DIY Security Cameras

[GigaBuist]

I know we've talked about this before and I promised I'd let people know what I learned once I got around to mucking with the cameras at our store.

Well, here we are.

The program we use for storing security footage is called ZoneMinder.  It's free (GPL) but I have no idea what the install process is like as I'm not the one that put it in there.  My brother did that, years ago, and he wasn't much of a *nix guy at that point.  So, can't be too hard, and looking at their website they even have a LiveCD distribution.  I assume that'll install directly to disk with minimal fuss.

Currently all of our cameras are hooked into ZoneMinder via coax cables and bt878 capture cards.  The cards suck, they can only record at 6fps when you've got 4 cameras to a card, and they're prone to just crapping out, but they only cost $15-$25 a pop.  I've looked at other capture cards but you're getting near $200 for anything decent, Linux support can be spotty, and you've still got a tangle of coax coming into the machine, and best I can tell you still can't get more than 16 cameras on a box going that route.

So, IP cameras it is.  Got out first one in today for testing:  http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003LNZ1L6/

Hey, it's $58 bucks, does panning and tilting, has IR night vision (that works in a room, it's not going to light up a barn), and you can pull a 640x480 image off the thing's 0.3 megapixel camera.  You can run either with wired ethernet or a WiFi connection.  Hook it up wired first, wait for it to grab an address via DHCP, point your browser to that address and you can configure the WiFi if you want.  Once that's done you just follow the ZoneMinder directions on how to configure it to record a Foscom camera (http://www.zoneminder.com/wiki/index.php/Foscam), which isn't the brand of what I linked, but many brands conform to that standard.  Probably because they're all made in the same factory and rebranded the marked up.

ZoneMinder won't control the pan/tilt functions of the camera (that I know) but you can just pop your web browser over to the camera's own webserver to control that stuff.  

Now, as to the computer that's recording all of this stuff, it's just an old Pentium 4 with a 1TB-ish drive in it.  The CPU does not appear to be taxed at all but I'm running a load average 1.ish on it which tells me I'm probably a bit I/O bound, but that's recording 9 streams right now.

My other brother (the non techie one that also works at the greenhouse) saw the camera and thinks he might want do a setup like that for his home.  Basically just a camera to watch the driveway while he's away.  With the camera being WiFi enabled I figure we can get away with tossing a barebones Atom box in a closet wired into his home router, stick 250GB of storage in there, and we're off.  Should be about $150 for the PC and another $58 for each camera that he wants going.  That's not as cheap as some of the stuff I see for sale off the shelf, but I think there's a benefit to not having to wire everything, and the cameras are more capable in my case.

Now, going with WiFi is going to reduce the available bandwidth on your network.  Looking at the capture files I'm getting at 640x480 they're 55k each and I'm taking 8-10 per second right now. I want to get that higher, but I'm not sure why it's not capturing faster.  So, that's 550k per second or half a meg, or 5Mbps in network speak.  If you've got a 54Mbit WiFi network and you drop 2 cameras on there you're only left with 44Mbit.  With home internet connections now starting at 18Mbps for even the cheap service adding 8 cameras to the network would start slowing down your internet connection, or getting close to it.

Of course, you could always run one network for the PCs and another for the cameras.  Just drop another AP somewhere ($20-$40) and set it up on a different channel.

Or just drop the resolution.  Our standard cameras that record at SD TV resolution only take 8k per frame.  

But, I think this is a workable solution for both extremes.  On the low end you've got no cables, not much bandwidth used, and it's pretty easy to get running if you're OK with the first step being "install this Linux LiveCD to disk."  On the higher side of things I've got to deal with bandwidth, but I'll be going wired, and getting some disks with fast write capability, but at least I don't have half a mile of coax and piles of tuner cards with dubious reliability.  I honestly think I can get all 40 cameras that we'll need at the new place going this way on one box.  Most of them are probably going to be stupid 0.3 megapixel thingies but a few are probably going to be higher end, like 1.3-2.0 mega pixel.

One more note on storage:  ZoneMinder, apparently, deletes the old stuff if you don't tell it to save it.  I know that because I've never had to clear up those disks.  The 1TB drive that has been recording those 8 cameras at low resolution and 6fps 24x7 have logs going back to October 5, 2011.  I see some stored from dates previous, but those were most likely cases of  marking video to be stored forever, as it was evidence of theft.

[InfidelSerf]

After our house got egged a few weeks back, I decided it was time to get some cameras.
We finally bought a kit from fry's last week.
It's a Swann 8channel dvr with 500GB drive and 4 cameras(1/4 CMOS 656 x 492) The dvr can be accessed by a free ipad/android app from them.
I had thought about going with IP cameras across the board, and use a free app I found called "IP Cam Viewer lite" but this kit was only $360. I can still use that app to access the cameras on my dvr as well. But the free app from Swann actually does everything I want quite nicely.
I wanted to run wired cams for the ones that will be located inside the house. I may use wireless for a few of the outdoor cameras that are hard to get to.
Running the cable is going to prove to be a PITA but it will be worth it once it's all up and running.
Right now I have it working with the dvr located in the 1st floor living room.
I plan to move the dvr up to my office where my wiring closet is located. That way it can be tapped into the 5 HDMI cables I have running to 5 locations 72" up the wall throughout the house.

