3 camera CCTV

cbr900

I'm thinking of buying a CCTV system for our home (Dublin),I would like one camera covering the driveway,one covering the back garden,and one for the side of the house,any idea how much this could cost including installation?

KoolKid

It really depends on what you want .The quality of the images, the storage how long you want to store images the recorder etc.

For cameras look for €600 tvl lines or better. For external also look for infred built in if there is low lighting at night time. You could get a basic 4 way recorder with 500gb hard drive , that would give you a months recording at reasonable quality. Also look for frame rate of at least 100 FPS (Frames per second) to will give you real time recording on 4 cameras.
For a decent 3 cameras professionally installed with recorder , monitor & UPS expect €1000 +

Jnealon

KoolKid wrote: »

. Also look for frame rate of at least 100 FPS (Frames per second) to will give you real time recording on 4 cameras.

Why would you want real-time recording, it offers no additional benefit
6 or 7 fps would be an absolute minimum with 12 fps being optimum.

KoolKid

More is better & usually at no extra cost.:D.
The more FPS the more that is captured. Manys a time I have spent with the Guards trying to catch better frames only to miss something with low frame rates. Criminals can move fast sometimes.:D

Jnealon

More is definitely not better. 25 FPS is motion picture standard and we're not in the movie business.
I have discussed this with other installers and they all use anything from 6 to 12 fps, not one records real-time. The do however record in D1 or 4cif.
I suspect your recordings were low on quality and not frame rate.
Only this week I had to retrieve footage from an apartment block in the city and it was at 12fps, more than enough to identify the suspect.
I also have another on going case involving a fatality which was recorded at 12fps @ D1, the Gardai were more than happy with the footage
Even the CCTV policy from the Home Office in the UK states that real time is not needed and that 8 fps is more than enough.
What I'm basically saying is that quality is better than quantity:)
I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this one

KoolKid

I suppose we will. On a small system like this its easy to get 25fps and still get the required storage time.

altor

cbr900 wrote: »

I'm thinking of buying a CCTV system for our home (Dublin),I would like one camera covering the driveway,one covering the back garden,and one for the side of the house,any idea how much this could cost including installation?

The best thing to do is get a few installers out to have a look at what is needed, this will also give a you a chance to see how much it will cost as you may need different type cameras installed depending on what you want to look at. The most important thing to see with any DVR is the playback of the events recorded as you may need them as evidence, live view of most systems will always look different in playback. As has being pointed out here real-time recording will take up more space so an extra hard drive is an option if more recording space is needed for the extra recording. Real-time recording means real-time viewing in playback.

Jnealon

If this is a diy install have a look at cctvdirect. Their own brand cameras and dvr get some good reviews
Realtime recording is not necessary and will only reduce recording time.

altor

By fitting a bigger hard drive real time is the better option, especially when it comes to the playback on a system.

Jnealon

altor wrote: »

By fitting a bigger hard drive real time is the better option, especially when it comes to the playback on a system.

This statement just proves that you know very little about cctv

altor

Real time recording when viewed in playback is like looking at live view.

You say :

Jnealon wrote: »

Why would you want real-time recording, it offers no additional benefit
6 or 7 fps would be an absolute minimum with 12 fps being optimum.

Real time recording 25fps offers more benefits than a lower rate of 12 fps.

Jnealon

altor wrote: »

Real time recording when viewed in playback is like looking at live view.
QUOTE]
Again this statement just proves my point.
When viewing playback the vidoe has been compressed and anything over 2cif will have interlacing

Actually most people can't tell the difference when viewing 16fps and 25fps

Show me an application where you need to capture 25fps

altor

Jnealon wrote: »

Again this statement just proves my point.
When viewing playback the vidoe has been compressed and anything over 2cif will have interlacing

Actually most people can't tell the difference when viewing 16fps and 25fps

Show me an application where you need to capture 25fps

What point does this prove

25 fps at D1 compared to 12 fps at D1 is giving the owner twice the amount of frames per second. How is them having half this is better for them If someone runs in front of a camera at 12 FPS and then does the same at the 25 FPS. Can you tell us what the difference is
The more frames per second you record the better the chance you have of maybe catching a vital frame.
With regard to the interlacing, if you find your having problems with this maybe it is the equipment your using.

25FPS can be used any any time, it does take up more space on a hard drive but installing a larger one or a second one will give the extra space needed.
It is very important for covert surveillance, facial recognition, can also be used in garages for catching reg plated if the owner does not want the extra expense of ANPR cameras. The list is endless really.

