What Russ knows about security systems

Thanks Cindi,

For starters what is the typical distance of a wireless security camera? Night vision? IP cameras? resolution, lens angles etc.  We have 2.5 arces of forest behind us and I thought it might be nice to have a heads up. I have a complete WAN at the house, with a RT-N66U ASUS router in the back office in the rear of the house, COX high speed connection, and extenders for the second floor. Right now there is a ADT system that was installed before I got here 3 years ago the wife had installed. 

Well @marlingrace,

Theses are great questions. There are a few types of wireless cameras out there. The two most popular are RF (radio frequency) and network or IP cameras. The RF cameras send an analog (old school) signal to an RF receiver that puts the image onto a coaxial cable. The network cameras send the image in a digital format like mpeg-4, jpeg, and H.264, to a wireless router, bridge, or wireless extender. When network security cameras first came out, the speed and compression ratios made the images very pixelated and the analog picture was more desirable. But now that the speeds and compression quality have gotten better, we can get HD images that completely blow the old analog out of the water. In both cases of wireless cameras I have mentioned, the range is truly dependent on the strength of the transmitter built into the camera and the receiver used to get the image. Most generic wireless cameras I have seen, have a 35'-50' range in open air. As soon as you put a wall in the way, the distance is definitely reduced by a varying degree, depending on the construction of the wall. If you live in a steel fortress, range is reduced to almost nothing, but if you lived in a grass hut, your reduction may not be so bad. The only way to tell what the range is going to be is to try it out. (I know this isn't the answer you're looking for, but it's honest)

There are three popular choices for night vision cameras. White light, infra-red illuminators, and light amplification. White light is exactly what is sounds like. It uses bulbs, usually LEDs now, to brighten the area where the camera is looking (usually turned on when the camera or other sensor detects motion). The advantage to this method is that the camera can continue to record in full color. The disadvantage is that the camera now becomes a big target for vandals. The infra-red illuminators (or IRs) work a little bit different in the fact that the LEDs used in this style emit a light that is invisible to the naked eye (usually turns on when it gets dark). The advantage to this style is that it doesn't put a target on the camera. The disadvantage is that the camera has to switch to black and white to view the invisible spectrum, and you lose detail that might be beneficial to you (like the guy in the red hat is driving away in a blue car). Both the white light and the IRs are limited in distance to as far as the LEDs can shine their light. The last style, light amplification, sometimes called starlight vision, uses existing light and amplifies the image to look brighter. The advantage to this style is that it allows the cameras to record in color, and unlike the LEDs, it does not have a range. It amplifies all light in the entire image. The downside to this style is that you need some sort of light, whether it be the moon, stars, or a night light. In complete darkness, you get a black image.

Cameras of all types use lenses to bring the light of the area into the chip int the camera to produce an image. The lower the millimeter, the wider the image you will get. A very common lens size is the 3.6mm lens (also called the 4mm). I tell people, if you want to know what a 4mm lens will capture, put your arms out for a hug. Now unless you are expecting the biggest hug ever, you'll probably end up having your arms at about a 65-75 degree angle. Everything between your arms is what will be captured in the image. If you go down to a 1.3mm lens, you'll be looking at about 180 degrees and everything not directly in front of the camera will be super tiny. If you go up to a 16mm lens, you will have about a 20 degree angle and have a good shot of a small area but not see anything outside of the image. These estimates are also dependent on what size of chip you have in the camera and at what resolution you are using as well (HD images are wider than a non-HD image).

On of the new things in network cameras now days is the fish-eye lens (the 1.3mm I mentioned above) in conjunction with de-warping software. This allows you to record a 180 degrees image (or 360 degrees if ceiling mounted) and run the image through an algorithm that makes a portion of the image look like a normal image. You can then do a virtual pan/tilt/zoom within the software just as if you were moving the camera around. With a high enough resolution, like 2-6 megapixels, you can zoom into the far edges of the image and get clear details.

