Give me a break!

[jisaac 0]

http://www.securityinfowatch.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=430&id=10557

 

Read this article and tell me if anyone can agree with the price point comparison. I mean at least make it some what believable.

[griffonsystems 0]

why when i read any article about ip from an ip mfg do i think im being talked to by obi wan; you do not need to question the price im telling you or the ease of install, or not needing to setup a separate network for megapixel camearas

 

i know there are applications for it but i guess im just happy delivering easy to use reliable dvr systems that people can access remotely

 

i do plan to look into more ip stuff when in vegas next month

 

oh and i did install 3 ip sony ptz cameras today for a scrap yard - for the price id go non ip for ptzs but thats just me at this point

[rory 0]

The author in this case works for a manufacturer of said cameras so the article is biased to begin with.

 

Other than that, the only real issue i see with the article is that they think you can get away with only 2 cameras, which is not going to happen in the real world. What is covering the sides of that camera, or behind it, or around the corner of the building, etc? Nothing.

 

But, remember they have to make sales somehow

[jisaac 0]

well assuming that they could get a wide enough angle it in a perfect situation they could do it with 2 cameras. but those are few and far between.

[rory 0]

well assuming that they could get a wide enough angle it in a perfect situation they could do it with 2 cameras. but those are few and far between.

 

Yeah thats what i meant really .. like how often is that ..

[jisaac 0]

hey rory i am looking at resorts at different places. Should I like into bahamas ?

Is their vacation resorts worth going to?

If so which ones? Which island?

[Souljah 0]

I think its pretty funny how everyone tends to bag on IP when it starts coming out in their market.

 

I remember when Voice over IP first came out. All the traditional TDM and Analog phone system guys use to bag on IP, stating it was unreliable, difficult, and too expensive. Now you cant find a customer wanting anything but IP for their phone system.

 

I see the surveillance market exactly where the voice was 5-7 years ago. Its just a matter of time till you cant find an analog camera being sold in the market.

 

And lets be honest with the price. We currently went to bid on a surveillance system for a casino. Our competitor bid all analog.. ended up around 3 million. Our bid, around 700K. Ill let you take a guess who won.

[rory 0]

Noone is "bagging" on IP, we that use DVRs use IP technology every single day with DVR systems .. everything i personally do is IP related, sockets, and such .. nothing new. IP technology has been in our market for years now.

 

As to VOIP, sure its great, I use it on a daily basis myself, but it is still not used as a primary phone system due to its unreliability.

 

As to analog cameras, well they are actually digital now, but regardless, they arent going anywhere anytime soon. Who knows, next 5 years from now, something may come out that will replace IP technology, something even better.

 

I doubt your competitor bid all analog CCTV equipment, that doesnt exist anymore.

well unless they were using VCRs, but most of us havent touched one of those for several years now.

Besides, the end price doesn't dictate what the actual product cost.

 

Eitherway, congrats on getting the job ..

Welcome to the forum, id like to see some more movement in this IP section of the forum also.

Any info on what product you use would also be appreciated.

[Souljah 0]

 

As to VOIP, sure its great, I use it on a daily basis myself, but it is still not used as a primary phone system due to its unreliability.

 

LoL. Are you serious? ever heard of 5 9's of reliability? I've personally setup systems for customers over 4 years ago and not once have they ever had an outage.. Nearly every fortune 500 company is using VoIP as their means of telephony. Not to mention the possibility of no long distance charges.

 

As for CCTV, I just dont understand the logic behind the systems Ive been seeing the past few months from other vendors. It seems every vendor in our area continuously stacks DVR's as their camera needs grow.. I cant see this being cost effective for the customer. Every time the 17th camera comes into play, another DVR must be added. If more storage is needed, then just add another NAS. Theres even the possibility of NAS replication for even more redundancy.

 

As for other costs.. lets look at cabling. Cat5E is pretty inexpensive when you consider going against coax + power + PTZ control. With IP, you can get it all with just one cable.

 

And if you want to place the argument that data switching gear can be expensive, lets just throw that out the window. 99% of the customers that need surveillance currently already have an internal network for you to use. With setting up proper VLANs and QoS mechanisms as well as implementing the right transport method, video quality doesn't become an issue.

 

Better camera control, ease of use, remote monitoring capabilities, less power usage.. i could go on and on.

 

It just seems that the vendors in our area seem to be making a killing at the customers expense.

