megapixel man

Enterprise software solution?

 

Well, how about Intellevision! It has over 52 installed bases right now mainly in military and government locations with special requirements... pertinent to resolution requirements and more importantly video analytics using FLIR cameras...

 

This is the software that will be released on December to general public for use at no cost... with limitations up to 1028 cameras capable, native H.264 compression at the server side and more...

Dependent on application and besides Intellevision, the Genetec looks good and as well as Eyesoft, Exacq and even Milestone.. Some of the priopetary once are ok - Avigilon looks great and so does D-Link and others...

 

My one beef with all these various solutions is the cost... and of course that is a different thread all together...

Can you please explain what you mean "native H.264 compression at the server side"? this does not make any sense to me.

What cameras does this software curently support?

The "HDSM" technology from Avigilon is the first I've heard with these capabilities. Ingenious for saving bandwith and CPU power... Probably helps out tremendously for remote internet clients.

Anyone know of other companies with similar technology? The stuff I'm experienced with only allows for throttleing of the entire systems remote connection quality and network bandwidth. This makes playing with megapixels over the internet no fun.

Bingo, someone gets it!

No, i dont know of any others that use this type of technology.

Ah, but then the question of the lens really comes into play. Remember, where your average CCTV lens has a maximum aperture anywhere from f/1.2 to f/1.8, f/2 is considered VERY fast for most EF-mount lenses, especially with varifocals (talking in the upper-mid range, four-digit-pricetag range), and f/2.8 to f/4 is far more common. The Sigma 300-600mm beast seen in the "Megapixel images" thread is f/5.6 *at best*, and with the 2x converter on the rig shown there, it won't open beyond f/11.

 

In a nutshell, unless you're spending as much on the lens as you are the camera, most of the lenses you're putting on the Avigilon are at least two stops slower - or one-quarter the light transmission - than typical "low-end" megapixel C/CS-mount lenses. At f/11, that's a full SIX stops slower than f/2... or 1/64 the amount of light.

 

Very good observation... What is the key on this is how you describe - as unless someone is spending as much on the lens as for the camera, the outcome will never be optimized.

 

Well.. not necessarily. A Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 can be had for <$200 *new*. But the point is, lens aperture DOES come into play a lot more than it does with C/CS-mount lenses, simply because there IS a much wider range available. I don't think I've seen a C/CS lens under 70mm that wasn't AT LEAST f/1.8 or faster, making it a factor that doesn't often need as much attention.

 

Very few manufacturers actually may even support this high end MP cameras... just makes no economical sense to produce them, since usage will be bare minimal... in some cases these lenses actually costs twice as much as the camera itself...

 

As far as EF-mount lenses for the Avigilon cameras... it's plenty economical, since there are 20 years' worth of Canon SLRs that use them. A number of third-party manufacturers actually have full lines of lenses with a number of different mounts available (for Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Konika/Minolta, etc.), which makes it even more economical for them.

 

However, with the larger sensor, you need substantially longer focal lengths to achieve the same FOV... and for the same aperture, that means a much larger lens structure overall, and a lot more glass. And with the higher resolution, that also means higher manufacturing tolerances than is needed for standard CCTV cameras. All that equates to more expensive lenses... but as with everything, you get what you pay for.

 

Keep in mind too, that a lot of these Avigilon samples are using Canon L-series lenses, which are their high-end professional models that often cost 4-5 times as much as similar "consumer" lenses.

 

We have been toying around with very high end IP cameras from DALSA with extremely high res (higher than 16M) and lenses at the same level... Picture quality is out of this world and ability to zoom multiple time and almost no pixelization is the gravy... Not a technology for mainstream, but has its potential military and government uses.. They are already the main supplier for space exploration projects... They tried in movie industry (the last 007 (Quantum of Solace) movie was shot with their technology cameras), but decided to pull back due to limitations on how many of these cameras can they sell...

 

Might be part of the reason Avigilon went with the EF mount - there's a HUGE market out there already for the lenses, and several third-party manufacturers, which makes the lenses a lot more economical than they might be if they were proprietary to the cameras.

