repair one of them and see if it works.

Interestingly, these illuminators have four tiny little IR elements that are being driven in two sets of two (two sets, each in series).  The same sub-element (out of the four) burned out on both of those illuminators.  I wish I had a camera with good enough macro lens to show you what I mean.  The elements are potted in some kind of clear acrylic or epoxy that prevents me from getting to them non-destructively.

They look like the latest quad LED, similar to the Fenix TK40.

CP forums is a great place and should be able to send you in the right direction real fast.

TAG!

Props to Expy!

I wasn't sure what he meant by "Star"... so I went back and looked.  Lo and behold, they do resemble a star.  I thought "star" referred to the tiny square elements underneath that clear acrylic bubble in the center (they have tiny, barely-visible-to-the-naked-eye asterisk-looking markings in the center of each sub-element... they almost look like a "star" as well).  



And there is heat-sink compound underneath them:



I wonder if these would benefit from some Arctic Silver or some of that Ceramique stuff.  The material they have on there doesn't look like the greatest thermal compound.

Most interesting.

Incidentally, I don't have an account over on candlepower forums, but if you want to link some of these pictures over there (or send them to this thread), be my guest.  I'm sure they know a great deal more about these things than I do.

ETA: I'm going to head over to candlepower forums and read up a bit tonight.

Grey, if you have a working one it would be interesting to put a milliampmeter in series with one of the leads to the emitter to see how hard they are being driven. Also measure the voltage across one.

You could probably put a couple ohm resistor in series with the emitter and solve the failure problem.

I've got one of those on the way and may run some tests on it.

It only takes a second to register on CPF and it's free and then you can communicate all your pic and stuff and get some answers.

I do have a working one, and an ammeter.  Let me see what I can do.

Be careful to have eveything connected securely before applying 12VDC.

Also, if you can measure the input 12 VDC [measure the input voltage too]  current and assume 90% efficiency, that should pretty much tell you what the power to the LED is and not run the risk of blowing it.

Here we go.  Battery voltage (standard sealed lead-acid gel cell battery):




Battery voltage with the illuminator attached:




Amperage (approx 200 milliamps):

OK,   .2 amps times 12.7 volts = 2.54 watts.

Taking convesion efficiency into account, say it's 85%...

2.54 watts   times .85 = 2.1 watts going into the LED array.

That doesn't seem like much. The old Luxeon flashlight LEDs were rated at 1 watt IIRC and some common ones are rated at 3 watts.

The mfg of that light claims:

" High Brightness The optical output of each standard LED is 5mW ~ 15mW but the optical output of each Led Array component is 5W~20W. This means this IRArray Illuminator can make a clearer & brighter image and see objects picture at a longer distances than the common products"

Now that's a stretch if I ever heard one.

They also show:

Specifications

Model NO.
SCA0176

Infrared Wavelength
850nm

IR Power waste
4.8W

IR range
2~30m

Beam Spread Angle
2°～90°

Operation Temp.
-10℃ ~ 45℃

Dimensions
Φ38×108mm

Weight
200g

IP rating
66

Power Supply
DC12V±1V/450mA


Your lamp is only drawing roughly half the rated power.

Maybe you should measure another...

That's the only one I have that's not currently in service.  I'd have to take down one of the others to get measurements.

Here's a real-world test of the replacement illuminator (after the one discussed above died an untimely death).  We're talking about this one:




Here it is mounted.  I mounted it closer to the wall for two reasons, the first being that I wanted to cover up the existing hole in the soffit, and fully conceal the power wires.  The second is to utilize that wall as a way to indirectly light the area.  When dealing with strong IR sources, it's sometimes better to bounce them off of a nearby surface, particularly if you're getting "hot spotting" or enough IR that it's washing out your images.  Indirect lighting by bouncing the source from a nearby surface often solves that problem (ask any photographer about the importance of diffusing light, or using a "bounce flash" off of a ceiling to get better pictures).



