Gold plating means to use advanced technology that does not provide a commensurable business benefit. In other words, to use new technology because it's new and 'better', not because it offers clear financial benefits.

Let's say I propose 3 megapixel cameras instead of analog ones. That doubles the price of the camera and potentially triples or quadruples the cost of storage. The total cost of the proposal may increase 50% or more.

Increasing costs to improve video quality without generating a business benefit is by definition gold plating.

Perhaps you believe you are generating a business benefit which is fine but please explain so I can understand better.

[quote:c288f87929="jhonovich"]

Agreed. But as you said, your system was $4,000 more without installation. You could buy tools, connectors, extra cabling and labor for any potential ground loops for a fraction of $4,000. Also, if you had a CCTV tech on site, he would have the tools readily and could have done this job in a day, less than a day?

Please don't get me wrong. I agree with you that there are benefits. I am just not sure if they outweigh the costs for many applications.

[quote:9aa7370cfe="jhonovich"]

Gold plating means to use advanced technology that does not provide a commensurable business benefit. In other words, to use new technology because it's new and 'better', not because it offers clear financial benefits.

Let's say I propose 3 megapixel cameras instead of analog ones. That doubles the price of the camera and potentially triples or quadruples the cost of storage. The total cost of the proposal may increase 50% or more.

Increasing costs to improve video quality without generating a business benefit is by definition gold plating.

Perhaps you believe you are generating a business benefit which is fine but please explain so I can understand better.

So you aren't making any adjustments in the camera then.

We are not comparing Ford to Ferrari. Both cars will get you from point A to point B. One camera system will identify the person who shoot your employee in the head and one system will not.

I do alot of low light and pitch dark installs, yet to see an IP camera (that wont cost alot more) that matches up with a CCTV camera in those applications. And yes we are typically able to identify the suspects face in most of the situations.

Yes, been able to do that for years now with DVR systems.
In fact you can do that with a $200 DVR. :)

That depends on the camera you use and how it is setup. Once done properly you should be able to see a whole lot of something. Beyond 50-75 feet it can get pretty bad though, but then again, a color IP camera wont see anything at night either. :D

[quote:d89c2c7a1d="rory"]

Yes, been able to do that for years now with DVR systems.
In fact you can do that with a $200 DVR. :)

the whole replacing cameras point is mute, as a camera cannot see behind an object or around a wall. It really depends on the app.

Can you logon to the IP camera without the built in Web server?

Forget about price we are talking image quality.

Question, how many CCTV jobs, non IP camera jobs, have you done before? Its a relative question as you are suggesting that you cannot get a quality image from a Non IP camera, which is incorrect and anyone that has installed high quality CCTV Professional systems, would know that.

[quote:7ebfa02e43="rory"]

Question, how many CCTV jobs, non IP camera jobs, have you done before? Its a relative question as you are suggesting that you cannot get a quality image from a Non IP camera, which is incorrect and anyone that has installed high quality CCTV Professional systems, would know that.

thewireguys recently made 2 points:

- compare costs for standard definition IP cameras with analog
- price savings for replacing 12 analog cameras with (1) 3 MP camera

For cost comparison to Axis, take the Axis 210 which is a mid-line IP camera. Compare it to any Pelco, Panasonic with similar characteristics. Using online prices from Google, the Axis 210 costs about $400 - $450 while the Pelco/Panasonic etc costs $250 - $300. That's not a trivial difference especially when you have a lot of cameras.

For price savings of 3 MP cameras: While a 3 MP camera offers 12x the resolution of an analog camera, that does not ensure that 3 MP camera will replace 12 analog cameras. Rory already mentioned issues such as walls. In general, you will have lots of practical issues where you never will be replacing lots of cameras. Often, you won't replace any. This is often because regardless of the resolution, you need certain angles of incident on the view. For instance, you often use 2 cameras in a hallway, looking in each direction. Even with a 16 megapixel camera, you would not eliminate one of the cameras. Two cameras are needed because the security objective is to see the front of the person's head. With only 1 camera, you will never see the face of people going in one of the directions.

I do think there are cases where megapixel cameras reduce camera count but I think those cases will not be common due to other design issues like I have just cited.

