As Good as it Gets?

evermorian · Post by **evermorian** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:27 pm

I have attempted to install with the ZoneMinder LiveCD on three different machines, now. The performance doesn't seem to be very good. I am wondering if I am doing something wrong or need different hardware.

I am using two D-Link DCS-900W cameras. I know they are not the best quality and many of the folks in this forum don't like them. However, at $50 USD each, compared to $300+ for better cameras, they are a bargain and are probably adequate for my use.

The first system was a 2GHz AMD system with .5GB of RAM. I don't think Mandrake/Mandriva likes the motherboard. The LiveCD sees the main hard drive (on the primary IDE channel) as /dev/hde rather than /dev/hda and fails to install. I see the same problem trying to install Mandrake 10.1 or Mandriva LE 2005. Other distro installers and liveCDs have no trouble seeing the main drive as /dev/hda. So, I gave up on this one.

Next, I installed on an old Pentium 3 400MHz machine with 384MB of RAM. The install took quite awhile but, everything works. I added monitors for the two DCS-900W cameras (no filtering or anything, just continuous mode) and can click the monitor names and see the streaming video. However, the frame rate is about 1.29 to 1.4 FPS, which seems awfully poor.

I thought this might be due to the low processor speed. I decided to try a test install on a fast workstation to make sure it worked well before investing in additional hardware. So, I installed on a 3.0GHz Pentium 4 Shuttle SB61G2V4 system with .5GB of RAM.

The installer doesn't seem to like one of the USB chips and the CD hangs while booting. Using the "nousb" boot parameter will let the CD boot but, yields an install that won't connect to the cameras. I was able to get the CD to boot without "nousb" on the second attempt by hitting "i" for interactive startup.

X also runs funny on this machine, doing some kind of virtual, scrolling desktop at resolutions higher than 1024x768. I normally run Mandrake 10.0 on it and have no difficulty with 1280x1024.

After the second install attempt, it was able to see the cameras. I was surprised to discover, however, that the frame rate on the fast machine is also 1.29 to 1.4 FPS.

I added another .5GB of RAM (for a total of 1GB) and now have about 1.48 FPS on one camera and 1.9 FPS on the other.

I have manipulated every configuration setting that seems relevant, including setting the max FPS for the monitor up to 10 (from 0). I've read some posts here that suggest I should be able to expect at least 6 FPS.

Am I missing something? Do I need a different hardware config? Or is this as good as ZoneMinder gets?

Andrew

jameswilson · Post by **jameswilson** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 12:36 am

not sure mate but i think i have read on here about others having poor performance eith those cameras. Usually a low fps is a camera or capture problem not a zm problem. If you connect direct into the cameras with a web page what fps you getting.

What fps are you after, i rarely set any of mine above 2

James

evermorian · Post by **evermorian** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 6:32 pm

jameswilson wrote:If you connect direct into the cameras with a web page what fps you getting.

It is difficult to tell what the actual frame rate is when connected directy to the cameras' web interface. It has settings for 1, 5, 7, 15, 20, and "Auto" FPS. However, I don't see much difference among the settings when viewing the video in the web interface. It doesn't look like it is much faster than what I see with the ZoneMinder monitor.

I played with the compression and video size settings on the cameras and managed to get the FPS in ZoneMinder up to about 2.4 to 2.9 FPS. So, you are probably correct about the cameras being the limiting factor.

jameswilson wrote:What fps are you after, i rarely set any of mine above 2

I guess I don't really have a good idea of what a reasonable expectation would be or what is necessary.

Andrew

jameswilson · Post by **jameswilson** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 7:38 pm

depends what you need it for
High fps is usually only needed for high speed moving targets
eg vpn and cards doing about 60mph needs as much as you can get but about 15 fps seems minumum. Like i said i usually go for 2 the only time i go higher is when im trying to break zm by overloading it

James

evermorian · Post by **evermorian** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 8:25 pm

I'm mainly trying to get images of anyone who would be coming into my office and carrying things out (or engaging in other mischief) to hand over to the police. So, ~2 FPS may be adequate.

Andrew

Post by **cordel** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:02 pm

I remember seeing somewhere that USB poorly managed it's bandwidth, and that you could improve webcam performance by connecting them to an external usb hub. I don't use webcams so I couldn't say how much truth there is to that but might want to give it a try.
Regards,
Cordel

jameswilson · Post by **jameswilson** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:05 pm

shows the limited amount i know then i assumed they were net cams

lol
James

Post by **cordel** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 11:25 pm

Actually James your right they are. I don't know where I got Webcams from

jameswilson · Post by **jameswilson** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 11:28 pm

excellent 1 to me 88 million 999 thousand to you lol

James

jfm · Post by **jfm** » Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:05 am

Have you tried to add more light to the environment? The camera shutterspeed is very dependent of how much light there is in the room.

What does your "load" indicator in ZM say?