Various viewing stations throughout a house?

[tangent]

As the final design is unknown, I'd rather run a generic infrastructure that could be used for multiple purposes, so I think CAT cables and fibre fit the bill the best.
Yes, I'd like a TV turn-on to be event-driven, but unless it is an off-the-shelf solution, I am not interested.
...
But back to my queries, I would really like to know the recommended specs for the monitors. (Regarding 1080p, 720p, 4K, at various screen sizes or whatever else is available today).

It's still a good idea to map out the topology of your network and bandwidth utilization of various links. From a security standpoint it may be advisable to isolate cameras from other parts of your network. There are different ways to do this, including managed switches and VLANs, but it may not be appropriate to just assume ever device on your network will be in the same subnet or be accessible directly. Especially for longer runs and runs to other buildings plan on redundancy to accommodate changes of plans in the future. Also as internet speeds increase over time, you could find yourself annoyed a particular piece of your network is say 60% utilized by CCTV traffic.

Regarding the actual displays, you're over thinking it. Even computer monitors can work well. The displays, and devices that send them cctv signals can and will change over time. At this stage this really isn't where you should focus.

Off the shelf is relative, there may be off the self products that require extensive configuration or even programming / scripting to make them do what you want.

 

[Phil.g00]

From a security standpoint it may be advisable to isolate cameras from other parts of your network. There are different ways to do this, including managed switches and VLANs, but it may not be appropriate to just assume ever device on your network will be in the same subnet or be accessible directly.

This is a valid point I hadn't considered. I intended that the entire CCTV network was on 1 VLAN. The NVR6-XI series has 512Mbps (with AI-enabled)
I expect to have about 25ish cams all told, so I think I'm good.

 

[Phil.g00]

I would really recommend that you get one NVR that is large enough to handle everything you need and includes a web server built into it.

I am interested in this solution. As I have all Dahua cams, I'd like a Dahua NVR. Does such a beast exist?

You say you don't want to run a bunch of wires around your house, but if you put a NVR at each screen location, you are going to need at least one network cable at each location and you will need a HDMI cable from the NVR to the screen (in addition to power and enough physical space to be able to put the NVR hardware). If you use the web browser technique, you can connect devices over Wi-Fi which means you don't need even a network cable at those locations. You could easily put up a "smart TV" and have nothing but power connected to it. Or perhaps you take a "dumb" screen and plug a media player (like a Amazon Firestick) into it. Again the only thing you would need is power making these installations much "cleaner" than a screen with a NVR below it with wires connecting everything.

Yes, I will be putting a wired network connection at most locations anyway. I am rewiring and don't want to upgrade in the foreseeable.
Even doing so, won't preclude me from using WIFI. It means I could still do all WiFi things as well, I am just not forced to.
But could I get the same resolution on multiple screens with a wireless connection or would compromises have to be made?

In terms of multiple system management, I see the "Big Momma" as being managed, the satellite NVRs will be subscription devices. Barring using something like a "de-fish" capability, I don't envisage I'll use their AI.
So it'll be like managing one system, very similar to a web server.

 

[Swampledge]

Phil, I get the impression you are very concerned about display resolution, hoping to see all fine details on many cameras. That is very bandwidth intensive. With the right cameras and system, display resolution should be fairly unimportant. One neat thing about the Blue Iris solution that has been advocated here, is the easy ability to display multiple cameras for a general view, and then simply click a camera to bring it up full screen in a high resolution view. A second click returns to the multi camera view. (Obviously, this means using a tablet or similar device vs. a dumb monitor.) This is even simpler than teaching us older folks how to navigate various apps built into so-called “smart” TV’s.

My apologies if this response seems clueless to your use case.

 

[tangent]

Phil, I get the impression you are very concerned about display resolution, hoping to see all fine details on many cameras. That is very bandwidth intensive. With the right cameras and system, display resolution should be fairly unimportant. One neat thing about the Blue Iris solution that has been advocated here, is the easy ability to display multiple cameras for a general view, and then simply click a camera to bring it up full screen in a high resolution view. A second click returns to the multi camera view. (Obviously, this means using a tablet or similar device vs. a dumb monitor.) This is even simpler than teaching us older folks how to navigate various apps built into so-called “smart” TV’s.