Even a Canon L Series 400mm (non IS) is no where near as much as the 16MP camera, dont know where people get their information from

Plenty of reasonably priced EF Mount lenses for the 11 and 16MP cams:

Sigma 20mm, f/1.8, 84 Degree Horizontal angle of view

Sigma 28mm, f/1.8, 64 Degree HAV

Canon 50mm, f/1.4 and f/1.8, 40 Degree HAV

Canon 85mm, f/1.8, 24 Degree HAV

All the above lenses between $200-800.

Of course there are Canon 50mm and 85mm F/1.2 lenses that cost a bit, but at around 1/5th or less the cost of the camera.

Now that 600mm Sigma with the doubler in the shot taken from the other thread may be an exception, but where on earth would you use a lens like that for an every day surveillance application

Ah, but then the question of the lens really comes into play.

 

I based my reply on the manufacturer specs:

 

0.1 lux minimum illumination

 

Lens f stops obviously effect ALL cameras but in this case I am highlighting that the manufacturers spec of 0.1 lux, regardless of what lens it has, is not good enough for a day night application in "most" cases. I really dont need to know what lenses are available for that camera either, as I would never buy a $15,000 camera.

 

If I did not know Rory, then I would have said "Great Job" in finding this flaw, but I do not expect anything less from him anyway - You are the best man.. and I mean it!

 

Interestingly enough that spec alone will kill any deal that may be cooking at the moment... How can someone pay this type of pricing (not including similar level of lens pricing or higher) and then have this type of lux level... Wow...

 

I will add one more:

 

- Lossless JPEG2000 compression

 

Are you kidding me?? Most of the known systems are spitting out H.264 compression and this camera at that price is pushing antiquated compression??

I did not have a chance to see who the manufacturer is or the product code... can anyone please provide this info if available?

LMAO, antiquated ???, do some research on the Avigilon adpotion of JPEG2000 with HDSM and then JPEG2000 Compression in general. Start with HDTV's H.264 and why, then HD Cinema's JPEG2000 and why. Then start thinking about why JPEG2000 for Surveillance with High Megapixel Cameras. Then research the impacts of High Megapixel Cameras with H.264 in a Surveillance application, then get back to me and well talk some more.

Oh, come on! It's dirt cheap!

 

According to one dealer, MSRP on the 16MP-PRO-C is only $15,722.36

 

Features

∙ 16 megapixel progressive scan CCD sensor

∙ Unsurpassed image quality

∙ 3 images per second at full resolution and 10 images per second at 4872 x 480

∙ 65 dB true dynamic range

∙ 0.1 lux minimum illumination

∙ Lossless JPEG2000 compression

∙ 35 mm optical format

∙ Automatic exposure control and iris control

∙ Software focus control

∙ Compatible with a wide selection of Canon® EF mount lenses

∙ Power over Ethernet, 24 VAC or 12 VDC power input

∙ External I/O and RS-485 interface

 

JPEG2000 - think of the bitrate

27.1Mbits at default quality level, not so shocking eh!

Consider the advantages of JPEG2000 with HDSM, while the above is the Bit Rate from Camera to NVR the Bit rates from NVR to Client are far less than any other solution I know of.

JPEG2000 is a constant bit rate from Camera to NVR, while other compression codecs are variable based on the complexity of changes within the scene, so if you doing network loading calculations on a variable bit rate what figure do you use for the calc?

Oh, come on! It's dirt cheap!

 

According to one dealer, MSRP on the 16MP-PRO-C is only $15,722.36

 

Features

∙ 16 megapixel progressive scan CCD sensor

∙ Unsurpassed image quality

∙ 3 images per second at full resolution and 10 images per second at 4872 x 480

∙ 65 dB true dynamic range

∙ 0.1 lux minimum illumination

∙ Lossless JPEG2000 compression

∙ 35 mm optical format

∙ Automatic exposure control and iris control

∙ Software focus control

∙ Compatible with a wide selection of Canon® EF mount lenses

∙ Power over Ethernet, 24 VAC or 12 VDC power input

∙ External I/O and RS-485 interface

 

JPEG2000 - think of the bitrate

 

and yet it still cant see at night (0.1 lux is NOT good enough for most apps and yes I have seen their couple so called night shots which are loaded with outdoor lighting)

16MP PRO Monochrome.

