Synology Surveillance Station
- Thread starter Bullysrus
- Start date
Neilc28
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,531
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Which version are you using? I was using 7.1 and didn't get any issues although to be fair I hardly had any cause to view the recording. I'm not currently using Surveillance Station as I'm running DSM6 of which SS is incompatible at present.
Neilc28
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,531
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Get a proper TVI DVR with HD cameras, leave the NAS for what's it's designed for
Performed adequately for what I needed, full PTZ support with the camera's and motion detection as well as remote-feed to my phone and live-alerts.
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
It is design for surveillanceGet a proper TVI DVR with HD cameras, leave the NAS for what's it's designed for
Mine runs with primarily Avigilon higher than HD cameras with varying specifications relevant to the situation of each camera due to certain specific needs that we have. The security firm I had involved had a similar what I would call old-fashioned view, but when I when we tested it and hooked it up in their test lab by my design, and then they tried many of their Onvif cameras and realised how they can integrate it, they changed their view very quickly. Which was nice that we could work together on it as they performed a sterling job on the rest of the security enhancements.I don't actually use an App, I use the build in web interface and have no issues with that. Mine is running on a totally separate physical network...
Old fashioned view......? I don't follow, I am assuming your saying Synology app stuck on a NAS, using ip cameras only is the the future over dedicated hardware designed to do a specific job. Each to their own, personally I will stick to the old fashioned tried and tested way, it's cheaper too.
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
Nope that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying you got to use the most appropriate setup for the job. There is nothing wrong at all with an IP based setup. There are some seriously large implementation based on these. The cabling is often easier to integrate. The monitoring console are often much easier to have in the location required without additional unsightly boxes. Providing backup and offsite storage is also much easier. Handling and sharing the footage is often again much easier.Old fashioned view......? I don't follow, I am assuming your saying Synology app stuck on a NAS, using ip cameras only is the the future over dedicated hardware designed to do a specific job. Each to their own, personally I will stick to the old fashioned tried and tested way, it's cheaper too.
I don't get your comment on the App on a NAS. What do you think a DVR is? Don't you think an app is running on that to provide you with the user interface? Now try and update that application
I used my Syno disk station with one IP Camera and I'd say it was the nuts. The only issue being that the old DS211j was perfectly adequate for running one IP camera, seriously underpowered for running any more.
The apps (both web app and iOS/Android APP) worked fine too.
I'd say it was equal, if not better standard than the dedicated appliance installed at the studio where I worked. Not to mention, the mess with additionally cabling.
I can see some drawbacks - with using th eNAS as a 'shared appliance' in true commercial setups. Ideally the IP cameras and recording/storage device should be vlanned off and maybe even (effectively) air-gapped.
The apps (both web app and iOS/Android APP) worked fine too.
I'd say it was equal, if not better standard than the dedicated appliance installed at the studio where I worked. Not to mention, the mess with additionally cabling.
I can see some drawbacks - with using th eNAS as a 'shared appliance' in true commercial setups. Ideally the IP cameras and recording/storage device should be vlanned off and maybe even (effectively) air-gapped.
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
Fully agreed. One of the reasons why I got a DS713+ at the time, it can run many more cameras but also has two network ports. One is on a vlan on a switch where effectively the cameras record and store their data. The other is on a separate vlan, bridged via two firewalls to another network used to view the material. You can make it as complex or simple as you like, and control from anywhere. Usual networking security measures apply...
dejongj
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
As @Neilc28 highlighted cameras depends on what you want and need from it. Too many variants to provide a fixed answer. I know of organisations who use 180 degree 30 megapixel Avigilon cameras which run into the thousands. But mine varied between £60'ish for indoor PTZ camera, to about £700'ish for two of the outdoor camera's, the others in-between there. It purely depends on what your requirements are, the situation for the surveillance, etc....Similar to the storage and access requirements, those can vary the server and access station requirements wildly.
Therefore the only realistic response is; it depends on your requirements.
OP
Bullysrus
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,948
- Name
- Tony
- Edit My Images
- No
Get a proper TVI DVR with HD cameras, leave the NAS for what's it's designed for
It works fine, and I am using IP HD cameras, it's much better than the swan ever unit I used to have
It's the playback software I'm not happy with
OP
Bullysrus
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,948
- Name
- Tony
- Edit My Images
- No
At the end of the day I'm using this at home
I'm running 5 HD IP cameras constantly recording on my Synology without any issues or performance, and the remote view works well.
I'd recommend it any day for home or office, and it's fully backed up every night
As mentioned my only issue is playback, I just want better playback software