By the way, here's that camera view with the dead IR illuminator.  You can't see very much:




Here it is with that dome illuminator installed... let there be (infrared) light!:




And here's a ground-level view through one of Victors 2nd gen SHP MUMs:




A couple of points about those images.  The view through the camera (with the IR functional) really shows the benefits of a well-placed illuminator.  If I trimmed that bush back a little bit, the image would be even better.  I should mention that the camera you're seeing is a WDR model (Wide Dynamic Range), and is able to compensate for the variable illumination.  For tough lighting conditions, WDR really shines, and enables the camera to compensate for brightly-lit areas and darker areas within the same field of view.  A camera without that feature might experience some washing-out of the image from that brightly-lit bush in the bottom-center-left of the picture.

WDR cameras allow you to be a little less exact with your IR source strength and placement, and still get a good image.  WDR can save you if you go a little too strong on your IR, so a little extra room for error is never a bad thing.

And once again, you can appreciate the greater sensitivity that even a 2nd gen NVG has for infrared, compared to a regular security camera.

Just got mine in. I'll try to take measurements as soon as I can get to it.

Also, what is a good PTZ IP cam to mt on a pole at a remote location for observing over a network.

Thanks.

I like Axis cams, but they're pricey.  Panasonic also makes very good security cameras (most of my exterior cameras are panasonics... their vandal-resistant domes are built like a tank).

Is there a particular reason you want a PTZ?

Unless the camera is going to be monitored all the time (or you just want the ability to occasionally log in and look around), I think I'd go with a high-megapixel stationary camera instead, and just get more storage for it.

ETA: just as an FYI, that's a panasonic vandal-resistant dome in the last set of pictures I put up.  The casing of that camera is extremely heavy and strong, and the polycarbonate dome is very thick.  The camera inside is actually shock-mounted, and it will return to the last focused position even after getting hit.  You'd really have to beat the hell out of those panasonics to put them out of commission.

I was talking to a colleague yesterday about some security cameras at his new office, and the subject of fake or "dummy" security cameras came up (I'll tell you why in a minute).  The philosophy of putting up fakes is akin to the alarm-sign-in-the-front-yard-but-no-actual-alarm strategy... deterrence.  However, it helps to actually look the part... and some of the fakes out there protest a bit too much, as you'll see.

I hit google images for some examples, and I've collected a few.  There's this one:

 

Does that really look like an actual camera to anybody?  Square aluminum body, fake-looking lens, a big red LED on the front, and no power cable (just the fake coax)?  It's also mounted outdoors without any sort of weatherproof enclosure.  Seriously... what's with the big red LED on the front of the camera?  

Here's a dome version of the same philosophy:



Looks cheap, and the LED on this one appears to actually light up.  I'm not aware of a single currently-manufactured security camera that puts a big red light on the front of their cameras.  It's extra circuitry/cost that serves no useful purpose in the real world except to highlight the location of the camera.  It's the "Look at me!  I'm a camera!  No no... not any sort of fake, a real camera!"  An experienced burglar will have already seen the camera (and probably recognized it as a fake) even without a big bright light on the front, and a crackhead will simply smash/vandalize it if he spots it.  You also would have to run power to that camera... if you're going to go to all that trouble, why not put up... you know...  an actual camera?

I like this one:



Interestingly, that's actually a real camera housing, with a dummy camera inside.  I don't know about anybody else, but I'd NEVER put that on my house; it's butt-ugly, and looks like something you'd see in a prison, or at Checkpoint Charlie.  That said, it looks real... because it IS real.  But along the same lines as the previous model, if you're going to go to the trouble of putting that up (and that housing probably costs $200 all by itself, not to mention the labor of putting up the conduit and junction box), why not stick a real camera inside, or go with a self-contained dome that is weatherproof and does the same job for roughly the same cost?

