Looking for suggestions on a DVR

[gto-guy]

I need some help looking for a DVR. I got pulled into this project on short notice.

I need to replace a failed DVR. It currently runs 16 analog cameras running 4CIF at 200 IPS (or 120 FPS) recording from my understanding. When looking for a replacement DVR, almost everything i am finding is discontinued. It just needs to be able to record, monitor from a remote PC, and save off video files.

would it be worth it to look at DVR cards and then use blueiris? if so, what can i use for a calculator for CPU load and storage at that high a framerate?

 

[TonyR]

Consider a Penta-brid NVR that will handle 16 analog + 8 IP cams up to 5MP.
A big fan and user of Blue Iris, you could likely stream directly from the NVR to BI at a later date if you should decide to do so....I'd avoid analog cards that plug into a PC.

 

[gto-guy]

I looked at the dvr spec sheet and it says it only goes up to 30 fps. Per an FBI request, the customer needs 120 fps min (at D1 resoution) for the cameras. It deals with the way the fbi van stich partial frames together to get full resolutions pictures.

 

[TonyR]

Per an FBI request, the customer needs 120 fps min (at D1 resoution) for the cameras. It deals with the way the fbi van stich partial frames together to get full resolutions pictures.

Good luck with your quest....

 

[IAmATeaf]

I did some reading on this a while back and found that these high frame rate cams produce effectively raw outputs which then might become an issue in terms of load for whichever NVR/DVR you choose.

There are high FPS cams out there Machine Vision cameras - Adimec

 

[gto-guy]

Thanks teaf. Ya the cameras they have are all coax and a little older but the old dvr was running them that high fps (until it decided to cook itself).

I have a call into geovision about thier cards. From the way i read the spec sheet for the gv-1240b cards, i think the card is offloarding h.264 encoding from the cpu (plus for a $800 card that would be nice). I just need to build a 1U server for it once i get cpu specs from someone. Also have an email into blueiris to see if they support the encoding cards too.

Ya at the end of the day no matter what direction it is going to run them 4kish to get this done without touching a single existing cam (or the mess of wiring and brick walls said wiring passes through).

 

[fenderman]

I looked at the dvr spec sheet and it says it only goes up to 30 fps. Per an FBI request, the customer needs 120 fps min (at D1 resoution) for the cameras. It deals with the way the fbi van stich partial frames together to get full resolutions pictures.

Nonsense. Your old recorder did not record 120fps and you wont find a new one that will. The FBI, NSA, CIA and NASA combined cannot take a D1 image and make it "full resolution" and even if it was possible the frame rate would not matter.
Most likely the old DVR was rated at a TOTAL frame rate of 120fps for all its channels combined.

 

[mat200]

I need some help looking for a DVR. I got pulled into this project on short notice.

I need to replace a failed DVR. It currently runs 16 analog cameras running 4CIF at 200 IPS (or 120 FPS) recording from my understanding. When looking for a replacement DVR, almost everything i am finding is discontinued. It just needs to be able to record, monitor from a remote PC, and save off video files.

would it be worth it to look at DVR cards and then use blueiris? if so, what can i use for a calculator for CPU load and storage at that high a framerate?

Hi @gto-guy

4CIF resolution?
704×480

Perhaps this is a good time to replace the entire kit?

 

[SamM]

@gto-guy
Save your money any upgrade now to Full IP. I am sure that you could use the existing cable, Ethernet over Coax, there are modules available if you want to still use the old infrastructure.

 

[CCTVCam]

More FPS doesn't equal better quality. It equals smoother motion. As I understand it, the higher the frame rate, the more compressed each frame is and the lower the quality of the still you can pull from it. Maths wise, @ 8mbs, @12 fps = 8/12 mbs for each frame. @120 fps = 8 / 120 mbs for each frame! Ten times less bandwidth. I can't see anyone recommending 120fps for max quality therefore as although video motion may look great, I very much doubt an individual still will without a significant bandwidth increase (impossible due to NVR limitations). As law enforcement tend to publish stills, it's highly unlikely the FBI would recommend 120fps. Also try and buy a camera that records 120 fps. You're looking at a high end DSLR or broadcast camera for mucho $.

 

[IAmATeaf]

^ That’s not how the resolution works is it? Won’t each frame contain the same number of pixels but the higher frame rate will equal more data being pushed from the cam?

Not an expert by any means, just my thoughts and logic.

 

[fenderman]

More FPS doesn't equal better quality. It equals smoother motion. As I understand it, the higher the frame rate, the more compressed each frame is and the lower the quality of the still you can pull from it. Maths wise, @ 8mbs, @12 fps = 8/12 mbs for each frame. @120 fps = 8 / 120 mbs for each frame! Ten times less bandwidth. I can't see anyone recommending 120fps for max quality therefore as although video motion may look great, I very much doubt an individual still will without a significant bandwidth increase (impossible due to NVR limitations). As law enforcement tend to publish stills, it's highly unlikely the FBI would recommend 120fps. Also try and buy a camera that records 120 fps. You're looking at a high end DSLR or broadcast camera for mucho $.

The OP or his "client" never spoke to the FBI and there was never a 120fps camera at that location. This entire thread is fabricated.

 

[CCTVCam]

^ That’s not how the resolution works is it? Won’t each frame contain the same number of pixels but the higher frame rate will equal more data being pushed from the cam?

Not an expert by any means, just my thoughts and logic.

I'm happy to be corrected but if the data rate is set to 8mbs then my understanding is that's the maximum it can use per second. Logic suggests, if you divide the data rate per second by the number of frames per second then you have an approximation of the compression to each frame (not strictly correct because of the differing frame types but an approximation nevertheless). What higher frame rates give you is less motion blur. If I'm correct the quality of each individual frame drops as the frame rate increases. It's probably not noticeable within video playback because each frame is on screen for less time.