Actually the SSC-DC374 would be approx $280 less (going by first found results on google for both cameras). Also, I would really like to, and this is sincere, see an IP Camera that will work inside a bar or nightclub's extremely low lighting, and pitch dark apps covering large areas, that doesn't cost a fortune, but really, any examples would be nice - IP Camera manufacturers dont seem to want to post any image samples of that type of app. I mean its nice if you have apps that have lots of lighting all the time, or even adequate lighting .. but in my case, the majority of my apps have involved extremely low light or pitch dark. I mean granted the color is off in the day and quality is not amazing, but even a $150 OEM IR Camera can many times light up a back yard. Now if we can just get the MP quality for not too much more. ;)

That depends on the camera you use and how it is setup. Once done properly you should be able to see a whole lot of something. Beyond 50-75 feet it can get pretty bad though, but then again, a color IP camera wont see anything at night either. :D[/quote]
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Rory can you please posted any pix which in your opinion is really good
Thanks

I suggest a quick search of the forum.
Meanwhile, can you post any pix of an IP camera at night, in a dark club or bar, and in a large back yard in pitch dark (not an ounce of light in the area)?

[quote:6c1bf9edb7="rory"]

I suggest a quick search of the forum.
Meanwhile, can you post any pix of an IP camera at night, in a dark club or bar, and in a large back yard in pitch dark (not an ounce of light in the area)?

This is a simple means for me to quantify how much performance per dollar spent to get it.

For instance you have 2 cameras with identical specifications and performance, however one is less expensive. The less expensive unit has the greater "bang:buck". This is all things being equal, same warantee same everything but price.




I do this weekly, however no need to set IPs in the cameras. Just install the DVR and give me a call I can do the rest.





Agreed $4k more must have beet a pretty small system, most of mine comparing to Axis (as I get the request all the time) it's much more. Then again my systems are designed to provide a bunch of coverage, no 4-6 cam jobs. My customers will capture intrusion from 360*, there are big benefits to having a bunch of inexpensive "worker" cameras.

Better resolution is better but the system designer has control of when/where they can be of use. For most of my customers I have a camera within about 48" of every entrace/exit. When you are 48" from the camera even CIF resolution will provide facial recognition.

Yes I do it all the time, and I remotely support systems bought elsewhere, this has nothing to do with analog vs. IP.

Elimiating the coax isn't so much an up front cost savings as it is preventing you from rewiring in the future. IP will mature and you will be able to get decent performance for decent money in the future having the Cat5 in place makes it a no brainer to upgrade.





You log into 1 DVR and whatever you are allowed access to you can adjust from there. Same for cameras on RS485 network.

Email on motion??? This is a basic feature all decent DVRs can do this.

How do you do object of X size traveling from this area to this area emails Y? My analogs can!

You add them, being analog doesn't mean being not upgradable.





This is the BIGGEST factor, any goof can hang a camera. It takes some knowledge to design the system to be maximized in every way. Using 4 cameras is probably not the ticket, putting a $1k multimegapixel camera 48" from the target is a waste, spending $600 for a fake day/night VGA camera also waste.




Agree with you 100% in concept but leave resolution out of it, sometimes you can swap multiple analogs for single megapixel and your bang:buck is improved. Resolution is CRITICALLY important, this why comparing analog to IP is in contrast. If megapixel cameras were $350 we wouldn't be having this discussion (yes I know 1 exists, it's not all that either).

Example I do some work for a nationwide wholesale club in this region. I continually tell them to go megapixel at the main entrance and exists and they just won't due to the $. The reality is the bang to buck on those locations make it totally worthwhile. I have no problems admitting where IP is the better choice, as my goal is the best most cost effective system.




Thats because they often do not, (right now in 2008) someday for sure they will.




No corrosion, but he is talking about what I call "fluff". Extras that cost more that really aren't needed.



I don't agree with any of that.

I also provide streams to websites from my analog system and multiple access to a PTZ, in both cases a single users actually controls the PTZ functionality.



THAT IS GOOD BANG:BUCK!

Putting a megapixel where a $100 bullet would suffice is not.



With VGA IP cameras you are comparing a Cobra SVT to a Ferrari, the performace is similar but one is sustantially more expensive. Although I have never had a client employee murdered on video (thank god!) I have captured my share using facial identification from analog cameras (20-30 convictions using my analog captured video evidence). If I designed the system then only a disguise/mask would help to prevent facical ID, I have you from every angle not just a couple.



