any one reading his , id be really glad of your input...
i make my living installing cctv for private /retail customers - exclusivly old school analogue stuff with a dvr viewable over the net.
two new customers recommeneded by a friend , have both already got a couple of ip cameras streaming footage to there head office - for monitoring use only , no recording.
one customer has got a couple of axis cameras and the other a couple of panasonics-
until these two sites , ive never really given much thought to ip cameras and the like -
ive always been of the opinion .
1. its expensive gear
2. network dvrs arent cheap.
but the picture quality of both the pan/axis cameras theyve got has blown my mind- and being asked to add more Axis/pan cameras on each site - and getting local recording... im at a loss on which recording system to use.
ive already talked both custmers into buying a couple of qnap recorders -but thinking on , and being a tinkerer at heart , i want to try zm...
but i dont want to look silly with these two jobs if zm doesnt work out...
are any of you reading this cctv installers ?
do you install zm proffesionaly for your customers - if so ,,,
what recommendations in terms of minimum pc spec would you make etc?
btw,
one site has already got 2 panasonic ip cameras , and the other one 2 axis cameras -
the panasonic site is a hotel , and theres a fair bit of activity so the pc would need more memory etc than the first.
the first site would only ever have a maximum of 4 cameras and the hotel already having 2 , would probably over the year want another 10 pany cameras...
concerns about zm are...
-not working when you really need it- a disaster when you need some important footage.#
-high maintanence- regualrly needing to reset / restart zm.
-recording , remote streaming quality- in short .... RELIABILITY
it would be easy for me to go out and buy a couple of those qnaps - but im really curious about this zoneminder software.
any advice anyone ???
zm -good enough for proffesional use ??
Re: zm -good enough for proffesional use ??
A short answer: ZM is reliable as anything else. I haven't rebooted my fedora 12, ZM 1.24.2 system in longer then a year (6 cameras, 80,000 events). I've built and played with the subsequent releases but just can't justify the upgrade, at least not yet. The patch from Mastertheknife is scheduled for 1.25.1 and that will be a deal breaker! If your looking for an alternative to ZM have a look at Bluecherry.net's latest. Curtis Hall has been absent from these forums for a while but his company has been developing their own security software and hardware that sounds impressive. Hope this helps
Re: zm -good enough for proffesional use ??
Give a look to the Ubiquity AirVision software, but only works with their cameras.
After more than 15 years, no longer using ZM as surveillance system.
Now in the dark side, using a commercial system...
Re: zm -good enough for proffesional use ??
Yes, ZM is definitely good enough for professional use. I'm using it as such.
However.
THe reason many professionals use expensive solutions is:
1. The customer pays for it so cost doesn't matter. (Less and less true these days, but a perception still held by installers)
2. They get paid-for support and service.
Time is money and if you're unfamiliar with the software you might be scratching your head. But if you know linux well, zm shouldn't be that hard to learn. No harder than any other cctv software, but you don't have somebody at the other end of a phone to talk you through it (unless the paid support is still going?)
IME, installers choose what they know and are familiar with. Can't blame them for that, but it doesn't always mean the customer gets the best system.
However.
THe reason many professionals use expensive solutions is:
1. The customer pays for it so cost doesn't matter. (Less and less true these days, but a perception still held by installers)
2. They get paid-for support and service.
Time is money and if you're unfamiliar with the software you might be scratching your head. But if you know linux well, zm shouldn't be that hard to learn. No harder than any other cctv software, but you don't have somebody at the other end of a phone to talk you through it (unless the paid support is still going?)
IME, installers choose what they know and are familiar with. Can't blame them for that, but it doesn't always mean the customer gets the best system.
Re: zm -good enough for proffesional use ??
thanks guys-
one final thing...
ive just been checking footage on you tube recordings of other peoples cameras - whether theyve not selected 25 fps and whether they use low resolution cameras i just dont know.
but the footage you see thats zm users typically upload , always seems to me, very jerky ( 5 fps or so) - and resolution not particulary high.