Those fine details are also often less important in live viewing than they are in the recordings after an incident occurs.

 

[TonyR]

Those fine details are also often less important in live viewing than they are in the recordings after an incident occurs.

So to that end, we have from BI's "Help" file:

"When the continuous+alerts record mode is used with a dual-streaming camera along with direct-to-disk, the result is a BVR file which will contain the sub-stream continuously recorded, but the main-stream only recorded when the camera is in a triggered state."​

 

[Phil.g00]

Phil, I get the impression you are very concerned about display resolution, hoping to see all fine details on many cameras.

Yes, within reason, I am trying to get the best picture coming from the camera, I don't want to down rez a cam feed because of a screen or wifi bandwidth.
Likewise, I don't want to spend a fortune on screens to view Minecraft because that is all the cam is capable of.
On the other hand, the big TV screens will be used for watching HD movies as well, so high resolution will already be paid for.

One neat thing about the Blue Iris solution that has been advocated here, is the easy ability to display multiple cameras for a general view, and then simply click a camera to bring it up full screen in a high resolution view. A second click returns to the multi camera view

I can achieve this on my big flat-screen TV at the moment with an NVR plugged into an HDMI port.
I like it, want it, and have it already without BI. I select the correct HDMI port on my TV remote and wallah.
I see a multi-cam overview. To enlarge a particular cam click on the NVR mouse.
This is what I want to duplicate in various venues in the house.
(Granted, they won't all be TV screens).
The NVR 52-EI came with a wired mini-mouse. I want to replace that with a wireless mouse for my armchair pleasure.
But that is my only misgiving.

 

[Phil.g00]

Those fine details are also often less important in live viewing than they are in the recordings after an incident occurs.

This is accepted recordings have to be of the best quality at the best viewing resolution.

From the satellite screens, I am looking for a real-time "What was that noise?" Quickview when watching TV or a "Why is that PTZ tracking?" when snoozing with one eye open on the couch.
I don't want to sacrifice resolution because I can make do.

 

[tangent]

From the satellite screens, I am looking for a real-time "What was that noise?" Quickview when watching TV or a "Why is that PTZ tracking?" when snoozing with one eye open on the couch.
I don't want to sacrifice resolution because I can make do.

Lets say you're viewing 8 cameras on a split screen on a 1080p monitor.
That's 1080x1920 pixels divide by 4 -> 270x480 pixels displayed per camera.
On a 4K display (2160x3840) with a grid of 8, each camera is displaying 540x960 pixels.
EDIT: apologies, don't do math when you're tired.

There's no point in forcing the client that's displaying the cameras to load the full resolution stream for each camera and scale it down. The substream is more than adequate and is likely still being scaled down.

 

[Phil.g00]

On a 4K display (2160x3840) with a grid of 4, each camera is displaying 540x960 pixels.

I expect my usage pattern to be more likely with more cameras in an overview pattern.
So, low substream resolution should be more than adequate for this view.
But,
Then, after identifying a particular happening in the overview, I want to click my mouse, and that camera will fill the screen.
Then maybe zoom in a bit, too.
That's what I require from the stream's resolution. Is a substream resolution adequate for this capability?
I don't know, hence my questions. I suspect the better the resolution, the more capable the zoom.

You raise an interesting point, though.

I have heard once the NVR goes to the full-screen view, it automatically displays the camera's mainstream.
But I don't know how this translates to real-time network bandwidth. Perhaps someone knows for certain.

Full-time recording will be by the base station NVR, so that will always use the mainstream quality.
On the other hand, why would the network send the mainstream to those satellite NVRs if they were neither recording nor displaying them at the time?
The ideal would be if the satellite NVRs subscribe to the substreams and switch to a camera's mainstream as required.

I have no idea how a web server behaves, but I suspect you fix the resolution, and it isn't adaptive.

 

[tangent]

I have heard once the NVR goes to the full-screen view, it automatically displays the camera's mainstream.

Many devices that would display the cameras are capable of this, but it may depend on how you set it up.

