Re: IP home security surveillance camera

Thumper wrote:

> a. Indoor or  outdoor
> ------------------------------
>
> Outdoor camera require a protective shell, which can cost $100 to $400
> dollars. Also, they are more involved to set up as you have to drill
> holes to get power and/or network LAN wires to the camera.

You'll have to drill holes in almost any instance - with a regular
camera, you need power and video; even with a wireless camera, you still
need to get power to it, unless you want to run it on batteries (and
then you need space for a fair-sized battery if you want any sort of
decent run time, keeping in mind that the wireless component will likely
be the largest draw).

You can minimize wire runs using a camera that supports PoE
(power-over-ethernet, IEEE 802.3af), although that then also requires
either a network switch/router with PoE, or a PoE "injector" module. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_over_Ethernet for more info.

If you're not dead-set on an IP camera and/or don't need the higher
resolution they're capable of, you can also use a standard camera with
video baluns to transmit the video signal over a regular pair of wires.
We've done several using basic station wire (four 22ga. conductors,
cable will fit through a 1/4" hole), and they work great.  In a pinch,
I've even just run the video over the station wire without baluns - it's
pretty limited to the length you can run before you start getting noise
and signal loss, but it does work.

> I'm not sure if I want an outdoor cam or if it will be easier to place
> one at the window and have it peer outside. I guess an outdoor camera
> might scare away burglars, so you want them to see it outside. On the
> other hand, your friends might be freaked out by the outdoor cameras
> and think you're in the mob.

Instead of a standard camera in a big boxy enclosure, consider a
dome-type camera.  They tend to be a lot harder to steal, look a lot
cleaner, and are typically more damage-resistant (Lexan domes, and
such).  These are typically all-inclusive units, as most box-type
cameras would require an excessively large dome.

> The guy who owns this camera installed it inside his home at the
> window. It looks pretty clear to me (in the daytime):
> http://incoma.xs4all.nl:8082/view/index.shtml. (By the way, he uses
> the Axis 207W network camera.)

The current view (as of 20:30 on the camera's time) is borderline
useless, because the evening sun is lighting up every smudge and
particle of dust on the glass and washing everything out.  At night, the
inside lights will cause reflections on the glass and also severely
diminish the image.  An exterior enclosure is a far preferable way to go.

> b. Audio
> -------------
>
> Some camera have audio. Some don't. I don't see the need, unless you
> want to have some kind of intercom system at your front door.

There are systems made specifically for that - they look like standard
door-buzzer intercoms but have cameras built in.

Another thing you can do, if you want to get the door areas
specifically, are pinhole cameras built to look like a standard door
peep-hole.  Frankly, I've never used one, but I have to believe they
exist :)

> c. Nightvision and motion detection
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Again, some cameras have the ability to record in low light (low lux),
> which is a useful feature if one assumes many burglaries happen at
> night. Some cameras can see further into the distance at night than
> others.

You could also just hook up a motion-sensor floodlight to turn on and
illuminate the area when someone walks into its zone.  This has the
added benefits of providing some safety for people you DO want at your
door, and of scaring off most bad guys who rely on the cover of night to
do their skulking around.  If they insist on continuing, well then
they'll be well-lit!

> d. Connecting to computer
> --------------------------------------
>
> There are a few choices.
>
> i. You can connect the camera to the computer using an Ethernet (LAN)
> wire. In some cases, you can also get the electrical power to the
> camera in this way (Power Over Ethernet, or PoE). This is probably the
> best way to do it if you constructing your new home and can place
> wires wherever you want.

If I was wiring up a new construction, I'd just pull Cat-5e everywhere
(or Cat-6 if I was feeling particularly flush).  You can run network
over it, phone, power, alarm, and with the appropriate baluns,
composite, S-, component, and VGA video.  Obviously you won't be running
ALL of them over ONE wire... but using all Cat-5e/6 instead of running a
mix-and-match of, say, network, coax, two-pair, bell, etc., gives you a
lot more future flexibility, and the ability to double-up in some cases:
for example, you could run one wire to your front door, an run your
alarm door switch on it, along with power, video and audio for a "video
enterphone".  (And yes, there are reasons not to do this, which I'm sure
folks here will be happy to jump in with... just noting that it IS
possible and using it as an example.)

> ii. If you already have electrical power near  the camera but no
> Ethernet wire, it's likely better to just get a wireless Ethernet
> camera (WiFi) and wirelessly connect it to your 802.11g wireless
> network router.

Works well, as long as you remember WiFi's limitations in distance and
transmitting through building materials.

> iii. The easiest method for existing homes, however, appears to be
> HomePlug Technology. Basically, you connect your camera to your
> computer via your home's A-C power wiring. A USB adapter is plugged in
> near and connected to your PC and your camera. Somehow, the video
> signal moves through your wiring. Amazing. (Although I guess the video
> signal moving through the air is amazing too, when you think about
> it.) Logitech has a subsidiary called WiLife that sells stylish
> cameras that connect to your computer like this.

I've not used these specifically, but many years ago, I used a friend's
14.4k modem setup that operated this way.

> e. Recording
> ------------------
> Here is the key part. Some cameras like the Logitech WiLife simply
> record to your computer hard drive. Which is okay as long as the
> burglars don't steal your computer.
>
>
>>>>> QUESTION <<<<<
>
> 1. I'd like to know if there exists a software that would record still
> images (frames) to my hard drive AND upload the images to my web
> server (where I have 1 GB of space). That way, even if the burglars
> take my computer, their image already be safely saved on my web
> server, hundreds of miles away.

There are several.  Some IP cameras even have this functionality
built-in. The IQeye series of cameras from IQinvision
(http://www.iqeye,com), for example, can upload images directly to a
specified FTP server, as well as email them to a specified address.  No
DVR, no special software required.  It doesn't even require a local
computer - just plug the camera into an internet connection.  And they
do make armored dome cameras, as well as larger armored domes designed
to fit their "box" cameras.

These are professional-level cameras, mind you, and IQ's are 1.3MP and
up - much higher quality (see a full-size 1.3MP shot here:
http://www.lps-cctv.com/contentimage/products/hd/test1-cam3.jpg), but of
course, also higher cost.  There are many other "professional" grade
makers, of course, such as Panasonic, Bosch, GE, National, Capture, and
so on; the IQs are the ones I use, so I'm familiar with them.

> 2. Related question: Can one mix and match software for any of the
> major cameras (WiLife, Dlink, Lynksys, Axis, etc.).

That depends.  The software provided by a specific manufacturer with
their camera, usually not.  Third-party software tends to have support
for multiple different brands and models of cameras.  Most cameras also
have a web-based control interface, though, so software is not required
for configuring them.  The IQeye's remote-sending options, for example,
are all configured through its web interface.
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]