Although they do not exist as of some old school analog tricks work, still they are substaintially more and perform worse in most cases. This is actually an Axis product too!



No thats the whole point it's called access control. When you fire the manager you only need to change 1 login in 1 place, not a login on each camera! Come on nobody wants to do that, in my systems IP/analog makes no difference.

How do you install covert cameras to catch the manager stealing?

[quote:c7f4686ae9="thewireguys"]

Forget about price we are talking image quality.

There are tons to choose from, but for starters a sub $100 BW bullet camera typically does the trick and has for years now in night clubs and bars. As for Day Night IR Cameras, take your pick. I suggest a visit to the Security Camera forum for further info on that:
http://www.cctvforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=6122

Not all cameras are made alike.
The location of the camera, how it is setup, focused, Iris adjusted, and much more, effects the end result of the image. That said ..

Typically they range as follows:

Color IR Camera - basic IR out to 50' approx - $100+-
Color IR Camera - IR out to 100-150' approx - $150+-
Day Night IR Camera - IR out to 50' approx - $200+-
Day Night IR Camera - IR out to 100-150' approx - $300+-

Those are the OEM cameras, on the budget side of it.
Plug them into a cheap 13" Color TV and its great quality.
They arent designed to be plugged into LCDs as they are composite outputs.

Look what we can do with $60 low res (380TVL) cameras and a $100 DVR card (+$170PC)
http://bahamassecurity.com/video/day_quad.Avi
http://bahamassecurity.com/video/night_quad.Avi

I dont have the high res videos/images as they are private and only for the clients eyes; the above are/were my own cameras. I tend not to save the clients on my PC nor any evidence I have gathered for legal reasons.

But we are getting ahead of ourselves here, I would still like to find the MP camera that can cover the areas I need, without spending thousands of $$, and I am being real. We all know, anyone that has at the least used or seen a MegaPixel Still camera, that the quality is much better, nobody is doubting that.

However I was responding to the previous posts, at 20-30' with a non IP camera I can most certainly grab a face with an optimal image from a CCTV camera given it is focused properly and not covered in dirt or glare, even from the images shown in the video above, and blow it up and enhance for the cops if needed, and have done many times in the past. In fact I identified a vehicle over 75' at night on a low res BW camera only last year for a murder case - granted that was a worst case scenario, somewhat.

Also realize that with Digital cameras using Analog transmission (as they ARE digital cameras) they have composite outputs - so when you plug that camera into a high res CCTV monitor that will be the optimum image quality - if one has never seen the camera on that type of monitor then they cannot talk about the quality of said camera as it differs greatly from when it goes into a PC or an LCD (any VGA mon) or even from a TV. Yes you still have the image size to deal with, it is NOT megapixel, thats a given.

Wide shot cameras will make it difficult to capture the faces but with narrower zooms (eg. 8mm) even 20-30' from the start of the FOV you can most certainly without a problem, at least with 811x508 pixel cameras.

back to the night club, bar, and pitch dark cameras though .. and megapixel .. we know we can do it with non IP cameras, been doing it for years .. but yes we want a higher quality MP image and hence the IP camera .. now all we need to do is find one that can perform in low light to suit our application. :)

Note: I recently released a new article on top 5 problems of IP Cameras: http://ipvideomarket.info/review/show/156. This might be interesting for further discussion.

that's sounds goood!!

I am one of the victom of bad anoalog installtions!!!

they where not bad at the time of fresh installtions ....but as time passes....problems with co-axial loose connections/video loss ...any problem arrives...have to send technitian there ...and all........

better with IP cams...rj45 connectors!! maintainance free ...

Thaks to IP cams!!

IP is better choice if you have small requirement!!!!.................and second thing is scallablity of such systems....................you can add as many as in the network..no need to depend on channels of the DVR!!

Kalpesh Nikumbh

India

"problems with co-axial loose connections/video loss"

I think you had an incompetent installer. Such problems are easy to avoid and are therefore usually quite rare.

On the other hand, many IP cameras have issues with rebooting or disconnecting. In practice, I have found this far more frequently than coaxial cable problems.

No dear!!!
It's not site specific... & not just my own problem.........

it's overall problem !!!

