Re: store system w 4-8 cameras ?

["Bob Worthy" <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Doug L" <vssdoug@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:etbSg.243$V6.39@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I think the gaps he is referring to are caused by  motion recording, not a
> lower recording rate. IE if someone stands still for 30 seconds and there
is
> no other motion in the view, when playing back the video it will appear
that
> there is a 30 second gap in the recording regardless if recording at 5pps
or
> 30pps.

I understand that, but I believe we are talking about a convenience store
with kids swiping candy bars or a can of beer. A jewel thief lifting
something from a jewerly store may be aware of how recording devices work
but a shoplifter in a convenience store?
>
> IMNSHO anything over  three pps is adequate for general use, too many
people
> get hung up on high frame rates instead of the image quality, its probably
> better to have a high quality image at 4 or 5pps per camera than 30pps of
> low quality footage.

Ahhh....yes and no. We try (budget restraints) to never go under 60pps. If
fluid motion is important to the customer than we have no choice but to go
higher. The cameras are what gives us the quality anyway. Proper camera,
proper wire, proper power, proper lens config etc is a must  for the
application. We do a live demo with the DVR and cameras at their location to
make sure they realize what they are getting for their money. That is after
a prelim discussion as to what their needs are of course. We also put  it on
remotely for them because their is some deteriation over the net. No
suprises that way and I don't have to hear that dreaded, "This isn't what we
expected".

 I normally set my systems to record continuously at
> 1pps increasing the rate when motion is detected

OK


> Quoting 30, 60 or 120pps without also mentioning the number of channels or
> cameras is meaningless, since a 120pps 16channel machine will produce in
> theory 7.5pps per camera, in a 4 channel machine it would be 30pps per
> camera.

Correct, even if there is not a camera on the port.

> Generally speaking PC based machines are able to handle higher pps than
> stand alones

Don't know. I have stayed away from the PC based machines for other reasons.
Mainly after tearing out a mountain of them and replacing them with stand
alones.

> As far as reliability is concerned, the hard drives can be the Achilles
heel
> of any system, in the old days a trashed tape would wipe out a days
> recording, a hard drive crash in a DVR,( PC or standalone ), can take out
a
> month of video

If they are ignored, like most customers do, it is bound to happen. If the
client is smart they will review their video regularly, save what is
important to them, etc. But, you are right, they ignore it until they need
it and it isn't there. All to familar with that story.


> "Bob Worthy" <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:AUaSg.13094$vi3.9301@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > <james.homeadditions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1159277671.830002.178420@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Most commercial applications are usually using a very very minimum of
> > 30pps
> > and most are using 60pps. I have some that are 120pps. Helps alot with
> > those
> > gaps, but a PC might not like it.
> >
>
>