 

As you can see im new to the board, and still learning about CCTV, I just simply dont see the benefit of the old analog way vs the newer IP systems.

[rory 0]

Going by your questions/assertions it appears that you haven't used a professional CCTV system yet. I would suggest reading the forum and that should answer all of the questions, and put to rest any of the myths about CCTV.

 

Also cat5 is the same cost of coax in most parts of the world.

 

As to reliability, maybe in the US, but most of the world's ISPs are not that reliable. I come from the Burglar alarm industry, and there is no way VOIP would ever be satisfactory, not even in the US.

 

Lastly, dont assume non IP cameras, or non NVRs, means analog, as they are mostly digital now and there is little difference between an NVR and a DVR besides the connections.

[crirvine 0]

Thanks Rory very true statement about VOIP phones and Burg/Fire panels we have started using DSC TL-150's for our VOIP customers. For 3 months I have been testing the TL-150 sending test 4 times an hour and I check the logs of the receiver I have never missed a test yet. I get 96 test signals a day on the test account. Also put in my 1st freedom64 and found a site listing the modem for this panel can you guess who's site came up on the search for a modem? I have 2 hayes 14.4 optima modems will these work?

[Souljah 0]

"Also cat5 is the same cost of coax in most parts of the world."

 

What about the extra cabling needed for power + ptz control?

 

"As to reliability, maybe in the US, but most of the world's ISPs are not that reliable. I come from the Burglar alarm industry, and there is no way VOIP would ever be satisfactory, not even in the US."

 

If your comparing VoIP to those stupid free internet long distance providers like vonage, then you need to do a bit of reading on this. Do you really think a business with 1400+ employees has their phones going out to the internet for phone service? LOL!

 

And as for the statement for me to go back and research old CCTV systems is like asking a automobile mechanic who works only on fuel injected engines to go learn carburators. Whats the point?

 

If you can point out some benefits the old analog/digital systems have over the newer IP systems, then im all ears. Just please dont make the regular stupid assumptions that its "unreliable" and "expensive" because obviously its not.

[rory 0]

Please take some time to read the rest of the forum, this is a CCTV forum, therefore it deals primarily with what you call OLD technology; this OLD technology being the leader in the Surveillance and Security industry to date. And as you will see when you read some more, this technology is not old at all.

 

CCTV can utilize Cat5 also; once again, please read before making assumptions based on myths created by a few NVR marketing folks with no prior experience in the CCTV Surveillance and Security Industry.

 

As to VOIP, we are not here to discuss that topic, as it has nothing what so ever to do with CCTV. However, I DO realize there are other options besides using those free services, but the ISP is always going to be the problem.

 

Also please see a thread we already have here regarding your other questions:

http://www.cctvforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=7210

 

Thanks.

[Souljah 0]

Thats fine, I was simply pointing out that the CCTV market was where the voice market was 5-6 years ago. All the vendors that didnt go with the new IP Market simply got pushed aside and went out of business.

 

Im simply trying to make the point that within time, NVR's will be the primary means for security and DVR's will become obsolete. Its up the vendors if they either want to go with it, or simply fall behind.

 

I wish all the CCTV guys luck because I saw how hard the analog/digital voice guys struggled with IP when it first came out. I recommend taking a IP networking course to start preparing for the future.

[jisaac 0]

I am not on one side of the ip - dvr debate. I sit right in the middle. About 50% of our installs now are IP based. So I am not one to be one sided on this at all. Think both have their place in two extremely large markets. And so we implement both wherever either one of them is needed.

But the only reason I posted that with a give me a break headline was the fact that the writer of the article did not report accurate information. He pushed his own product that he sells through this article. And one way to do this was to make it seem that this product that he sells is 110% no brainer because it is much less expensive and of higher quality.

He altered the facts and distorted the entire outlook on these systems.

Thats what I wanted someone to give me a break about.

[rory 0]

hey rory i am looking at resorts at different places. Should I like into bahamas ?

Is their vacation resorts worth going to?

If so which ones? Which island?

 

Sorry I missed this .. are you looking for a real island experience, or a holiday resort type thing ..? Quite a few choices .. let me know ..

[rory 0]

Im simply trying to make the point that within time, NVR's will be the primary means for security and DVR's will become obsolete.

 

Possibly, but we wont know for certain for some years yet. Currently it doesn't look that way, but things do change. Personally I see Hybrid systems in the future, not just NVRs. They still have a ways to go with the IP cameras though, to match what is available in the CCTV industry. Ofcourse there are always video servers to work with CCTV cameras, and many here have used them already. It becomes extremely useful in large Wireless applications, either with decoders and DVRs, or an NVR using something like Milestone, and that has already been pointed out on other threads.