 

[saltwater]

You keep referencing having numerous satellite NVRs. I'm not following precisely what you mean. Does your main NVR record all cameras? Do the satellite NVRs also record a group of cameras that the main NVR records anyway? Is the primary purpose of the satellite NVRs in order to connect directly to a nearby TV? How many satellite NVR's do you plan on installing? What about cost of each satellite NVR?

In any regard, wire the hell out of your house and whichever way you decide to go you're covered and can achieve all your requirements.

I have BI, and in my family I administer it. My wife is not that interested. I was away on a work trip, wife rang me, wanted to check the CCTV, simple instructions over the phone and she was browsing and reviewing without issue.

 

[Swampledge]

…..

I have no idea how a web server behaves, but I suspect you fix the resolution, and it isn't adaptive.

I have negligible experience with NVRs/DVRs. But Blue Iris’ built-in web server is what you would call adaptive. It sends sub streams for multi-camera views, and automatically switches to the main stream for single camera views

 

[jec6613]

Lets say you're viewing 4 cameras on a split screen on a 1080p monitor.
That's 1080x1920 pixels divide by 4 -> 270x480 pixels displayed per camera.
On a 4K display (2160x3840) with a grid of 4, each camera is displaying 540x960 pixels.

There's no point in forcing the client that's displaying the cameras to load the full resolution stream for each camera and scale it down. The substream is more than adequate and is likely still being scaled down.

Your math is off, for 4 cameras it's a divide by 2; for 9 cameras, divide by three - it's similar to the square cube law:

• A 4K display can put up four 1080p images at full resolution, or nine 720p at full resolution.
• A 1080p display can put up four 540p images, or nine 360p images.

That's before getting into annuar resolution, on a 40" TV at 6' your eyes simply can't tell the difference between the two so it's irrelevant, but on a 24" display at 1' you definitely will notice between 4K and 1080p. And also before dealing with scaling effects and how high quality your cameras are, where inexpensive cameras have poor optics and high image sensor noise, etc, etc. Also, higher resolution = more bandwidth being shoved across your network, HDBaseT, HDMI, or whatever.

My rule of thumb is to do the size/resolution/distance as if it were a TV and use a home theater calculator for it, should be pretty easy to do. Also don't cheap out, get an IPS panel so you can view at any angle.

 

[Phil.g00]

You keep referencing having numerous satellite NVRs. I'm not following precisely what you mean. Does your main NVR record all cameras? Do the satellite NVRs also record a group of cameras that the main NVR records anyway? Is the primary purpose of the satellite NVRs in order to connect directly to a nearby TV? How many satellite NVR's do you plan on installing? What about cost of each satellite NVR?

I think this has been covered in my previous posts in this thread.
I envisage having a central, very capable NVR that records all cameras and deals with the AI/IVS rules.
I envisage having 3-4 less capable satellite NVRs that subscribe to a group of cameras relevant to the particular screen.
Yes, things cost money, but the satellite NVRs are small change after 25 cameras, some being PTZs and a few wide-screen TVs

 

[Phil.g00]

My rule of thumb is to do the size/resolution/distance as if it were a TV and use a home theater calculator for it

This is useful info I'll look into this.

 

[saltwater]

I envisage having 3-4 less capable satellite NVRs that subscribe to a group of cameras relevant to the particular screen.

Will they also record?

Yes, things cost money, but the satellite NVRs are small change after 25 cameras, some being PTZs and a few wide-screen TVs

It's a cost that is not necessary if your only purpose is to view a group of cameras.

 

[actran]

@Phil.g00 A gentle suggestion, instead of satellite NVRs, why not just use an app on a smart TV to stream IP cam feeds, like this one: IP Camera Viewer - Apps on Google Play

There are a number of these apps out there.

BTW, I'm not using these apps because Blue Iris works for me. But since you are going NVR route, the right app on your smart TV may make more sense long term.

 

[tangent]

Your math is off

So it is, fixed. Sorry about that, the wonders of sleep deprivation.

 

[bigredfish]

I have negligible experience with NVRs/DVRs. But Blue Iris’ built-in web server is what you would call adaptive. It sends sub streams for multi-camera views, and automatically switches to the main stream for single camera views

Pretty sure Dahua NVRs can do the same. And yes there are some beefy models for your mothership.