ETA: another nice feature is that you can configure it to email you a snapshot (4KB) whenever motion is detected. You can also set exactly where in the image the motion needs to take place in order to trigger the "alarm" 
I've busted several of the cats when they enter the cat free zone :p

[Nick1911]

Hasn't ZoneMinder been unsupported for a very long time now?

I recall trying to get it running on a modern Fedora instance was an exercise in frustration.

[GigaBuist]

Hasn't ZoneMinder been unsupported for a very long time now?

The last release was in August 2011. 

I recall trying to get it running on a modern Fedora instance was an exercise in frustration.

That tends to be my experience whenever I have to touch Video4Linux too.

[RevDisk]

You may want to add additional IR lights, to help out with night time footage.

Test the camera to make sure the video is usable. Call me skeptical, but how clear are those 0.3 megapixel images? Under what conditions? Is the goal to actually see anything, or just deterrence/insurance?

[GigaBuist]

Call me skeptical, but how clear are those 0.3 megapixel images? Under what conditions? Is the goal to actually see anything, or just deterrence/insurance?

Even the 0.3 megapixel cameras look better than the crappy ones we've already got.  So, it's an improvement.  These just sit above every checkout lane so we can keep and eye on things.  Cashiers missing product, spotting somebody in trouble, letting people know they didn't leave their credit card with us, we've got video of them putting it back into their wallet.  Stuff like that.  Nothing too detailed and the camera isn't too far from the action.

Now, when it comes to getting something that can look over the parking lot, or a wide area, I'm going to have to find something that gives a lot better picture.

[RevDisk]

Even the 0.3 megapixel cameras look better than the crappy ones we've already got.  So, it's an improvement.  These just sit above every checkout lane so we can keep and eye on things.  Cashiers missing product, spotting somebody in trouble, letting people know they didn't leave their credit card with us, we've got video of them putting it back into their wallet.  Stuff like that.  Nothing too detailed and the camera isn't too far from the action.

Now, when it comes to getting something that can look over the parking lot, or a wide area, I'm going to have to find something that gives a lot better picture.

Ahhh. Gotcha.  Yep, perfect for that application. Apologies, I thought these were for wider applications such as parking lot, major corridors, etc.

Yea, you'll need much higher resolution for wide scope applications. Higher the megapixel, more space you can effectively cover. Not familiar with the layout of your facility but you can cheat by lower resolution wide cameras, with higher resolution cameras on choke points (vehicle entry and exits)

[AJ Dual]

With all the improvements in vision technology, even facial recognition... and how I'd think a garden/landscaping type business would operate a lot over the summer months...

Is "cleavage recognition" possible? 

[cordex]

If you're thinking about putting in additional wireless to support these things, check out OpenMesh.

Come to think of it, if you're considering wireless coverage for any reason, check it out.

[GigaBuist]

If you're thinking about putting in additional wireless to support these things, check out OpenMesh.

Come to think of it, if you're considering wireless coverage for any reason, check it out.

I'll have to check them out.  We're doing pretty good with the outdoor WAPs we have in the place.  I'd say we have 2-3 acres of the facility covered.  It's good enough for most things but I plan on trying to get coverage of the whole 7 acre new facility from the get-go.

[cordex]

I'll have to check them out.  We're doing pretty good with the outdoor WAPs we have in the place.  I'd say we have 2-3 acres of the facility covered.  It's good enough for most things but I plan on trying to get coverage of the whole 7 acre new facility from the get-go.

I've got three sets deployed.  They are more or less comparable to Meraki with a few bonus features that the entry Meraki systems don't have (at less than 1/6th the hardware cost, and no ongoing cost).
Some key features:

• Transparent migration between WAPs.
• Zero configuration per WAP (Configure the network online, enter the MAC addresses of your modems and then go plug them in.  Done.)
• Mesh network lets you use some units as gateway nodes with wired access to network and other units as repeater nodes with mesh access through gateway nodes to network.
• Can support two distinct networks (i.e., public and secure, or computer and camera).
• Built-in wired switch allows each WAP to act as an RJ45 connectable wireless device for equipment you can't set up with wireless access.
• Hardware watchdog automatically restarts WAP if it starts going wonky.
• Outdoor enclosures available.
• Email notifications for outages
• Capability to keep wireless network separate from wired, or to bridge it.
• POE capable.
• Dual band Wireless N (MR500)
• Web-accessible configuration.
• Very low cost

[CNYCacher]

People get caught up in megapixels.  .3 megapixels is nothing to sneeze at, that 640x480 resolution is standard TV definition.  You could watch that cameras stream full-screen on a non-HD television without pixelization.