 

I wish all the CCTV guys luck because I saw how hard the analog/digital voice guys struggled with IP when it first came out. I recommend taking a IP networking course to start preparing for the future.

 

Luckily there arent many CCTV technicians left that do not have any experience with IP networking, IT work, etc. The majority these days use it on a daily basis either with DVRs or other devices. So with their added extensive knowledge of CCTV, Video Cameras, and the Security Industry in general, when and if they do ever start to use a Webcam, IP cam, or NVR, they will be at the top of their game.

 

So you see it is not that they cannot do it, or have not used it, but more so that if they are not using it, there is no need for it in the security applications they are dealing with. After all, it is actually easier to install and setup, and does not require much knowledge of Video Surveillance. From there we get back to price; typically it will cost much more than the "average" DVR application (notice i said average).

 

Anyway, I think that other thread is a better place to discuss any pros and cons of both technologies mentioned..

Edited March 5, 2007 by Guest

[ak357 0]

http://www.securityinfowatch.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=430&id=10557

 

Read this article and tell me if anyone can agree with the price point comparison. I mean at least make it some what believable.

 

Can you please tell me what is so unbelievable in this article ?

Thanks

[Souljah 0]

Im simply trying to make the point that within time, NVR's will be the primary means for security and DVR's will become obsolete.

 

Possibly, but we wont know for certain for some years yet. Currently it doesn't look that way, but things do change. Personally I see Hybrid systems in the future, not just NVRs. They still have a ways to go with the IP cameras though, to match what is available in the CCTV industry. Ofcourse there are always video servers to work with CCTV cameras, and many here have used them already. It becomes extremely useful in large Wireless applications, either with decoders and DVRs, or an NVR using something like Milestone, and that has already been pointed out on other threads.

 

I wish all the CCTV guys luck because I saw how hard the analog/digital voice guys struggled with IP when it first came out. I recommend taking a IP networking course to start preparing for the future.

 

Luckily there arent many CCTV technicians left that do not have any experience with IP networking, IT work, etc. The majority these days use it on a daily basis either with DVRs or other devices. So with their added extensive knowledge of CCTV, Video Cameras, and the Security Industry in general, when and if they do ever start to use a Webcam, IP cam, or NVR, they will be at the top of their game.

 

So you see it is not that they cannot do it, or have not used it, but more so that if they are not using it, there is no need for it in the security applications they are dealing with. After all, it is actually easier to install and setup, and does not require much knowledge of Video Surveillance. From there we get back to price; typically it will cost much more than the "average" DVR application (notice i said average).

 

Anyway, I think that other thread is a better place to discuss any pros and cons of both technologies mentioned..

 

Good points, but as everything begins to migrate to NVR's, expect the real decision making on which vendor/products businesses will be going with falling upon the IT staff.

 

I can gaurantee that the IT staff that maintain their own data networks will be real weary who they let on their network if they are not up to snuff. If a vendor is not really too familiar with IP Networks, I can gaurantee that will play a big part in their decision making who they will go with.

 

Ive already seen some customers asking for networking certs (mainly cisco) before they even let you think of looking at their current infrastructure. I simply think its alot easier for an IP savy business to fall into the CCTV market then the CCTV market falling into the IP world.

 

After all, its just another end device on the network to us.

[rory 0]

 

Good points, but as everything begins to migrate to NVR's, expect the real decision making on which vendor/products businesses will be going with falling upon the IT staff.

 

I can gaurantee that the IT staff that maintain their own data networks will be real weary who they let on their network if they are not up to snuff. If a vendor is not really too familiar with IP Networks, I can gaurantee that will play a big part in their decision making who they will go with.

 

Ive already seen some customers asking for networking certs (mainly cisco) before they even let you think of looking at their current infrastructure. I simply think its alot easier for an IP savy business to fall into the CCTV market then the CCTV market falling into the IP world.

 

After all, its just another end device on the network to us.

 

Yeah I do envision they would need to get some certs at the least .. especially for the large networks (most of what I was mentioning was regular networks). Like you said, many IT depts dont like anyone else touching their equipment as it is already ... so next they will be asking to see some qualifications .. which is justifiable.