The reason this came up today is because of this:  



How do you like that?  That's what was above the back door to my colleague's office.  Note the beat-to-death, rusted out mount... the fake cable (upon closer examination, it's simply rubber tubing of some type... doesn't even look like coax, and somebody already cut it).  The lens is totally weathered to the point of being opaque, and it's also smashed.  This camera obviously didn't deter anybody.

ETA: Incidentally, at one time Magnavox did make cameras like that.  It would be interesting to find out whether they made a dummy version, or if this is a functional one (or previously-functional) that was put up simply for show.  Even if it was real/functional at one time, It certainly wasn't hooked up to anything at its current location.

Seeing the installations of those fake cameras got me to thinking about something you have not discussed.



Security of Installation!!!



If it can be reached it will be damaged !!!



If that weatherproof camera is within reach it is in a position that it can be disabled easily.

Why spend all that money on a fake camera and then do a piss poor job of protecting the wiring?

Blind side of camera has wiring easily disabled. When installing, think like a bad guy and what you would do to get around the camera.

If it was real and within reach the wiring should be protected as much as the camera is.



Dome cameras provide the most secure installation if easily reached.

Maybe.

Security of installation is of prime concern for anything installed on a ground-floor wall, eave, or soffit.  Anything above the first floor is pretty safe from vandalism (most burglars aren't cat burglars, and they tend not to bring their own ladder or scissor-lift... though they'll use yours if you leave it out).  The downside of mounting cameras high is that the angle of the shot often prevents you from getting good face shots... you only get the top of the person's head.    Ditto for attempting to get license-plate shots.  Just as an example of an elegant solution to the latter situation, I'll direct you to this page.  (the owner of that webpage is a wealth of information... I recommend him highly).  The guys who manufacture that little item are here.  For those who don't want to click over there, the cliff notes version is that they've hidden a camera in a speed bump... gets beautiful license plate shots.

Normal-looking speed bump:



Wait... what's that extra hole?



ahhh... a beautiful plate shot!




Anyway, for places where a camera is highly likely to be vandalized (in a jail, or in the ceiling of an isolation room/cell), they make some VERY heavy-duty cameras.  These are the severe-duty models, usually made out of thick polycarbonate and stainless steel.  Here are a few examples from extreme CCTV (they make very high-quality cameras):

   

For your basic residential installation, you don't have to get that hard-core.  Then again, if your house is a "modern architecture" structure, those stainless conical cameras might fit in beautifully.  If you're living in a colonial, or some kind of classic/old-south plantation-style home, I'd use something else.

I may wait to replace that dummy camera... this was three feet to the right.  She wasn't bothered by my presence in the slightest.



Heh... I like doves.  Maybe we'll wait until she hatches those eggs.

GMan, just tested mine and got the same results as you did. At 12VDC, .25A so about 3 watts going INTO the LEDs, maybe 1 or 2 watts of light coming out.

Also, it just occurred to me that the photocell was uncovered and the room I tested in was lit.

I wonder if that would make a difference vs a darkened room? I\ll retest and post if there is a difference.

Where did you find a mating plug for the device's connector?

Or hit the dome with a little spray paint.




 

They alarm if you do that... they're smart enough to tell if their view has been obscured.

ETA: Expy:  they take a standard 2.5mm barrel connector... the same one that comes with most CCTV 12v wall warts.  I had an extra power pigtail I'd cannibalized from something else, and I just stripped the wires and crimped some spade connectors to it.

ETA2:  Here is a page for a similar panasonic dome.  Read the PDF brochure for details on the camera.  If it looks heavy, it's because it is heavy... that camera weighs about 4 lbs in the surface-mount version.

Any chance for a section on software?  Maybe the pluses and minuses of the ones you've tried and cost vs features, etc.

Excellent info so far, read the thread twice so far and I'm sure I will again.   The choices for cameras are pretty overwhelming and like most electronic equipment it seems like the most telling factor is price because if you go by the listed specs you find that most times the cheaper brands lie through their teeth about how well they perform.

Trent

Dummy camera's are great... you can judge a persons intent by how they react and/or avoid it.