I hate BNC connectors....

rather like working with other products in Access , Fire .etc...

Just because you hate BNC connectors does not mean they are unreliable.

BNC is one of the point...

other lots of features make them overall choice!!!

IPs are recent one!!! certaiinly those analog platforms can be migrated on IP..
even DVRs are migrasted on IE...

you still want to go with multiplexers with TLVCRs???

Kalpesh Nikumbh
India

You do realize that IP cameras run into limitations on the NVR side when it comes to scaling? There are limits to processing power and bandwith. And at the same time you can design Analog systems to scale fairly well with the network.

what sounds good in case you have enogh back bone??

I am slitly tilt towards corporate customers rather consumer section!!

Regards,

Kalpesh Nikumbh

India

I'm not quite sure what you mean with the question.

What are you people smoking? Analog and digital. How are you going to tell me that an Axis cameras is digital and that a standard ccd camera is analog. WOW. Really? Open an Axis camera and please tell me what you see? I bet my ass you see a standard CCD from sony, like the sony ssllx or maybe a sony HQ1 ( analog ) camera just like any other camera in the world. What makes the Axis camera digital? That fact that you are converting it at the camera and not the DVR? People talk about things without any knowledge or sense. Its amazing. When a so called " analog " camera goes into the dvr it also becomes digital and is streamed digital. Same as an IP camera. Whats the diffrence? Where its being done? As far as the AXIS being a better picture quality. Please. If you believe that i have some ocean front property for you in Vegas i would like you to buy. Hello, Mcfly, its the same ccd as that found in Pelco, Samsung, Panasonic and even Cop cameras. The picture is the same. You tell me. If you compress all your cameras at the dvr and have one video stream for all 16 cameras is this not better than having 16 diffrent streams from 16 diffrent IP cameras? Of course you will say no. Your recoding platform is also on a PC based system with 4 gigs of windows OS to help you run a DVR program thats ment to run as an add on to an OS unlike an RTOS stand alone with full processing and dedicated OS for the DVR only. But of course the PC is better right?

An if you compare a megapixel camera to standard HQ1 540 lines of course the megapixel camera is going to look better. BUT, try sending 16 cameras at even 1 megapixel over a network at 30fps and see what happens. I know what your answer will be. Just drop the frame rate and res on the cameras right? Well then whats the point of having megapixel if you cant transmit at megapixel and store at megapixel? Try storing a megapixel picture at full frames in an NVR and let me know how many terrabytes you will need for couple of days of recording. I give IP cameras credit for one thing and one thing only. They have been able to sucker everyone with there terminology and marketing. Everyone says they have digital cameras as opposed to analog and the truth is they believe it. For this i give them credit. But i would really study things prior to speaking about them and look at things from a practical point of view and not a closed one.

We have one more expert who join CCTV Forum
Great
let the show begin
Rory vs Telespy
just joking
:)

hmm dont u compare number of pixels on CCD ?

With NVRs it is very easy to add a more powerful processor, more memory, and/or more harddrives.

What happens if you have a 16 channel DVR that is full and you want to add one more camera? This is something that is very easy and much cheaper with a NVR.

Everybody talks about bandwith issues but if you design your network properly and use managed switches you will not have issues.

You just keep installing analog cameras I will take all of the IP camera installs.

to answer some of your questions:
hmm dont u compare number of pixels on CCD ?

yes but what are you comparing a sony ccd with a megapixel ccd?

if you take standard Ip camera ( non megapixel ) they have the same ccd as an analog camera. Ask your buddy Rory. He is very honest.
[/b]

With NVRs it is very easy to add a more powerful processor, more memory, and/or more harddrives.

You are correct. But adding a 16ch DVR will run you the same in most cases to adding 4 more IP cameras.

What happens if you have a 16 channel DVR that is full and you want to add one more camera? This is something that is very easy and much cheaper with a NVR.

The money you spent on the IP cameras would be enough to cover an extra DVR for more cameras.


Everybody talks about bandwith issues but if you design your network properly and use managed switches you will not have issues.

See thats the key. Design your network. Why should you have to spend all that extra money on your network when a DVR can handle the same capability with this need. You would rather revamp and add to exsisting network to accomplish what really? Seriously think about it. Im not arguing. I would like to see the reasoning

hold it

u sad "Open an Axis camera and please tell me what you see? I bet my ass you see a standard CCD from sony"

How u can compare reg cam with at the most 420K pix
with megapixel CCD or Cmos ?