∙ 16 megapixel progressive scan CCD sensor

∙ Unsurpassed image quality

∙ 3 images per second at full resolution and

10 images per second at 4872 x 480

∙ 65 dB true dynamic range

∙ 0.01 lux minimum illumination

∙ Lossless JPEG2000 compression

∙ 35 mm optical format

∙ Automatic exposure control and iris control

∙ Software focus control

∙ Compatible with a wide selection of Canon® EF mount

lenses

∙ Power over Ethernet, 24 VAC or 12 VDC power input

∙ External I/O and RS-485 interface

 

50

but you still wont be able digitally zoom into the recorded image like you can with the one 16MP.

 

you can digitally zoom into any recorded image.

Yes Rory, you can but the resolution will just not be there, you cant argue with physics.

haha, thats about what i expected but look at what you get! anyone nerdy enough to calculate how many analog cameras it would take to get the same picture?

40 odd+

but you still wont be able digitally zoom into the recorded image like you can with the one 16MP.

Then you have to factor in the installation and supporting infrastructure for all the analog cams required to cover the same area. The 16MP Cam is a case of horses for courses. Large open space area monitoring.

try that again!

[/img]

Dosnt look like i can post the native size from Photobucket

In the Avigilon client software I can zoom in and read every plate on those cars at the traffic lights. Also note, no motion blur on the moving cars.

Just for fun, since "thewireguys" posted a native res day shot from an Avigilon 16MP PRO Camera, heres a night time image from the same camera.

Anyone care to talk about costs of these software packages??

 

Someone calls a software Lamborghini and an expensive brand to compare top notch software product - I take it such statement quantifies price and not a quality, as Lamborghini is not a quality driven product - rather status quo if someone can afford it... Best of the best of anything comes in price and not reachable to 99% of public... which is fine only if that is the audience that these companies target.

 

The main question, how many people actually use it...

 

Lets do some basic analysis on costs lets say 4 cameras solution and then lets do the same with 128 cameras and see who is the leader of this pack and then lets look at how many customers actually use them.

 

I think this is an interesting challenge, don't you?

 

 

Anyone care to talk about costs of these software packages??

 

Someone calls a software Lamborghini and an expensive brand to compare top notch software product - I take it such statement quantifies price and not a quality, as Lamborghini is not a quality driven product - rather status quo if someone can afford it... Best of the best of anything comes in price and not reachable to 99% of public... which is fine only if that is the audience that these companies target.

 

The main question, how many people actually use it...

 

Lets do some basic analysis on costs lets say 4 cameras solution and then lets do the same with 128 cameras and see who is the leader of this pack and then lets look at how many customers actually use them.

 

I think this is an interesting challenge, don't you?

 

About software: it reminds me an apple iPhone software - its easy to use, easy to understand, made for human beings, really nice to work with. Actual software is expensive, compared to something like Luxriot.

 

Avigilon makes cameras, software, all accessories themselves - thats HUGE benefit. You get a-z from one company(like apple), so you know it will work 100%. They even sell Dell hardware, so you can get perfect kit, plug & play with guaranteed peace of mind.

 

The way to build system - they have their own online system builder which is far best I have ever seen. Just dream tool for building your set up - from lense calculation with model suggestions to NVR storage space tool etc.

 

Lenses. If you have seen their price list, they have tested dozens of lenses available on market and matched to their cameras. SO, you dont have to guess if this lense is any good with this camera. Also every lense has their comment about its performance and you know its real, not marketing bla bla bla from lense manufacturer.