I have one on my porch (fake dome on the landing).



Folks who turn their back to it while waiting for me to answer garner special attention.



Ideal would be to have one or more hidden cameras aligned to pick them up when they turn away from the decoy.



(awesome thread!)

I have experience with about four different software suites... I'll try to write up a short blurb on each.  Be warned: professional video surveillance software can be very expensive.

+1 for the axis megapixel.  All of the advantages of a PTZ without the power requirement or motor to burn out.  Most vandi cam domes are hard as hell to break.  We have dropped them from a bucket truck and they just bounce back up about half way. Yet it never fails that a few times a year we have to replace one or two with a shattered dome. Intercity school kids can find a way to break almost anything.

If you do end up going with a regular PTZ find a control box (most software will do this if its an IP camera) that will allow the camera to patrol a sector.  Then set it to lock onto and track movement.  Nothing worse than a PTZ that just misses the action by a few feet or secs.

One last quick tip.  True most systems will go into alarm upon vandal dectection.  Often times the response from the police/ whatever is too slow.  If you think you may have to deal with spray paint, acetone, a bright light or whatever; use intersecting fields of fire.  We do this in high crime (who am i kidding its inter city... everything is high crime) areas with high value targets.  Like the area around a computer lab.  Each camera can be seen by another.

Agreed.  Once you go megapixel, you'll never go back to analog.  It'll be great once the price really starts to drop on those.

There was a recent home invasion down in Florida where a wealthy couple was gunned down in their own home by three men.  The men were dressed in black, and made entry through separate doors of the home, killing both parents (thank God none of the sixteen children in the home were killed, but the parents had adopted most of the kids, many of whom were "special needs" kids... very sad story... and the killers haven't been caught).  The family had surveillance cameras, and here are the images from their driveway camera:



Here's a blow-up of that second picture:



Note the horizontal lines and jagged edges (particularly in the highlighted-in-red area).  This is what happens when you try to blow up a lower-quality or lower-resolution image... it pixelates, and it magnifies any compression artifact.  This gets worse with motion, particularly if you're using an interlaced camera.  Interlacing means the camera scans half the lines in one image, and the other half in a second image, and then puts them together.  Here's an animation to help explain it:



You either get a blurred image (as the DVR or camera "deinterlaces" the image by combining them), or you get a jagged image, as the computer simply slaps the two images together.  In a 640x480 image, the camera scans 240 of the horizontal lines in the first pass, then the other 240 lines in the next pass, and combines them.  With an object that has moved in the meantime, the images are not the same, and your image blurs or gets the "jaggies."

A better and more-detailed explanation can be found here. (not my website)

Progressive scan corrects the interlacing problem.  When buying cameras, ALWAYS opt for progressive scan over interlaced (it's analogous to the difference between 1080p and 1080i on that HDTV you just bought).

Here is a link to a video I saved on my Photobucket account, referencing the home invasion I mentioned above.  I took the liberty of taking a couple of screen shots from the video:  



That is a perfect example of a man-made choke point.  That's a high fence, and not easy to scale like chain-link, meaning that anyone entering the property is probably going to have to make entry through that gate.  You could set up an automated gate there with a keypad/intercom, and have a camera focused right on the area where a person would lean out the window to use it.  Have a second camera looking through the fence at the front license plate.  



Good deterrence... and effective against somebody who doesn't have any knowledge of what's on the other side of that gate.  In this particular case, I suspect the perps were people who knew something about the property, and the house.



That is a great driveway (this is obviously a large property), with all sorts of opportunities to surveil anyone approaching the house.  Those carriage lights at the edge of the driveway would provide not only light, but power and hiding places for multiple cameras.  You could also mount a camera in a bird house and place it in any of those trees.

The unfortunate owners of this particular house were murdered, but their cameras, limited though the picture quality is, did manage to provide the police with a VERY important lead:



Yep... that's the van (or the police are 90+% sure that's it), and two "persons of interest" are being questioned.  At least in this case, the home owners cameras may have provided the necessary lead to make the perps' successful home invasion into a pyrrhic victory.

