Multiple Site Solution
  • Hi All,

    I've got a requirement where I need 2-4 cameras each at 6 of our branches. I'm waiting for a couple quotes back from professional security companies but after a couple discussions I'm failing to see the benefits compared to my idea. I was wondering if anyone could point out issues with my idea below.

    I was thinking of having a Mac Mini running at each branch running a copy of SecuritySpy with the IP cameras streaming to the mac mini. Then with a frequent copy via FTP back to our data centre every 15 minutes or so. If we ever need to view footage we either remotely connect to SecuritySpy or go directly to the captured footage.

    I'm one of our companies Network Engineers, and have the IP all sorted. In regards to Camera's I was thinking either Axis or Mobotix but can decide later down the track. I dont want to run each camera streaming back over the WAN links as I believe this would be inefficient and would compete with business traffic traversing the link.

    One of the sales guys from the security company was trying to sell me the idea that there is more redundancy in their DVRs as they run RAID with AV grade hard drives, but the Mac mini is simply a relay point to our redundant data centre.

    Our PoE switches at the branches are all Cisco 2960's

    My only question at this stage, does SecuritySpy compress the stored footage? IE before its then uploaded via FTP?

    Thanks,
    Ben
  • Hi Ben,

    For efficient file sizes and video streaming bandwidth, you should definitely go for cameras that support H.264 video compression. Mobotix have very nice hardware, and there are cases where we would recommend them, but they are not big on H.264. So for your case I would recommend Axis or other H.264 cameras that you can find on your list of supported cameras or our latest 10 recommended IP cameras list.

    You basically have two options: 1. A Mac mini at each location, each recording from its local cameras (the setup you describe), or 2. Have the cameras all streaming back to one central location where a single instance of SecuritySpy is recording from all the cameras.

    With option 1, you are using some internet bandwidth for uploading the captured files via FTP, so you have to work out if this method will use less, or the same, bandwidth compared to option 2. If you are doing continuous recording (i.e. recording every frame) then the internet bandwidth usage is the same in each case. If you are doing motion detection recording (so that you are recording a small subset of all the frames) then option 1 will use much less internet bandwidth.

    The advantage of option 1 is that the connection between the cameras and SecuritySpy is much faster, so you will get better reliability, potentially higher frame rates, and the ability to easily expand to more cameras in the future. The advantage of option 2 is that you have all the video footage being recorded in one place, available via a single web interface. Personally, I agree with you that option 1 is preferable.

    As for hard drive reliability - uploading the video footage provides very good reliability with the added advantage of an offsite backup (which is very important if someone comes and steals the recording device). If you want RAID or high-grade drives you can achieve this with an external drive to the Mac mini(s) but this seems like overkill if you have an offsite backup.

    Finally, to answer your compression question: SecuritySpy can capture the H.264 video direct from the camera to the recorded files, resulting in very efficient file sizes combined with low CPU usage on the Mac.

    Hope this helps.
  • Hi Ben,

    Thanks for your quick reply. I've since had a look at your 10 recommended IP cameras list and will use this to base my decision.

    If I have any more questions I'll let you know.

    Cheers,
    Ben

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!