 

Honestly If I had the money I would play around with IP cameras more, but right now, the CCTV gear is cheaper to test .. As the prices drop and things change, such as more software is released, it will be easier to get our hands on that and do more testing.

 

In fact I just bought a basic webcam, not to use for myself (dont want anyone to see me LOL), but to write software for as thats actually a pretty large market right there .. just for a single webcam in this case .. such as home users. Next step would be to work on IP cams after that .. but then it gets really pricey as you need an IP cam/server from each manufacturer ... One day though ..

 

The thing is though, even with CCTV techs, most dont realize that it takes alot of hard work and experience with cameras to set up a very good Video Surveillance system, as in the end the camera still needs adjusting, even if it is done automatically as in some CCTV cams, and most IP cams .. manual adjustment is always the best, but more difficult in that it requires alot of experience in that area. I hope they never get rid of manual adjustments though, at least as an option, as I still dont like the end result of the automatic ones yet (in CCTV and IP cams). All one has to do is take one look at most of the CCTV systems out there in the field and or ask the installer how long he took to adjust the camera, or what he did to adjust it .. in most cases, he just plugged it in and did some minor adjustments, and left.

[cctv_down_under 0]

If I get some time tommorow I will read through this whole article again, however I now feel that this post has become far too argumentative to be constructive, however in summaary I would like to point out some very real and very obvious advantages and disadvatages of both systems and perhaps we can leave it at that.

 

Although I love a good argument, I can not see this post as constructive anymore so by listing the advantages and disadvantages (and to be honest I am going to mention a lot of benefits not mentioned by our learned IP colleague) I hope we can put this thing to bed.

 

Advatages of IP:

 

1/ IP systems are actually much more affordable (I did not say cheaper, about the same price really) when considering using many cameras over a new network infrastructure, the advantage of running on one network wire as apposed to having to wire each camera individually mean that on very large (and only very large) installs it can be as cost effective to use IP.

 

2/ IP cameras can do a larger resolution than analogue, although it is rare that on large jobs that you would actually need to do so, nor is it likely that you will be able to use this advantage if you are using an existing network.

 

3/ A DVR is limited in its location once the wiring is done, an IP camera system can be relocated...even offsite if bandwidth allows, this means that relocations and renovations are easier with IP cams.

 

4/ IP cameras generally have the ability to adjust more settings than analogue cameras, and although those settings can usally be almost matched by DVR systems, there are a few settings such as dual streaming etc that can be set up on an IP camera that DVR does not support.

 

5/ Compatability issues, IE mainboards, Northbridge etc is not required with an NVR, therefore upgrades are easier for a NVR compared to a DVR.

 

6/ When considering a business that has one major site and many small ones, IE a head office of an Ice Cream Business that has many sites that only require one or two cameras, can be installed much cheaper as there is no need to worry about a recording device at each site IE if you had a head office with 20 or so cameras and 30 small shops you do not have to buy 30 DVR's you could use 30 IP cameras and one NVR so long as you have the adequate bandwidth.

 

7/ Some good IP camera systems allow for transmition of MPEG4 with settings allowing for adjustments like I Frames etc, allowing you to adjust the streaming parameters of each camera.

 

8/ IP cameras are indeed easier to upgrade than MOST analogue cameras.

 

9/ IP cameras do not have interlace problems, this is because they are not limited in the capture resolution that MOST (and I say MOST very loosely) DVR systems are limited to due to PCI Bus limitations.

 

10/ As video analytics evolves we will need much more processing power at the actual camera, this may depend on advancements in actuall PC devices, but if the development of video analitics continues at the rate is currently growing at then a camera with a CPU onboard (most likely an IP camera) will for a short while be able to handle a lot more than the single processor that is in a singe CPU that the DVR requires.

 

11/ In the world of PTZ cameras, IP has the advantage of transporting protocols over a network in an easier manner than MOST (once again I use the word MOST loosely) analogue systems, this means that there is less of a need for cabling and makes IP PTZ almost as affordable as analogue PTZ but much easier to configure and upgrade.

 

12/ There is no distance limitation that effects quality for IP camera systems, although it is rare that distance is an issue with some analogue cameras (once again..choosing the right analogue camera is imperative, I tend to use Bosch because they support coax up to 3/4 of a Mile which is fairly rare to require such a distance, and most of their devices have the option to switch to network balun increasing this distance, however there is no need to do this with an IP system.

 

13/ With an IP system the conversion from Digital to Analogue only occurs once, with Analogue it is convereted to digital for processing then back to analogue for transportation then back to Digital for recording, this is not necessary for IP systems.

