IPVMU Certified | 01/14/14 05:21pm
It has potential for far-flung installations where cameras are more than ~300 feet (100M) apart.
It is not the only option for this sort of application (For example, we discussed a similar PoE product here, as well as SLOC).
This Stardot offering shares many of the same weaknesses:
I dug around on pricing and found that MCLDC cameras have a project street price range between ~$400 - $500 each, and the 4 channel receiver is about ~$200. Pricing of 'pure IP' equivalents that beats these prices is common, and growing.
Whether or not this proves to be less expensive that 'traditional' cabled projects ultimately depends on install difficulty and amount of total cable needed. In general, smaller jobs (<16 cameras, mostly indoor locations) simply would not gain much advantage over traditional ethernet camera designs.
I don't know this vendor in particular but we are already using such IP configuration over coax TV antenna for IPTV for example or internet But you need IP , that 's why Stardot is using IP Hybrid Security Camera, like Sony Sloc's. But Sony doesn't promote multiple shared connections.
PowerLine communication over coax IEEE 1901 (200 and 500 mb/s) can work on bandwidth sharing using 2-30 or 2-68 Mhz frequencies on the coax up to 600 meters. Real Throughputs are +/- 65 Mbits with 200 mb and 180 Mb/s with 500 Mb.(180 Mbs measured is great)
Advantage is to use Tree topologies like analog TV did ...and you can extand length, does support also POE. One master and several slaves.
Sloc is using according to what I know a customized PLC (keeping some coax frequencies for analog and some for IP) so you don't have the full theorical bandwidth and resolution / streams are for such reasons, limited, and also analog is reduced ( you don't have a full 4CIF...)
Moxa (multimedia over coax) technology is also using shared bandwith but over 1 Ghz (so good at home, but not convenient for long distances)
I work for StarDot Technologies and just wanted to share some information about Multi-Channel Long Distance Coaxial that I hope will clarify things for you. MCLDC is a new technology that we have been developing for some time, and we are very excited about the potential for MCLDC in the security market.
Here are the facts:
- MCLDC cameras utilize DVB-T video transmission to transmit megapixel video through coaxial cable. DVB-T is the digital television standard for most countries around the world, and truly is a common sense method to transmit high resolution video. This technology is by no means proprietary; we are just the first to develop this technology for security surveillance.
- Because MCLDC cameras transmit DVB-T, it is possible to connect up to 16 cameras on a single coaxial cable. The best way to visualize this is to think about how cable and satellite television works in your home, and all of the channels that your set top box receives through the coaxial cable. MCLDC is the exact same concept, except your set top box is the MCLDC channel receiver. DVB-T is a very reliable method of transmitting video signals, and is a proven solution in television broadcasting.
- Another reason why DVB-T is a common sense solution for surveillance cameras is the distances that can be achieved through coaxial cable. If using RG59 coaxial cable, cable run distances of up to 1200ft can be achieved. Even greater distances up to 3000ft can be accomplished by using high quality RG6 coaxial cable; this would significantly reduce installations costs when compared to fiber optic options currently available in the market.
- The MCLDC network channel receiver supports 4 cameras; this is an ONVIF Profile S compliant device so an installer will not be locked into using a specific recorder. We have already had some MCLDC projects use ExacqVision as the VMS.
Here are the benefits to an installer/end-user.
- MCLDC is a true retro-fit solution, meaning the end user can save a significant amount of money on a CCTV upgrade by keeping the coaxial cable that is already in place. The cost of the MCLDC cameras and channel receiver are competitive when compared to HD-SDI and IP over Coax solutions, and the overall cost will compete against any IP installation.
- An installer can easily add more cameras to an MCLDC security system, the daisy chain topology means that adding a new camera is as simple as connecting a coaxial cable from the nearest camera.
- MCLDC cameras also simultaneously transit analog video, which is primarily use for focus use but can be transmitted down the same cable as the megapixel transmission. This can be used to utilize analog monitors that are already in place, for example in a retail store or a casino that wants to watch the surveillance cameras on their existing monitors.