.
i currently use a bit of gear by "teleeye" its analogue , its comparativley low def stuff ,, at best ,,, dvd quality and no where near megapixel - but,,, playback ( and im recording 4 cams) is absolute realtime - no jerky movements and whatever pal/ntsc camera i plug in - the playback quality in terms of update /origional resolution is the same as the live input video.
assuming ive a nice speced pc - used solely for zm , ,,,, maximum ram , memory - is it realisitc to expect a full 25 fps recording at full high def resolution ( 1280 times 720 ) , i think this is what the panasonics/axis offer ???-
there will be no other traffic on the network , just a 50mbs switch , maximum of ten local ip cameras sreaming and recorded over seven days before rewriting.
to me , the only reason for using ip cameras is because of the megapixel quality they offer - if that quality cant be recorded at full frame rate then there seems no point in using them ,
any thoughts appreciated.
one final thing...
ive just been checking footage on you tube recordings of other peoples cameras - whether theyve not selected 25 fps and whether they use low resolution cameras i just dont know.
but the footage you see thats zm users typically upload , always seems to me, very jerky ( 5 fps or so) - and resolution not particulary high.
.
i currently use a bit of gear by "teleeye" its analogue , its comparativley low def stuff ,, at best ,,, dvd quality and no where near megapixel - but,,, playback ( and im recording 4 cams) is absolute realtime - no jerky movements and whatever pal/ntsc camera i plug in - the playback quality in terms of update /origional resolution is the same as the live input video.
assuming ive a nice speced pc - used solely for zm , ,,,, maximum ram , memory - is it realisitc to expect a full 25 fps recording at full high def resolution ( 1280 times 720 ) , i think this is what the panasonics/axis offer ???-
there will be no other traffic on the network , just a 50mbs switch , maximum of ten local ip cameras sreaming and recorded over seven days before rewriting.
to me , the only reason for using ip cameras is because of the megapixel quality they offer - if that quality cant be recorded at full frame rate then there seems no point in using them ,
any thoughts appreciated.
Re: zm -good enough for proffesional use ??
Simple reason is most users buy a cheap anolog capture card. Where 1 30fps captre is shared between cams. Ex 2 cameras on a 30fps card gives around 8fps and it drastically goes down from there. I run mine on a slitley better techwell based card at 10fps for one simple reason cost. That and 10fps is plenty for me.
Re: zm -good enough for proffesional use ??
i use 8 channel cards with 8 chips from bluecherry. i usually set them for 10 or 15 fps each.
i've got a few people with this setup with 8 cams and the videos made are nice.
real time might be 24fps but 15 doesn't miss much.
the only time i've had problems is when i use a very large hard drive
similar to this setup
8 chip capture card > bluecherry
8 cams @ 15fps
motion detection
3tb hard drive on a regular sata port intel chipset
gets over 82.000 events
at about 30 days in this setup
with these settings, i get problems related to mysql load
when it's checking the database with 83.000 events
the recordings do suffer, and system load goes hi
it's got to be related to the enormous amount of events
and the motion detection recording we use.
i just haven't taken the time to tweak it.
the CPU i used with these is an i3 2100 which is bad to the bone
for a ZM box
with the same cpu, cams ect' as long as the storage isn't huge they do fine
i've done some testing with the i3 2100 and IP cams with record mode and motion
one test had 12 hi res IP cams @ 5 to 7 fps and the load was around 15 in record
mode. dual core means 7.5
i used online IP cams and couldn't get more fps. saturated my bandwith
at the rate i did get
at this very moment one of the 8 cam capture card systems with i3 2100 is running
load of 70 with motion in 4 of the cams
hope this gives ya an idea
i've got a few people with this setup with 8 cams and the videos made are nice.
real time might be 24fps but 15 doesn't miss much.
the only time i've had problems is when i use a very large hard drive
similar to this setup
8 chip capture card > bluecherry
8 cams @ 15fps
motion detection
3tb hard drive on a regular sata port intel chipset
gets over 82.000 events
at about 30 days in this setup
with these settings, i get problems related to mysql load
when it's checking the database with 83.000 events
the recordings do suffer, and system load goes hi
it's got to be related to the enormous amount of events
and the motion detection recording we use.
i just haven't taken the time to tweak it.
the CPU i used with these is an i3 2100 which is bad to the bone
for a ZM box
with the same cpu, cams ect' as long as the storage isn't huge they do fine
i've done some testing with the i3 2100 and IP cams with record mode and motion
one test had 12 hi res IP cams @ 5 to 7 fps and the load was around 15 in record
mode. dual core means 7.5
i used online IP cams and couldn't get more fps. saturated my bandwith
at the rate i did get
at this very moment one of the 8 cam capture card systems with i3 2100 is running
load of 70 with motion in 4 of the cams
hope this gives ya an idea