 

I do agree with some of your statements. CMOS cameras are not very good at night, but they dont cost like their CCD pro range, about the same as Arecont. So, on CMOS camera quality I cannot say Avigilon is Lamborgini, but just best between other manufacturers.

 

I doubt you will be able to build 100 camera system, as for example single CMOS 5mpix DN dome camera on visually loseless video recording gives out 81 Mbps - you just dont have such a computer power in these days yet. Of course you can lower image quality, but then whats the point of buying Avigilon then?

Their CCD camera range - thats best stuff you can find and it is Lamborgini.

 

I can carry on for long, but you have to see all demo videos, check cameras, spec etc, to realise that this is nice stuff

Hi Robert,

In actual fact you can run 100's of Avigilon 1 thru to 16MP on a client machine, unlike many others that limit you to how many cams can be displayed at one time in the high megapixel range. Avigilon does this with HDSM (High Definition Stream Management), basic description of this is that if your viewing 36x 16mp cameras on one monitor, your not actually sending 36x 16MP streams to the client monitor, it basically adjusts to the resolution of the monitor, and only send the required image packets for viewing, and then there are quality layers that can be zoomed in on, and even then it only sends those packets required for viewing that part of the image. A bit like a straw into a cube if that make sense.

The bandwidths you mentioned are from camera to server, and it would be rare to run at "visually lossles" the Avigilon default is Level 6 compression so a 5MP cam at 12 images per second Level 6 will run from camera to server at 34.6Mbits, Level 9 is comparable to others and this would be 24.2Mbits at 12 images per second.

Most available NVR's on the market are suggested to run no more than 256Mbits. However thsi depend on the servers. For example a Blade with a 10GIG back plane can run ALOT more.

Anyone care to talk about costs of these software packages??

 

Someone calls a software Lamborghini and an expensive brand to compare top notch software product - I take it such statement quantifies price and not a quality, as Lamborghini is not a quality driven product - rather status quo if someone can afford it... Best of the best of anything comes in price and not reachable to 99% of public... which is fine only if that is the audience that these companies target.

 

The main question, how many people actually use it...

 

Lets do some basic analysis on costs lets say 4 cameras solution and then lets do the same with 128 cameras and see who is the leader of this pack and then lets look at how many customers actually use them.

 

I think this is an interesting challenge, don't you?

 

CCTV_Suppliers I am gonna assume you don't know anything about Avigilon. Their cameras are what make the system so great and they only work with there software. They are the only ip cameras that use 35 mm sensors and SLK lens. Their cameras are the best and most expensive.

 

I did hear there entry level stuff is reasonably priced

Yep, Avigilon will do all the features I mentioned in my post prior to this.

And your spot on Wireguy, excluding the PRO Camera range the rest of the product line up is very competitive. As no one else does cameras like the Avigilon PRO range what is there to compare it to anyway!

First up. What do most here define as "Enterprise Class"?

This will limit the field a bit.

For example I dont see sticking capture cards and a peice of software into a domestic or commercial grade PC as an Enterprise Class solution. Nor DVR's networked together.

To me an Enterprise Class solution is NVR Server Based (rated as an Enterprise class server by the manufacturer), End to End engineered from cameras to client software. Support for its own cameras, analog, and third party IP cameras, such as those as members of ONVIF, (MPEG4, MJPEG, H.264, JPEG2000 compression support), HLI integration to Access Control and Alarm Systems, IP Intercoms, BMS and Fire Systems, a .NET SDK or similar to provide this type of integration at a high level. Can handle 1 to 100;s to 1000's of cameras connected via Lan and Wan, Has mirror redundant and fail over recording capabilities. Can be run up in a VM enviro as well as dedicated server. Graphic mapping interfaces. etc etc..

And most of all, run day in day out without the need for high maintenance.

What are your thoughts?

I'm interested to see the spec sheet on the new Arecont 10MP camera, sensor size and type, also recommended lenses available for it and what software platforms will accept it.