 

14/ Viewing statistics are more readily accesable through an IP sytem than an analuge system.

 

 

Advatages of DVR systems:

 

1/ DVR systems do offer very similar networking ability (good ones do) compared to IP Systems, and although IP systems are more flexible, it is rare....other than on large corporate systems that these benefits would actually be utilized, DVR systems can be a PC so there is little that DVR software can not offer that IP can not.

 

2/ Not every location (Keep in mind we are talking globally, not just Asia and US) has the abiltiy to provide the bandwidth to take advantage of what IP can truly offer, it is important to note that in the majority of the world it would be difficult to stream more than a few cameras in upspeed without exceeding your total upspeed of your connection, therefore the myth of having many cameras without a NVR onsite is not accurate.

 

3/ DVR's provide MORE redundancy than IP, ISP's can go down, Virus's do occur and networks do crash, there is NO redundancy on MOST IP based DVR systems, having a hard wired solution not only allows you the majority of features found in IP streaming, but offers a redundancy that MOST IP systems can not offer.

 

4/ There are no compatability issues with Analogue cameras, there are many with IP cameras, the same limitations with PTZ protocols occur and there is NO need for the additional cost of a web server.

 

5/ All the storage and back up facilities that are offered by NVR's are also available to analogue systems.

 

6/ DVR's are easy to integrate, they also are easy to retrofit, the replacement of a totally anolgue system to DVR offers the majority of benefits that would be associated with having an IP system at a fraction of the cost.

 

7/ DVR systems are CONSIDERABLY, let me say that again.....CONSIDERABLY cheaper than IP systems, this is only because IP is new and this will surely change over time, but to install 32 cameras on IP compared to a DVR with analogue cameras is uncomparable.

 

8/ IP systems are harder to configure than your average DVR system, they do require a network knowledge and they require a systems administrator to support them, this is often not available in many countries

 

9/ The maintenance and support of a analogue DVR system is limted compared to that of a full IP system.

 

10/ There are more failure points in a network system then there are with a DVR syetem and a DVR system is much less likely to be affected by outside elements than an IP system.

 

11/ Analogue HYBRID systems that incorporate the best of both systems are easier to retrofit than a total IP system.

 

12/ It is much easier to mix and match cameras on a DVR system compared to IP systems especially due to the factor that there are simply a wider variety of cameras that work with every Analogue system compared to compatability issues of IP systems.

 

13/ IP cameras require considerably more bandwidth than analogue cameras.

 

14/ Although IP cameras are experiencing massive growth, the lions share of the market is still with DVR this ensures that developments in DVR will match that of IP cameras for the next few years. The value proposition based on the advantages of IP is not yet there and as prices drop for IP systems it will become more prevalant to use IP products but for now the benefits for most situations is not with IP systems as the majority or market share is only in the low to mid end.

 

15/ When using wireless IP cameras you need to consider the BAND of frequencies available to the IP camera 2.4GHz spectrum can make a difference on how your system works. There’s also the “newerâ€

[kensplace 0]

part two and part three of the original article are available also now.

 

Just had a quick look at part two, whilst in general he is right that a megapixel cam can cover a greater area (lets forget,like he conveniently does, about frame rates, lighting issues, cost of storage / interface equipment etc) the article makes me think the guy has no idea you can change lenses on cctv cams.

 

His lets use 6 conventional cams in the choke point example, to cover a area a little larger than a car, is ludicrous at best, as you would just use on cam with a decently zoomed lens...

[BKerlin 0]

The loss of redundancy alone makes mega pixel undesirable IMHO. Loss or corruption of one signal results in loss of coverage of a huge area (go go gadget laser pointer), whereas more cameras are more difficult to disrupt all at once.

 

Falls back to ancient wisdom about eggs, a basket and an unhappy time.

Edited May 7, 2007 by Guest

[scorpion 0]

I look forward to the day I can plug in my cameras, alarm panel, and electronic access in to the internet, and be able to control all of the above, and perform checks and maintenance, or make changes as needed! Now I want everything to comunicate with each other! Access a door, bam, gotcha on cams, if you are not authorized, bam alarm signal, bam, laser range finder finds you, bam, laser fires! IP controlled lasers?

 

Great! Now anyone with a 10 in one tool can be an installer!

 

We need a license program similiar to electricians. Journeyman CCTV, MasterCCTV.