RIP to the home owners... sounds like they were loving, generous people.

ETA: There is apparently much more video, but the police are not releasing it.  This story has grown much larger and more complicated than anybody knew.  You can follow it here.

tag

tagged great info

I'm working on a from-scratch hybrid CCTV project right now for a friend.  When I've got everything together with some pictures, I'll try to do a step-by-step to give everyone an idea on how everything fits together.

It's really not that tough... you'll see.

Budget?

The budget was open-ended, but I combed Ebay and found deals wherever I could.  It's a small system, max of four cameras.  They're high-quality WDR cameras, including one megapixel model, going in a smallish office.  They've had some vandalism, so I got the toughest cameras I could find (that didn't look like they belonged in a maximum-security prison).

Current list (this is subject to change, depending on what the landlord will allow us to do):

Panasonic vandal-hardened domes (2 network domes, one analog dome with Acti camera server) approx $1500
DVR computer (off-lease IBM from Ebay) and box to keep it in: $400
Software to run it (Luxriot):  $300
PSU and PoE switch (generic wall-wart and Trendnet PoE switch) : $80
Cabling and various sundries (connectors, etc): $50
UPS (2): $80
Labor: done by me... this is for a good friend

In straight hardware, it's looking to be roughly $2500.

You are obviously more experienced and skilled then I and I realize you are describing a high-end system but  for a starter system this can be done for considerably less and still have a decent starter system...  

Here is an inexpensive setup (less then ideal but better then nothing):

$400 Swann System with 4-cameras - http://www.buy.com/prod/swann-security-camera-kit-sw244lpd-dvr4-1150-tm-4-camera-kit/q/loc/111/208713862.html
Cabeling will still be say $50
UPS is a good idea but remember you need to do the cameras and DVR.  Note that box DVRs like this one will reboot when the power comes back on so a UPS is not as essential in my oppinion.

Later you can upgrade to better cameras, add UPS but even a basic system as above for say $450 complete can show you if someone is snooping around your place and if the recorder is secured it can help identify a criminal even if they break in and steal you blind or worse kill you and all witnesses.

I have under $600 in my system so far but we are still using a time lapse VCR.  I really need to upgrade to a DVR unit like the one I linked earlier but my wife is out of work with a 11-week baby so funds are tight.  I posted the cameras we are using and by far our money is in the cameras with the $50 used time lapse VCR I got when a business upgraded to digital.

You're absolutely correct, and I apologize.  Please don't be discouraged with the price tag I listed above, because CCTV is a great security addition (that murder case in Pensacola would probably have gone unsolved without it), and it can be done for much cheaper than what I listed.  

Unfortunately, I was limited by the configuration of the building these are going into... it's a single-story, and the cameras are reachable from the ground (which, considering past vandalism, puts conventional cameras, bullet-cams, and lighter-duty domes out of consideration).  This is the same building where I showed the fake Magnavox camera that had been heavily vandalized.  It's in a business area frequented by transients, drunks, etc (I've also purchased replacement polycarbonate domes in case one or more gets smashed... though that's thankfully VERY difficult to do with the Panos... the domes are about 4mm thick, and can take a heavy beating).

Fortunately, the hardware is very variable, both in price and configuration.  I don't want the assembly, installation, or configuration of these things to scare people off.  My objective with this thread is to get more people thinking about the hows/whys of CCTV, and where/how they can fit it into their budget and security plan.

Are you pretty happy with the features and performance of the LuxRiot software?

Yes.

I have the 16-channel version in my own home, and will be doing the four-channel version for the office I referenced above.

My current Luxriot server box is a Lenovo Thinkcentre SFF system... looks just like these (the Small Form Factor version... not the tower).  I added a couple of 1.5 TB drives, and it makes a pretty fair DVR.