Jnealon

ANPR is down to shutter speed and quality of camera and not fps
There's plenty of white papers and studies on fps, I suggest you read up on them.
Facial recognition, again quality and positioning of the camera

altor

I know how the ANPR cameras work, I am just giving you an example of if a customer does not want the extra expense of them. For example, a camera zoomed in getting reg plates at 12 FPS will miss some reg plates if the car is traveling at speed, at 25 FPS it has a better chance of getting the reg.

Jnealon

Again it's not the fps it's the shutter speed, lighting positioning etc. ANPR is a totally different subject
Back to fps and cctv you need to read up on it.

altor

I suggest the best thing you can do is invest in better quality units to help with the problems your having.

Jnealon

altor wrote: »

I suggest the best thing you can do is invest in better quality units to help with the problems your having.

What problem.
As I already stated realtime offers no benifit over 12fps apart from making the system more expensive.
The need for realtime recording is very rare and none of the applications you have listed need realtime

altor

Jnealon wrote: »

What problem.
As I already stated realtime offers no benifit over 12fps apart from making the system more expensive.

That is your opinion. If expense is an issue I can see why you install the cheaper systems.

Referring to customers :

Jnealon wrote: »

Actually most people can't tell the difference when viewing 16fps and 25fps

It is up to you as an installer who knows the systems to point out the differences. That is why people who dont know employ someone they trust to install a system for them. Knowing your installing a system lower than its ability (depending on the system your installing) is like pulling the wool over there eyes. I know I would rather catch as much information as possible if it was my system as recording at 25 FPS over 12FPS gives over twice the frame rates per second at D1 on the system I use. 2 weeks footage at the highest rate is better than 4 weeks footage at the lower rate. It Is not good as you the installer should be making them aware of what is available regardless of the price and what recommendations your taking from the UK.

Can you give us something to back up your claim that 12 FPS is better than 25 FPS at D1
Again dont refer to the interlacing as newer units dont have this issue.

Jnealon

altor wrote: »

That is your opinion. If expense is an issue I can see why you install the cheaper systems.

Not my opinion, it's widely stated in reports, white papers and books on the subject of cctv. One book is from Axis, probably the leaders in IPCCTV. There's also the Home Office policy in the UK. I can go on but what's the point

The studies state that detection rates increase when frame rate increases but once you reach 8fps it starts to plateau and when you reach 12 fps it flattens out
Source here
It's also stated in many books

I can loan you some of these reports and books if you like or post up isbn numbers and you can ask the library to get them for you

fred funk }{

12 FPS is more than enough for 99% of installations. Anything else is over-kill or over-selling, whichever way you want to look at it.

KoolKid

I don't think the argument is what's sufficient . Its that 25fps at the same settings is any better than 12fps . Has to be IMO

Jnealon

Detection levels do not increase once you go over 12fps, various studies have proved this.
Every one is entitled to their opinion but we are talking about the difference between taking a photo every .04 seconds compared to .08 seconds.
Unless the application is forensic in nature 12fps is more than enough

KoolKid

Jnealon wrote: »

Unless the application is forensic in nature 12fps is more than enough

So there is a difference?

Jnealon

KoolKid wrote: »

So there is a difference?

Which would be that 1% that Fred referred to

KoolKid

Regardless of how negligible the difference is 25fps is better than 12fps then?
So if price is not the issue what is the benefit of 12fps over 25?

Jnealon

Jnealon wrote: »

The studies state that detection rates increase when frame rate increases but once you reach 8fps it starts to plateau and when you reach 12 fps it flattens out
Source here
It's also stated in many books

Define better, is it increased detection, in that case no it's not better.

KoolKid

Jnealon wrote: »

Unless the application is forensic in nature 12fps is more than enough

This suggests it better.

Jnealon wrote: »

Which would be that 1% that Fred referred to

This suggests better.

Jnealon wrote: »

Define better, is it increased detection, in that case no i

So
if the application is forensic what's the benefit?
Is 25fps better than, worse than, or the same ad 12fps in your opinion?

Jnealon

KoolKid wrote: »

Is 25fps better than, worse than, or the same ad 12fps in your opinion?

I would define better as an increased detection rate. Detection rates have been proven to increase up to a rate of 8fps where they start to level off. Once they reach 12fps detection rates remain static and do not increase.
I have listed my references above.

KoolKid

So what point are you making here?
If the application is forensic what would be enough?

Jnealon wrote: »

Unless the application is forensic in nature 12fps is more than enough

Jnealon

Maybe forensic is the wrong word but I was simply paraphrasing one of my references