PTZ Pro v Con

[hornbill 0]

All,

 

First post here. I tried searching on Google for this topic but to no avail. I have a superior who wants me to install PTZs all over the place. No one will be monitoring these PTZs they will be used for post incident evidence. All of the PTZs he wants on shadow tours, currently our system does not use analytics. In the past with some PTZs on shadow tours "they were never at the right place at the right time." Also the maintenance cost and storage is not through the roof yet, but is we continue to add them they will be. He honestly does not have a grasp of what needs to be done with our system, but that is a whole other story.

 

My issue that brought me to this forum is this. I was told to install an IP PTZ on a patio/parking lot area. The patio will be covered by two 1.3 MP cameras and the parking lot area will be covered with 2 3MP cameras. The area is completely covered by the fixed cameras. The PTZ will be put on a shadow tour because our current IP system does not offer much in the area of analytics. I need a good rebuff (pro/con) argument not to install the PTZ or anymore PTZs because they will never be live monitored.

 

1) PTZ will never be live monitored

2)Waste of $ in maintenance and storage

3) Fixed HD cameras with digital zoom will be more effective

 

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Guest

[cglaeser 0]

No one will be monitoring these PTZs they will be used for post incident evidence. All of the PTZs he wants on shadow tours, currently our system does not use analytics.

 

IMO this is a big waste of money. PTZ has its uses, but this isn't one of them. The money can be spent far more productively using more cameras, more resolution, and possibly other types of sensors integrated into the system such as PIRs, perimeter IR beams, security alarms, etc, depending on what you are trying to record and the assets you are trying to protect.

 

Best,

Christopher