Here's a 0.3 megapixel image:




The limitations on a cheap camera like that are going to be light gathering and as a consequence, motion blur due to slow "shutter" speeds, or image noise due to jacked up ISO.  640x480 resolution is more than enough to get the job done.

[RevDisk]

I've got three sets deployed.  They are more or less comparable to Meraki with a few bonus features that the entry Meraki systems don't have (at less than 1/6th the hardware cost, and no ongoing cost).
Some key features:

I agree with cordex. Back in the day, I would have laughed.  But Meraki went full retard. They tripled the price, with no notice. According to my suppliers, they've been acting like jerks as well. Considering that "cloud" devices are essentially purchased AND LEASED, institutional attitude is very important.

I suspect Meraki will continue going full retard, which is a shame because they make nice kit, believe it or not. I really do like the idea. I'd like remotely managable switches, routers and APs that have clean interfaces instead of arcane command sets. Don't get me wrong, I know and use those command sets. I am a linux geek as well as a network geek. Networking equipment has grown fastly more powerful, but the tech that runs it has not.

To make a poor analogy, networking kit is essentially still C. Networking kit needs python, ruby, perl, et al.  I'm not saying we should do away with C, for obvious friggin reasons. But we could really use the networking version of python, ruby, perl as well. Meraki had the potential to move in that direction.

That said, I'm still considering buying them for my long term fixed facilities because of rapid deployment over a wide geographic area by unskilled untechnical personnel on location with central management. I like the site to site VPN ability, along with the included firewall. I can condense my equipment to two devices.  Physical security is high enough that I can (reasonably) trust the location with an always on connection into my central network. All of the small offices, which for me is the overwhelming majority, will likely be getting OpenMesh. They do not have physical security that I'm comfortable giving permanent entry to my network. They're treated like anyone dialing in from their home PC or mobile laptop. My guess is within five years, OpenMesh will be as good or better than Meraki but they still lack a lot of nice features for enterprise users.


FYI, MR500 is not compatible with the smaller routers. And the second generation small router is in beta and cannot be sourced through the usual vendors/suppliers. I tried sourcing 30 of them through my regular vendor and couldn't.

People get caught up in megapixels.  .3 megapixels is nothing to sneeze at, that 640x480 resolution is standard TV definition.  You could watch that cameras stream full-screen on a non-HD television without pixelization.

Short distance, controlled lighting, .3 megapixel is absolutely fine. It's not as great for say, reading a license plate across a parking lot. But you can cheat with lower resolution cameras for the entire parking lot, with higher resolution cameras at good angles at strategic emplacements. For instance, cheap cameras can catch a fight or car theft, but not really provide enough resolution to spot a license plate. But, your high resolution camera on the sole entry/exit can do so.  

[GigaBuist]

So, IP cameras it is.  Got out first one in today for testing:  http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003LNZ1L6/

OK, nobody buy a camera from that link.  I ordered up two more and got different cameras.  They look the same, but they're a different brand, different software, and have a different (wider) lense than the first.

Funny thing is I like the wider lense, but if I reorder I have no idea what I'll get from them.  So, screw that.  I'll be spending more money on something like a Foscam now to get something consistent. 

The setup procedure on the new ones was horrid.  Plug it into the network, see nothing on my DHCP server, run their scanner tool which finds nothing. I futz around for an hour trying to figure it out, see a forum post somewhere where it's noted that they spring up with an address of 192.168.0.178/24 upon factory reset.  Configure my workstation to have a second address on that network, and THEN I can open up the thing's admin panel, set to DHCP, and make an allocation in the pool.

Not a big deal once you know what to do, but holy crap the manual was worthless.

The fact that you can get cameras with COMPLETELY DIFFERENT software and specs blows my mind. 

[Marnoot]

I have a Foscam FW8918W we use as a nursery cam. I got it after hearing a lot of bad things about the cheap knockoffs and similars. Sounds like your experience verifies that. Not to say the Foscam is perfect. It drops wireless after awhile when connected to any wireless security other than WEP, which is pretty lame. I solved it by making a seperate WEP SSID that only the camera is on.

[GigaBuist]

I stuck in two more cameras recently that were the Foscam 8918 variety. 

My advise would be to run away from anything in this category of camera.  They are all very unreliable.

Initially I figured the 5 I had on my wireless network were just too much (despite my math showing otherwise) so I wired them in.  That didn't work, I still lost connection to them.  So I gave them fixed IPs instead of fixed IPs via DHCP.  That didn't work.

Upon further investigation it seems these cameras (the whole lot of them, not just Foscam but also the knock-offs) hork up their ability to handle ARP requests at some point and the common fix is to add static entries to your ARP tables.

But that's not working for me either.

At this point I have no idea how to fix the problem.  If I power cycle them they start working fine, but that only lasts for 30-120 minutes.  Then all but one craps out.

The goofy thing is I can look at my local ARP table, see an entry, connect to the camera's web interface, but the streaming video just doesn't present itself.

It's almost like they're designed to work well enough that you won't immediately return them and that's it.