The Realities of IP Video Surveillance By Jason Schmitt, Product Manager, Steelbox Networks
Digital video has changed the way most people interact with this technology in their daily lives; but it is having the most profound affect on video surveillance applications. Digital video is not an especially new technology in surveillance, however, the convergence of digital video surveillance solutions with conventional IT networking technologies is. In fact, it's having a transformative affect on how surveillance systems are designed and implemented.
For resellers and systems integrators, this transition to using Internet protocol (IP) networks for video surveillance is opening up a world of new services and solution opportunities in a market long-dominated by relatively "ancient" analog video technologies. Suddenly, an IT networking savvy VAR can have an impact in video surveillance.
As new players begin to enter the IP video surveillance market, there are some practical realities that they must understand to put their customers on the road to success. We will look at these realities through five myths of IP video surveillance that have affected the speed of its adoption.
1. Digital Video Qualityis Inferior to Analog
The most common myth perpetuated by analog video vendors and solution providers today is that digital video quality is not as good as with analog systems. This was true as recently as five years ago, but today digital video cameras from all mainstream camera vendors produce image resolution and frame rates as good as, or better than possible, with analog cameras. The fact is that 4CIF image quality from these cameras is indistinguishable from analog. Megapixel cameras offering resolutions from 1 to 5 megapixels are currently available at price points equivalent to traditional digital cameras, enabling high-definition quality surveillance video that far exceeds what is capable with analog.
2. Digital Video is More Expensive
A 2007 study conducted by Axis Communications dispelled the myth that digital video systems cost more than analog. The study showed that an existing system as small as 32 cameras is cheaper in the long run when converted from an analog to a digital system. Regarding greenfield projects (a project that lacks any constraints imposed by prior work), an all-digital IP video surveillance system has a lower total cost of ownership and even lower installation costs from the installation of the very first cameras. Digital systems utilizing IP networks can share network resources and expertise already in place, while analog systems require expensive, labor-intensive cabling and specialized equipment. Analog systems are also prohibitively expensive to grow after installation because of the hard wiring and limited capacity specialized hardware that is used.
3. Your Current Network is Adequate
The rise in digital video surveillance camera deployment has had a huge impact on IP networks. These networks, including routers and switches designed to support corporate data usage, were not built for the transmission of very large volumes of video. In addition, storage devices designed for data do not have the speed or reliability to handle high throughput video streams. Dedicated video networks and specialized networking and storage equipment is typically required to accommodate a large surveillance network. Your current network technology is not necessarily inadequate; the network itself was just not designed with video in mind.
4. Analytics Save You Money
Perhaps the biggest myth in video surveillance is that video analytics software will save you money on security equipment and labor. Analytics software attempts to analyze video feeds for anomalies such as motion detection, objects moving in certain directions or perimeter crossings to alert operators or to control when and how video is stored. The truth behind these systems is that they have been tremendously over-hyped in the surveillance market and are simply not dependable enough in real-world conditions to displace human operators, or to limit the amount of video that must be stored.
5. Video Surveillance Systems are "Open"
Finally, the last myth of consequence is when surveillance video vendors tout their systems as "open" in the sense that they will work with cameras, disk arrays, software and other solutions from other vendors. In reality, most surveillance solutions are developed in proprietary ways and are often "cobbled" together from several disparate systems collected through acquisition. The result is that customers are often locked into a particular vendor and experience very high switching cost because of the proprietary nature of most video surveillance products.
Jason Schmitt is product manager at Steelbox Networks, a provider of scalable surveillance systems, based in Atlanta. Schmitt has extensive experience in product management, product development and technical consulting.