Why spend the money for analog cctv cable when you can only use it for analog cameras. Me and my customers would rather put that money into a better network that will be more useful.

[quote:cf66d8bd32="ak357"]

hold it

u sad "Open an Axis camera and please tell me what you see? I bet my ass you see a standard CCD from sony"

How u can compare reg cam with at the most 420K pix
with megapixel CCD or Cmos ?

[quote:202c8ae4b5="thewireguys"][quote:202c8ae4b5="ak357"]

hold it

u sad "Open an Axis camera and please tell me what you see? I bet my ass you see a standard CCD from sony"

How u can compare reg cam with at the most 420K pix
with megapixel CCD or Cmos ?

I like the cheap analog systems, but i hate BNC too!

I am from the Netherlands,..we smoke burned ccd!

[quote:202e1e75be="thewireguys"]

You just keep installing analog cameras I will take all of the IP camera installs.

[quote:243964fd3d="thewireguys"]

Why spend the money for analog cctv cable when you can only use it for analog cameras. Me and my customers would rather put that money into a better network that will be more useful.

[quote:a9f6e091bb="thewireguys"]

With NVRs it is very easy to add a more powerful processor, more memory, and/or more harddrives.

What happens if you have a 16 channel DVR that is full and you want to add one more camera? This is something that is very easy and much cheaper with a NVR.

Everybody talks about bandwith issues but if you design your network properly and use managed switches you will not have issues.

[quote:0dc1bcdeda="securitysys"][quote:0dc1bcdeda="thewireguys"]

You just keep installing analog cameras I will take all of the IP camera installs.

Doesn't it all come down to a "money" shot for the particular business? i have only installed 3 DVR systems at this point, 12 camera being the largest, for some small stores... and yes i agree that the quality can/should be better. But for my last install there are only 2 ways in/out.. barring going through a brick wall.. so i put 2 high quality cameras at the doors.. and regular vari-focal domes inside along with IR bullet cameras..

What i explained to client was that since it's a bar and entrance is very well lit we need to put high quality cam there and zoom in on the door so we can get a clear face shot. The rest of the time as long as we can follow the person around after the fact we are fine.. we only need ONE good shot of a face the rest can be kinda "fuzzy" and the same for the back door(to make sure food/liquor doesn't walk out). Also camera by register and watching bartenders is important. I'm still working on getting POS (point of sale computer/register) outputted to the screen but i will have it done shortly.

For a lot of small business you have to evaluate and pitch the correct solution. For most small business a nice DVR is more then enough.. and the fact that they can watch from home AMAZES 95% of the people i talk to.

I would seriously say that if i pitched a very expensive system to a small business they would tell me to leave. When i could sell "more reasonable" systems and have many small business actually consider it. Times are hard and alot of businesses are pinching pennies.


I'd love to have you sell DVR/NVR systems for me ANYTIME!! the fact that you got a person to pay you $4k more then closest bid means you did a great job at selling him what he "needs" and you didn't even have to install it!! I'm sure the system looks great to!

Interesting argument. I've been building a network since it was running on a coax cable. No RJ45, No Hub, No Switches, No Router, and so on. This argument between analog and ip camera really interesting. IMO, Analog could be more reliable and secure, but in lack of quality compared to IP, the same to the old networking system running on coax. On the other hand, IP or network based system are can also be very reliable, secure, and way better quality, with one big BUT. That BUT is, everything will be tied up to a switch or a hub (I don't think anyone uses HUB anymore these days). Therefore, IP or network based system all very dependent on the switch (under circumstances where power outage is taken out from the variable), while Analog is tied up directly to the DVR. So, my suggestion, if you go with IP / Network based, do invest more money on the switch and secure it (of course secure the camera also). If you decide on the Analog, do install more cameras for better coverage.

Also, if some manufacturer will decide to make NVR with built-in 4 to 8 to 16 to 32 1Gigabit port. That will eliminate the bottleneck on the switch, so there won't be any network overload for High Megapixels IP Camera. The storage factor won't be an issue since Hard Drive capacity are getting bigger and cheaper, and most NVR are expandable via NAS these days.

