Security cameras
Oct. 10th, 2008 02:09 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
johnridleyApparently there has been some suspicious activity happening in our neighborhood lately; someone asked a lurking pickup if he needed any help, and the guy sped off, and later that day there was a break-in nearby.
A couple of years ago we had a break-in at the church, and I'd talked about network security cameras for that location at the time.
I think it's important that the camera operate independently, and that it has FTP capabilities so that unless the intruder takes the power or internet signal down, or grabs the camera within 10 seconds of it seeing them, the images of them have already been uploaded to an off-site server.
I looked into them a bit and found that almost all of the inexpensive cameras have incredible amounts of weaselly prose in their marketing. They all seem to say that they do motion detection, email alerts, FTP uploads, and other features, and the camera works "without a PC."
After finding PDF manuals online though, it turns out that almost all of them connect to the ethernet network "without a PC" but that's about it. Once connected, they just sit there. They require a PC to connect to them, pull data from them and the motion detection and other fancy features happen in the (windows-only) software, and sometimes they even only can be viewed from an active-X control within IE.
It looked like the Panasonic camera was the only one that had actual motion detection, FTP and email alerts within the camera, for a reasonably cheap price. The wired version is quite reasonable at about $85, but for whatever reason the wireless version is about twice that. I found an Amazon seller selling one at a discount and ordered it up.
It works OK, has pretty good low light sensitivity (by increasing exposure time quite a bit, which blurs anything moving as would be expected). Getting the wireless set up was a guessing game though. First, it only supports WEP encryption. That would have bugged me more but I'd already gone from WAP to WEP for the Nintendo DSs. The worst part though was that as far as I can tell, it only works with the standard channel 6. Most routers default to channel 6, but I had been using 11 to avoid interference with neighbors. I could not get the camera to work on 11 at all. it had no settings, so I assumed it would hunt. I left it for 5 minutes and it never locked on the signal, and there's no way to know what it was trying to do.
Anyway, I have this thing sitting around now. I don't know if I should put it in the garage (which would seem to be the most tempting target to me, since there's always either a person or a dog in the house) or whether to just point it at the front lawn or driveway, or put it in the house. I may try it in a few locations and see if it produces usable pictures when people or cars move in front of it. Or I may decide to place it at the church in the entryway.
A couple of years ago we had a break-in at the church, and I'd talked about network security cameras for that location at the time.
I think it's important that the camera operate independently, and that it has FTP capabilities so that unless the intruder takes the power or internet signal down, or grabs the camera within 10 seconds of it seeing them, the images of them have already been uploaded to an off-site server.
I looked into them a bit and found that almost all of the inexpensive cameras have incredible amounts of weaselly prose in their marketing. They all seem to say that they do motion detection, email alerts, FTP uploads, and other features, and the camera works "without a PC."
After finding PDF manuals online though, it turns out that almost all of them connect to the ethernet network "without a PC" but that's about it. Once connected, they just sit there. They require a PC to connect to them, pull data from them and the motion detection and other fancy features happen in the (windows-only) software, and sometimes they even only can be viewed from an active-X control within IE.
It looked like the Panasonic camera was the only one that had actual motion detection, FTP and email alerts within the camera, for a reasonably cheap price. The wired version is quite reasonable at about $85, but for whatever reason the wireless version is about twice that. I found an Amazon seller selling one at a discount and ordered it up.
It works OK, has pretty good low light sensitivity (by increasing exposure time quite a bit, which blurs anything moving as would be expected). Getting the wireless set up was a guessing game though. First, it only supports WEP encryption. That would have bugged me more but I'd already gone from WAP to WEP for the Nintendo DSs. The worst part though was that as far as I can tell, it only works with the standard channel 6. Most routers default to channel 6, but I had been using 11 to avoid interference with neighbors. I could not get the camera to work on 11 at all. it had no settings, so I assumed it would hunt. I left it for 5 minutes and it never locked on the signal, and there's no way to know what it was trying to do.
Anyway, I have this thing sitting around now. I don't know if I should put it in the garage (which would seem to be the most tempting target to me, since there's always either a person or a dog in the house) or whether to just point it at the front lawn or driveway, or put it in the house. I may try it in a few locations and see if it produces usable pictures when people or cars move in front of it. Or I may decide to place it at the church in the entryway.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-10-10 06:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-10 06:58 pm (UTC)I've also heard that lower-end wireless cameras can be finicky. I know at least one person who gave up and ran an ethernet cable to it.
If it has a motion detection setting, it would be neat to have it not only upload a picture, but perhaps alert someone that something is going on...
no subject
Date: 2008-10-10 11:05 pm (UTC)I'm able to watch the cats in Kalamazoo now on 13 cams, 3 of them IR so that I can see that yes, those little buggers really do play all night. It's funny how they seem to know when I tune in, because they'll look right at the cam, and their eyes absolutely glow. Tullio has it set up so that audio can be heard over one of the channels. Makes it interesting when there's a party or D&D game. I suppose someone should caution guests about that at some point... heh, heh, but just for the fun of it, I don't think I'll say which cam has the mic!
Anyway, your previous correspondents are right John -- the Axis cams and servers are great (and $$), and the cheap-o wireless cams can be a real PITA. Interference galore. Good luck.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-10 11:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-10 11:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-10 11:43 pm (UTC)Honestly, if I can't get this done for $120 or so, it's not even worth doing for me, so the more expensive cam wouldn't be worth it even if it were the only way to get it working.