 

Rory, the Avigilon 16MP is in a class of its own, actually all the Avigilon PRO range (2, 4.2, 11 and 16MP) cameras are, their 11 and 16MP Cameras have a full size 35mm CCD Sensor and all PRO range cameras come with a CCD Sensor and EF mount for lenses. Not cheap, but you get what you pay for. All the PRO range cameras are either full colour or monochrome.

 

Their Day / Night Cameras (720P, 1080p, 3MP and 5MP) are all CMOS sensors, both in full body or dome.

 

i thought i read they were coming out with Day Night CCD cameras, if not already? Yeah I heard they are not cheap, but then for somewhere like down here, no megapixel camera is cheap after 50% customs, so if someone can afford a $2000 camera, which will be retailing at $4000-$5000 here, then they should be able to afford the better Avigilon camera.

Ouch, thats a heavy hit, why so high? given that the Bahamas is not known for their electonics manufacturing and most product would have to be imported. Oh I guess I answered my own question - Government Revenue.

What is a "Surveillance editor"?

 

Someone who writes articles on Surveillance systems. "A magazine editor".

Good pic.

what about Avigilon? 16 MP?

And how are their Day Night CCD MP cameras?

I'm interested to see the spec sheet on the new Arecont 10MP camera, sensor size and type, also recommended lenses available for it and what software platforms will accept it.

Rory, the Avigilon 16MP is in a class of its own, actually all the Avigilon PRO range (2, 4.2, 11 and 16MP) cameras are, their 11 and 16MP Cameras have a full size 35mm CCD Sensor and all PRO range cameras come with a CCD Sensor and EF mount for lenses. Not cheap, but you get what you pay for. All the PRO range cameras are either full colour or monochrome.

Their Day / Night Cameras (720P, 1080p, 3MP and 5MP) are all CMOS sensors, both in full body or dome.

The use of IP or megapixel cameras is not always required for ANPR, however megapixel cameras do allow multiple lanes of ANPR with a single camera due to a higher "pixels on target" and offer a greater flexability with design and camera placement.

As stated in a previous post, shutter speed, lighting conditions and offset angles play an important part. A system that uses Visable light cut filters and correct IR illumination allows shutter speeds and lighting conditions to be controlled. Offset is controlled by the design and installation.

Another factor in the accuracy of ANPR is the systems database of characters and fonts. With an ever incresing amount of custom license plates available it is important to choose a system that has an extensive character and font set for "world wide" plate recognition, that is also updated regularly.

I have heard comment from a respected Surveillance editor that the technology proposed by the hdcctv alliance is akin to "putting wheels on a horse".

As per the promoters of hdcctv, products were due to be launched at ASIS 2009....

Did anyone see it, or is it still a myth

Its less pixels, so lower quality.

HOWEVER, when played back I think it is widescreen.

Only DVR I used that on before was the Iview.

It is considered 2 CIF.

 

QCIF = 160x120

CIF = 320x240

2 CIF = 640x240

4 CIF = 640x480

 

4 CIF also known as VGA.

VGA is 640x 480. 4CIF (NTSC 704x480), (PAL 704x576).

CIF (NTSC 352x240), (PAL 352x288)

2CIF (NTSC 704x240), (PAL 704x288)

4CIF (NTSC 704x480), (PAL 704x576)

Cheers

640x240 is HVGA (Half VGA), 8:3 DAR (Display Aspect Ratio).

I've been using twisted pair/ Ethernet converters for a while now that are significantly less than that price... and the same company just came out with a converter for coax using HPNA 3.1 that can go up to 100 Mbps bidirectional, point to point or multipoint, up to 4000 feet at lower rates... for $220 for the pair! It was designed for foil RG59, but it's operating frequency band is 12-44 MHz, and attenuation on copper core RG59 is lower than foil in that band.

 

Just ordered some to try.

 

Going to try DC power injectors on the same line to see if I can make a power link on the same cable, but most of my long run coax installs have remote power supplies, but if I could localize power, too, that would be a bonus.