Once you have your cameras, you have to decide if you are going to record them. Obviously archiving the images allows you to go back and see the details of what happened, where, when, and by whom. But sometimes you are just looking to be able to check in on things to make sure everything is okay. Most network cameras have the ability to be remotely viewed but this does not mean you are necessarily recording them. To do this, you will have to setup a space on your computer to archive to, set up a separate computer to record to, or use a digital recorder. The thing to keep in mind is, the same HD image that allows you to get great detail and clarity, is also much more of a memory hog in both you RAM and your hard drive (the camera is really cool until it causes Hernando's Hideaway Lounge Chat to start lagging). My preferred way is to use a dedicated digital recorder. This is an embedded Linux system, so it is more resistant to viruses and malware. It also allows for remote viewing of all cameras that are connected to it via a DDNS service, almost always free.

As far as the "ADT system" is concerned, you'll have to be a little more specific. ADT use a large variety of equipment and some of it is actually good. So if you get me a little detail, I might be able to tell you what would be a good step forward.

Russ Frame

russellframe,
Take your time Russ. Your answer to Marlin actually was quite helpful as well. You answered the question of cable vs. RF for me since the outlier buildings have a bluff between them and the main house. Which brings up another question. Is there a limited range cable works? Or would an additional recorder be wise?

I would also like the exterior cameras to be as concealed/hidden/camouflaged without image degradation as possible with faux cameras plainly visible. So I imagine that lens size would dictate that correct? I like the fish eye idea, that could actually cut down on the amount of cameras, though I would think that they are more expensive.

Welcome to the site. I am reading what others are asking and what your answers are. It is always good to hear from people who have first hand knowledge about things and not just what is taught to them.

Do you ever recommend to people to get a shotgun in some areas where crime is really bad?

Sorry for the delay Doug. Been working too many hours this week.
So coaxial distance depends on the type of cable. RG59 cable will give you about 1000 feet where RG6 can go about 1500 ft. But if you want to use any camera with an HD image, almost all are network cameras. The best thing might be to trench an underground CAT6 network cable or two to the outlier building if it's within 350 feet. If it's further, but within 600 feet, you would be better off trenching in a couple RG6 cables with network adapters. If it's more than 600 feet, I would recommend using an outdoor wireless extender. You can get some that will go up to a mile. But unless you are going to dig that trench yourself, it will almost undoubtedly be cheaper to put in a recorder in the outlier building. But if you want notifications, you will need Internet service of some sort.

And yes, motion detection is a very sound way to do recordings. It is almost standard on any network camera or digital recorder these days.

As for prices, they are all over the board. You can get DIY cameras as cheap as $200 these days thanks to Google and Drop Camera. But if you really want to be a DIYer, go with the Arlo wirelwss camera for the same price. They are partnered with NetGear and can be found at Best Buy. The great thing about these cameras is that they are truely wireless. They run on four 3 volt litium batteries and can be put pretty much anywhere, including outside. You also get 1 week of motion recording on the cloud and notifications for free. The downsides are the batteries only last 2-3 months and you do not have the option to recorder in any other manner that motion detection.

If you are looking to go with professional equipment, a hardwired network camera starts around $140 for a 720p resolution, $190 for a 1MP resolution, and $250 for a 2MP resolution. The wireless cameras in the 720p range are priced about the same as their hardwired brothers. The 1MP and 2MP wireless cameras start getting a little more pricey. You can figure on spending about $80-140 more per camera. In my opinion, the fish-eye camera, 1MP, and 2MP cameras should only ever be bought in the hardwired configuration because of the amount of data they transmit. The fish-eye starts around $290. The big cost on professional equipment is the installation price. But you do get a warranty on the install, which many times pays for itself.

Oh, I'd also ask if you know of any programs that automate the adjustments on those sliders in an effective way for changing ambient light conditions? Automatic in that cheap setting is.....well, worthless. So when I've used the webcams, and if I want continuous recording through twilight into darkness, it takes a half dozen or so manual tweaks across that period between day and night.

Any better ways for handling that?