KiwiBoy42 Posted March 2, 2009 Posted March 2, 2009 Hi All I am to propose an System Q Alien DVR an educational institute. Beside recommending the the DVR I am trying to find a range of dome cameras (vandal proof) that have more than a 3.5 to 8mm vari focal lens. Any suggestions? They would be to cover carpark and external areas around buildings.
leesutton Posted March 2, 2009 Posted March 2, 2009 System Q do a good range of domes Lee Sutton E-Mail: leesutton@centurianfire.co.uk Website: www.centurianfire.co.uk Phone: 0845 094 9870 CENTURIAN FIRE & SECURITY (part of centurian group limited)
Neutech Posted March 2, 2009 Posted March 2, 2009 Can i ask why or how you have qualified the DVR ? are you Trade? As for Domes with bigger Lens than 3.6-8mm check out Samsung Techwin for an excellent range of equipment
KiwiBoy42 Posted March 2, 2009 Author Posted March 2, 2009 Can i ask why or how you have qualified the DVR ? are you Trade?As for Domes with bigger Lens than 3.6-8mm check out Samsung Techwin for an excellent range of equipment Hi yes, trade down in London. We use DOWSHU DVR's mainly but I liked the Alien DVR info I have been sent. This application has camera positioned a bit higher than we have done in the past and for some reason the customer wants cameras to be the Architect range or similar
james.wilson Posted March 2, 2009 Posted March 2, 2009 so the customer specced them? strange we normally get asked what we recommend not get told to use something they found in a magazine securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.
Cubit Posted March 2, 2009 Posted March 2, 2009 so the customer specced them?strange we normally get asked what we recommend not get told to use something they found in a magazine Don't think he said that James
james.wilson Posted March 2, 2009 Posted March 2, 2009 maybe i misunderstood then? securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.
KiwiBoy42 Posted March 3, 2009 Author Posted March 3, 2009 I hear what you're saying. The point regarding the customer is a valid one . I am trying to recommend cameras and a larger that will suit the application but also fit in to the new building decor.The part we are to look at is a new block that has been built that requires CCTV. Customer in this case is the services manager for the school. The budget is
SystemQ Posted March 3, 2009 Posted March 3, 2009 so the customer specced them?strange we normally get asked what we recommend not get told to use something they found in a magazine James we carry out a large lead generation scheme to benefit our trade customers. Live right now we have an end user with 400 sites who has asked us for a national installer for the AlienDVR. This is positive marketing for all System Q's customers as the small installers right up to the nationals benefit. Paul. System Q Ltd.
digitalwitness Posted March 3, 2009 Posted March 3, 2009 I am not an installer but I not tender for a job on a DVR I have not tested especially a H.264 one. This is not to discourage you from trying the AlienDVR or SystemQ as I have no familiarity with either so have no reason to discourage you but with H.264 DVRs do not assume they will perform the same as an MPEG4 DVR. Due to the processing power and architecture required for H.264 they can have serious drawbacks and this is the case with the vast majority of H.264 DVRs available but not all! Some examples of potential Drawbacks: - Limited playback capabilities, such as limited by frames or channels i.e. 200fps record but 100fps playback. - No flexibility on playback, even if you can playback multiple cameras you sometimes cannot bring one camera full screen (have to restart the search to do that) - Unable to change picture quality and frame rates - Despite pentaplex claims, all functions must be stopped to perform a download and often need additional software to convert the download to playback. - Many claimed H.264 DVRs are not proper H.264, some processing hungry steps in the compression are skipped. This is not ment to be a checklist but just to illustrate some potential downsides of H.264 which may not be apparent from the specification sheet. I am definitely not saying avoid H.264 as good ones are worth the effort but I am saying test first.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.