The problem isn't just a matter of securing the switch. The cameras themselves pose a security risk. Axis had a rather nice cross-site scripting issue that allowed root control of the camera itself. And given that at the same time it was reported that Axis was sending usernames and passwords as plain text.

The major issue on the IP side that people don't want to talk about is that there are a lot more design issues in play. Cameras need to not be exposed to users. And a large number of software designers encourage the opposite because it lets them say "We can handle 80 cameras" because they are too lazy to transcode. There is no damn reason to be handing off multiple mega pixel streams in a multiplexed set up users who can't display all of that at max resolution anyway.

I'm not saying IP isn't what we'll use in the future, or that IP is bad, but I am saying there are a lot of damn elephants in the room that people aren't talking about.

Thomas, when you say expose, do you mean letting users connect directly to the cameras rather than through the NVR/IP Video surveillance software?

[quote:b410a3a9ae="jhonovich"]

Thomas, when you say expose, do you mean letting users connect directly to the cameras rather than through the NVR/IP Video surveillance software?

Welcome back Thomas! You and I are on the exact same page. :D

[quote:51f7f1df37="Thomas"][quote:51f7f1df37="jhonovich"]

Thomas, when you say expose, do you mean letting users connect directly to the cameras rather than through the NVR/IP Video surveillance software?

With regards to connecting directly to cameras, I find it especially strange that manufacturers talk this up as if it is a virtue. I agree that letting users connect directly exposing all sorts of unnecessary problems. Such access only makes sense when you have 1 or 2 cameras total and it is for personal/small business use.

[quote:95067e402f="thewireguys"][quote:95067e402f="Thomas"][quote:95067e402f="jhonovich"]

Thomas, when you say expose, do you mean letting users connect directly to the cameras rather than through the NVR/IP Video surveillance software?

Don't forget an IP camera on the outside of a building is basically just like having a network jack on the outside of your building. How often do you see that?

Also if PoE is present it wouldn't be too hard to trade the cam for a WAP and plug the cam into that. Now you can be hacked internally from miles away. (google Mikrotik).

Not if you setup your security properly on your switch. Per-port MAC filtering, 802.1x, vlans.

Also Zyxel has a really cool feature called Intrusion Lock on there switches for security. Once you plug in all off your devices you can turn on a setting that if a device gets unplugged the switch disables the port. There is no way of hooking anything up to that network wire until you log into the switch thought the Local console port on the switch. Making your install very secure.

[quote

Also Zyxel has a really cool feature called Intrusion Lock on there switches for security. Once you plug in all off your devices you can turn on a setting that if a device gets unplugged the switch disables the port. There is no way of hooking anything up to that network wire until you log into the switch thought the Local console port on the switch. Making your install very secure.[/quote]

Thx for sharing about Zyxel it is very cool
will be offering to my customers

[quote:b8832036dd="thewireguys"]

Not if you setup your security properly on your switch. Per-port MAC filtering, 802.1x, vlans.

Also Zyxel has a really cool feature called Intrusion Lock on there switches for security. Once you plug in all off your devices you can turn on a setting that if a device gets unplugged the switch disables the port. There is no way of hooking anything up to that network wire until you log into the switch thought the Local console port on the switch. Making your install very secure.

[quote:40345ffcfa="Thomas"][quote:40345ffcfa="thewireguys"]

Not if you setup your security properly on your switch. Per-port MAC filtering, 802.1x, vlans.

Also Zyxel has a really cool feature called Intrusion Lock on there switches for security. Once you plug in all off your devices you can turn on a setting that if a device gets unplugged the switch disables the port. There is no way of hooking anything up to that network wire until you log into the switch thought the Local console port on the switch. Making your install very secure.

[quote:3b4afb1ee6="thewireguys"][quote:3b4afb1ee6="Thomas"][quote:3b4afb1ee6="thewireguys"]

Not if you setup your security properly on your switch. Per-port MAC filtering, 802.1x, vlans.

Also Zyxel has a really cool feature called Intrusion Lock on there switches for security. Once you plug in all off your devices you can turn on a setting that if a device gets unplugged the switch disables the port. There is no way of hooking anything up to that network wire until you log into the switch thought the Local console port on the switch. Making your install very secure.