The Luxriot interface is easy to understand, and the configuration wizard makes setting things up pretty easy.  It also has a low CPU load on the server, particularly considering the fact that I'm not only running the server on that box, but a client as well.  Even using the built-in video card, the CPU load is reasonable:

The client also is running on the server box in order to distribute video-over-cat5 to several locations within the home.  

I can also run remote clients on my desktop, my wife's desktop, and even from my laptop at the hospital... all at the  same time.

It works... and for the price, you cannot beat it.

ETA: I'll add some screenshots from the server box... give me a chance to upload them to photobucket

ETA2:  Not screen-caps (those probably would have been better quality... oh well)


Here is the interface (sorry... not putting up the actual camera views... I'm sure you can understand), with a ten-camera tiled view running.  There are more than that... but we'll use ten just for the sake of example.  It's two larger views in the top of the window, and eight smaller views below that.  If you'll note the view options in the top toolbar?  It's the right-most one.  The server and camera browser shows up in the left-most window in a "tree" format:  This can be maximized with the F11 key to just show camera views without the toolbars and such.



Here is the CPU utilization.  The box has 4GB of RAM (XP really only uses 3GB or so... but no big deal), and a 2.13Ghz Core2Duo processor.  Running the server, local client, and one remote client gives you a CPU utilization of roughly 50% (Note: that's on both processors... Luxriot is multi-threaded for multi-core and multi-CPU systems).  You can see the memory utilization below... it doesn't even come close to using it all.  I'm also using all on-board sub-systems... integrated LAN (gigabit), and integrated video (intel Extreme 9000 graphics).  Even with all that, it still is only running 50% CPU utilization... and that's with all camera views at D1/VGA or higher (including megapixel), and motion detection on every camera.



Here is the network utilization.  The Lenovo box has integrated gigabit ethernet, and the home network backbone is also gigabit.  Note the change in the utilization about midway through that graph: the first half is one remote client running... the second half is two remote clients running.  The network utilization never cracks 8-9%, even with serving multiple remote clients, and continuously downloading video from all the network cameras.  This demonstrates that unless you're fielding several multi-megapixel cameras, you can probably get by with regular 100-megabit ethernet.

As for the other major offerings I tried, here's the deal with them.

Video Insight:  Website.  This is an enterprise-class software suite.  You can set up multi-layered e-maps with camera locations, and the interface looks a bit like the Luxriot interface:



VI will provide demo versions of their software if you want to try it out... you can get a 30-day demo by contacting any of Video Insight's Integrators (or Partners).  They support multiple sites, and the views can all be integrated in the same page.  It's windows-based, and runs about $200 per camera (it's licensed per-channel or per-camera... so a 4-camera system would run you about 800 bucks).  Updates are free for a year... after that, you have to buy them, or buy a service plan to get them.

I found that the CPU utilization was about 40% with VI (identical system)... and there was some kind of bug where it would mysteriously double the CPU utilization to 80% for no apparent reason.  Their tech support guys were very responsive whenever I contacted them about issues.


Exacqvision:  Website.  This is another enterprise-class software suite.  The interface looks much like the other software suites I evaluated:



Exacq has a major strength that the other products lack... it runs on Windows and Linux. I pulled the windows drive from my SFF DVR box and put in a separate drive, upon which I installed Ubuntu 8.04.  Installing the Exacqvision software was pretty straightforward, and it ran pretty well.  It also averaged a nice low CPU utilization, similar to VI.  It had a separate server application that ran alongside the regular camera-management software that allowed you to get images on your mobile phone (VERY nice feature).  This feature came at a cost, however... the CPU utilization jumped about 20% or so whenever I was browsing cameras on my phone, probably because the software has to take the camera stream and recompress it before sending it to the phone.