 

Survtech, think through that one, you probably could run an IP camera that also has analog output up the same coax, keep your matrix (no latency for ptz, no forklift upgrade, etc.), and peel off megapixel video for recording. HPNA specs have QoS, too, so you should be able to control the stream pretty well.

 

I'll try feeding baseband video through my test pair and see how it works, what filtering might be needed, etc, and let everyone know.

Hardwired, we are both thinking along the same lines and I did mention this to him previously, however he has reservations of the Analog to IP converted images viewed on LCD screens, apect ratios etc... I am currently in discussions with a large casino and this is what are planning to do. Keep the Matrix for PTZ controls and live viewing on analog monitors, convert the Analog feeds to IP via encoders after the matrix for recording to NVR's, add megapixel cameras from 2MPx up to 16MPx resolutions.

Back to the thread topic. HDcctv in concept has potential for some applications, the proof of concept will be in the detail, and in this regard I have many many questions in my head.

"Bring it on" , less talk and more show.

Any forum members going to this show?

Will be on stand G22. drop in and say Giday.

Not really the same FOV, but thats the great thing about upgrading to megapixel. Greater FOV, better res and colour.

FUEL DEPOT

Panasonic SDIII Over 1 Bay

Avigilon 5 Megapixel Over 2 Bays

Exacq does not require you to pay the yearly software upgrade fee not a maintenance fee. It's up to you if you what or need the latest features.

 

My point exactly...

 

Why do we need to pay yearly maintenance fee to get the new features or updates? It should be a standard offer going forward and not an option to get if you are willing to pay for it.

 

Think about this - if Microsoft charges for each upgrade they do for any version of their operating system, will it be feasible for you to recommend Microsoft?

 

If I understand it correctly, then if you do not pay their yearly maintenance fee, then you can not get any changes that this software offers on their newer versions. Is this correct? If so, then their model is the same as most trying to do - open end cost center for any end user! Customer pays for the software, pays for each connection license and then pays additional yearly fee per license to be kept up to date on changes and fixes that such software undergoes... Does this make any sense to you?

 

I am not against making money, but I am totally against in any solution that does not clarify all the upfront and future costs and more importantly, keeps customers hostage on anything they do. What if there are problems with the software that they were not able to fix during the first year of use (not that this is not a common practice). Any software you design, it always have many hidden bugs that do not come up right away and it takes time to close such holes - and even then, while you fix these bugs, more start pupping up elsewhere - anything man made is bound to fail. If so, then why are customers to pay for such efforts after purchase of such products?

 

I am just voicing my opinion, which is a direct result what our customer complain all the time. Where is this end? Exacq is probably one of the best solutions out there and means nothing if the model of what they sell falls into an open end cost category. Most follow this model and most started seeing falling of sales figures and loosing customer who are not willing to pay for such costs anymore. Rather, Panasonic, CBC America, Bosch and few others started to sell ready made IP software package that does not cost more than initial sell and no yearly maintenance or upgrade fees. They include such costs for the period of three years and why can't other follow the same?

 

Here is an idea - Why not come up a fixed price per let say, 4-ch, 8-ch, 16-ch, etc. number of connection to such software and offer three years warranty for such product. Simple and easy solution. If customer wants 4-ch or 64-ch, then give them such package without hidden costs. If such customer is willing to pay for such solution, then they do not have to be bound by yearly additional costs.

This is what Avigilon does also, software comes in 1 to 24 channel package and includes server, workstation software and 1 viewing client lic. Software upgrades are free for the warranty period of 3 years. Also good that if you add analog cams via their encoder each 4 cams only takes 1 software channel (not one per cam, like other software) ie. you can add 90 odd analog cameras on a 24 channel software package, I know its not the cheapest software on the market but is enterprise class and very easy to set up and use. Support of third party IP cams, Sony, Axis, Panasonic, Arecont is due for release very soon, other IP Encders and cams will also be supported. Avigilon have joined ONVIF (Open Network Video Interface Forum) so more thirdy party IP camera support should be forth coming.