- Being able to add 16 cameras to a single cable will alleviate issues such as limited conduit space, having to install multiple cable runs (adding to the overall cost of an install). Existing CCTV installations can also be expanded at a minimal cost.
We are primarily marketing MCLDC as a retro-fit solution, we understand there is a demand for megapixel but often the costs associated with an upgrade will affect the final decision. Installers bidding on IP installations will usually have to offer their labor at the lowest possible cost in order to compete. Any installer that can offer their customers MCLDC as a solution to upgrade their surveillance system will be more competitive, and will be able to (we hope) make more money for their time. We expect more customers will be enticed into upgrading their surveillance system because they can re-use the cabling infrastructure they have already invested in while saving money on a better system.
Just a little note about StarDot Technologies, we are a California based company and have been engineering imaging technology since 1994. We released our first internet camera in 1998, and have since developed IP cameras for both the tourism and the security markets.
From a partner VMS perspective, we saw enough promise in this hardware technology that we have made sure to do a much deeper integration for our upcoming V2.2 release next week. I've been quite impressed with how well the two technologies are recieved during demonstrations. At ISC, they will be showing it running on our software on one of their screens.
Thank you Nathan & Ben, I will be sure to stop by the booth. The reason we had not quoted StarDot's MCLDC was it limited just to 5 Star Dot cameras and their own VMS. We have many old plants in our area that we have run alarm and fire alarm system wires very similar to Star Dot's architecture. In these plants keeping the camera runs under 328 feet are difficult even with a makeshift IDF. Not everyone can afford a fiber run either. I still have my doubts but this solution maybe an option for us in future.
Chesapeake & Midlantic
Ben Kirk of Stardot was kind enough to come in and show us these cameras today, and I was highly impressed.
First, it's a forklift upgrade. Quoted distance is 3000' on RG6 and 1200' on RG-59/U.
Second, you can daisy chain cameras, which- woah, mind blown. Put a T connector on an existing camera, run a coax cable to a second camera, and boom, done. Assuming you have a free channel on the decoder. Ben even said you can run redundant coax cables so snipping a wire won't take out the camera. The literature claims up to 16 cameras on a single coax cable (they're only launching with 4 channel encoders, though). This is, in my opinion, the clearest advantage over HDCVI.
Third, DVB-T is capable, in theory, of extremely high resolution video. I'm just speculating here, but I'll bet we see practical 4K cameras in a couple of cycles.
Obviously, this isn't going to be for every installation, but as I've been saying since I first heard about HDCCTV, idiot proof HD surveillance that is easier to install than IP cameras, reuses existing analog infrastructure, and and doesn't require networking knowledge to program or operate can only be a good thing for the surveillance industry in general.
More info on StarDot's website here. There is a case study, which I thought was pretty cool, and it'll be launching in about a month.
Who cares which side handles compression...
Most people don't. But the people that do, really do. For example: You know the 'city' right? I used to live in Midtown on 7th between Times Square and the Park. Within gun earshot of where they got 'Pac.
You know how they have all those pricey high-rise towers where two elevator doors open into a ground floor 'lobby' thats about the size of a 'bridge and tunnel' person's kitchen? And about 5 feet from the sidewalk's chaotic foot traffic 24/7?
You got your guard and some of sort of desk or podium, and traditionally the b&w b&h squarish monitor that I'm sure you know far more about than me. I used to know the guard in my building pretty well. He said he's got 5 secs to react, to hit the lock button or the panic button or fight or run... He would always have an eye on the quad with street level and 2nd floor (looking down) views.
They didn't have IP cameras back then so I couldn't ask him, but I'm pretty sure he never heard of compression, but just as sure that he wouldn't wanna give up any latency, MP or not. You know there is a bit of unsung value in those old uncompressed analog systems, they can't fool you like the new ones can. They make you believe in their reality! If the monitor is showing the lobby is clear, you can count on it!! Systems today with their jitter and judder and reduced frame rates, never make me think I am doing anything than watching the past...
Sorry for the rant, I'll come up with a less anecdotal response later...:)