On the downside, there was a bug in the Exacq software that would cause the local client on the DVR box to lock up after 7-10 days.  Nothing done at the server end could bring it back up.  In fact, you couldn't get it even to drop to a shell or terminal window so you could restart it from the CLI.  Curiously, despite this local-client-lockup, all the remote clients continued to work fine, and it continued to record (gotta love Linux... even the local client crash couldn't bring down the entire system).  As a workaround, I installed an SSH server on the DVR, and remotely logged in via secure shell to reboot the box and bring the local client back to life.  An easy workaround, but an unnecessary inconvenience.  

This software also runs about $200-per-channel (or per-camera), and updates are free for a year.  Their tech support guys were also very responsive... I left a message and they called me back within the hour.

The 16-channel system I purchased from Luxriot ran me about $600 bucks, and updates are free forever.  That's tough to beat, considering that the other offerings I listed above would have cost >$3000 dollars for similar functionality, with only a year of updates at that price (in fairness, they integrate MUCH more alarm and monitoring stuff into their suites... Exacq has some event scripting stuff in their software that's amazing).  I simply found that the enterprise-class stuff was a bit of overkill for my home, and the Luxriot software was a better value.

Thank you very much for the software run down.  I hadn't heard of the Luxriot before you mentioned it a few days ago and I was quite impressed especially when considering the price.  Good to know it is a good value and they aren't over promising

My biggest problem right now is my front door and how to monitor it properly.  As you can see in the following picture I have some serious issues to deal with.  I don't like the fact that my wife is home alone and has no ability to see who's at the door if someone rings.  Usually she just won't open the door.



The small window to the left of the door is actually over our stairway and it is not possible to step up to the window to look out.  The large windows to the right are pushed out so when someone is standing at the front door you can't see them.  And if you look closely you will see that the clearance between the screen door and both the ceiling and side wall is slim to none so getting a camera there that looks out at someone standing at the door will be difficult as well.  I'd like to place something where you can get a fairly decent look at them as they walk up the driveway and to the front door so I want it angling back towards the location the picture was taken from but I'm not sure how.  And on top of that I'm not sure what type of access I have into the roof area above the doorway, I'm thinking I can get in from the garage wall side as that's really my only option.

I am planning on starting small, 8 camera software and one decent megapixel camera for the doorway first and then I'll add on as I can.  I just don't know what will be best for that first camera in this location.

I GIMPed your picture for the sake of discussion:



A couple of thoughts.

You could do it with one or two cameras... two might be overkill, but I'm an overkill kinda guy.

Soffit #1 would be a good location for a camera to cover your driveway.  It's also enough of a straight-on view that you stand good odds of getting a plate shot of any vehicle that pulls in.  This would be even more likely with a megapixel camera, though you could probably get away with an analog model, provided it focused on the driveway, and had WDR (you don't want headlights or tail-lights to wash out your picture, and prevent you from seeing plates and/or faces).  It's a bit of an overhead angle for good face shots, but it might also get a decent view of a person approaching the front walk, since they have to walk directly underneath it.

Soffit #2 is another way to cover the driveway and the front walk.  A person coming up the walk would be walking toward it, and their eye might even be drawn such that they're looking directly at it (hang a colorful plant underneath it, or put a bright reflector on the wall...bright/shiny things tend to draw the eye, and it's a sneaky way of getting a person to look.  By the time they see the camera, you've already got 'em... say "cheese!").  A megapixel camera in that location would also cover your driveway, except it's from the side, so you'd have a good view of the car, but little chance of getting a license plate shot.  

Behind the post is another possibility.  You'd have a good view of anybody standing at your door, and you'd also see anything they had behind their back.  As a side-benefit, they'd have no idea you were watching them, since they're not likely to notice the camera behind the post as they walk up to the front door.  Most people look for a doorbell as they approach a door, not a camera.  They also tend to angle themselves toward the jamb side of a door, so you'd have a perfect view of their back.  You wouldn't have a face shot at that point, but you'd stand pretty good odds of getting a face shot as they turned to walk away.  At that range, you could also get away with an analog camera and probably still recognize a person, but at night that light might wash out your view, so again, WDR might be a useful feature.

You might have to play with lenses a bit to get just the right view, so I'd advise domes rather than bullets.  You're low enough to the ground that the toughness of a dome might be worth the additional cost, and domes often have different lens options.

As an addendum to the above post, if you're in the market for a megapixel dome camera, I'm looking hard at this one from Acti.



I don't have any experience with it... yet... but that's probably going to be my next camera purchase for my home (I already have one of their megapixel bullet cameras, and it works great).  Both are supported by Luxriot.



Note: I'm not usually partial to bullet-cams, but I installed this one because the price was right, and it's mounted up high enough in a sheltered/protected location that it cannot be reached to vandalize it.  It provides great pictures.

Thanks again. It's kind of hard to spend close to a grand on just software and one camera but I'm a bit of a tech geek myself and I love getting the best stuff the first time so I know if I pull the trigger I'll end up going that route.   I've been looking at specs and looking at the area I have and if I could find a way to mount a dome camera so only the glass dome was sticking out below the soffit I could tuck one in the far corner right above the front door and still clear the storm door.  I have about 2.5" inches of clearance and it looks like most domes are just under than.  But I'd have to gain access to the area, make my own mount, trim out the hole in the soffit and get everything just right for it to work.  But it would sure give a nice ability to see someone standing at the door as well as down the driveway, license plates may be difficult but doable as well depending on the depth of field/focus the cameras are capable of.

Here....



Definitely learning a lot.  I really appreciate your thread and your replies.  One of the best threads ever on ARFCOM and it doesn't even have to do with AR's!

Trent

Hmmm.  I had another thought.

If you really want a camera right there, let me make another suggestion:  Check out this camera from Axis.

It also comes in a megapixel version:



Check out the dimensions: it's less than two inches in height, and would easily clear that door.  It might also save you a lot of trouble cutting that soffit.  It's also humidity, vibration, and dust-resistant (has its own heater inside).  They're made to go inside transit buses and trains, and if your environmental conditions are not too severe, it might be something else to consider.  It'll cost more, but Axis makes good stuff (I have some of their hardware), and virtually every software suite out there has Axis support.

I'd probably put another camera on the opposite side of the garage to capture plates and vehicles.  That Axis camera will give you outstanding face shots at 1.3MP.  The only downside I can see is that it's not day/night... so that porch light will need to be on to really see well at night.

ETA: That Acti camera comes in a flush-mount version (note the mounting bracket on the last page of the datasheet), and the dome would protrude a little over 2 inches... maybe more with that flange around the dome.  That would be cutting it close.

Then you'll appreciate this.

When running NVR software, (Luxriot, etc) a remote client goes VERY nicely on a second monitor.  I use two identical Viewsonic panels (Ebay'd them used for about 100 bucks each) on a desktop Planar dual-mount.  When you're not running the client, you can put a second browser window there, email application, etc... it allows you to keep a tiled view of certain cameras on the right-hand monitor so you can see who is at the door, who is walking by, and what your kids are doing... all while you accomplish actual work on the left-hand monitor.  

It's extremely functional... I'd recommend it to anybody who has CCTV.

That is very nice.  I have dual 24" monitors on my main PC but that's in the basement.  I do have an extra panel that will would work well upstairs.  I definitely like the option of having it up and running nearly 100% of the time so when the doorbell rings all it takes is a glance up or a move of the mouse to bring the display back to life and in seconds you can see what's there.  

Still looking at camera's too.  I really like that slim one you posted above, would be perfect.... if it had some night capabilities as well.  Also looking into what it would take to make the front light right by the door turn on by movement while keeping the same fixture.  Then I could put a second camera in another position that was a bit better with it's dark capabilities, there's a street light across the street that gives decent area lighting and I'm probably also going to put in a motion activated flood above my garage.

Still considering my options,  the wife is on board as well but not thrilled when I've mentioned some of the prices but oh well.

Very nice... mine are only 19's.