jhonovich

Hi Guys, I recently released an article about increasing competition and alternatives to Axis' IP cameras: http://ipvideomarket.info/report/axis_ip_camera_dominance_coming_end There's been a bunch of interesting comments to the article. I thought you might be interested. I am also curious to your views on this topic. Excerpt of the article below. Cheers, John ___ IP video is becoming mainstream but Axis' IP cameras may lose their dominance in the process. Six critical issues may undermine Axis position and in the process provide consumers with more options and lower prices. The six issues are: * Lower cost, good enough, IP cameras from competitors are maturing. * Multi-megapixel cameras from competitors are maturing. * Axis' new features overshoot the needs of mainstream buyers. * Now, traditional CCTV vendors are committed to moving into IP. * Industry interoperability specifications are coming * The recession will force buyers to prioritze low cost. http://ipvideomarket.info/report/axis_ip_camera_dominance_coming_end

Hi Thomas, thanks for the education on the particulars of Axis' testing tools. That was very helpful. Also, I agree with you that there is no evidence of common standards today. Right now, it is only in committees and negotiations with executives at these companies. It will be interesting to see how long this takes to get to the implementation and testing level.

Hi Thomas, I am becoming convinced that the camera manufacturers with smaller market share are going to drive the adoption of standards. They are the ones who have the incentive to do it. Even if we do not get 'a' standard, I see a critical mass building around a common specification that all the ip camera providers with lower market share will support. Then companies like yourself can add support for that specification to provide support for many IP cameras.

for those of you interested in reading more about the developments in creating/promoting standards, you may find this article helpful: http://ipvideomarket.info/report/ip_camera_standards_battle

Hi Thomas, I agree with you that we are unlikely to see a new 'king' in its place. If the analog camera market is an indicator of a mature state, it's likely that you will have dozens of players all with modest market share. By various measure, Pelco is the analog market leader but with less than 20% of the market share. A major IP market could simply see new entrants to IP gain market share and result in a more balanced market.

As a side note, using a text overlay on video for 'integrating' POS has significant limitations. Many video management systems today allow for the POS information to be 'tagged' and recorded in a database. This provides the benefit of allowing alerts and searches to be done from your video management system (i.e., send me an email if a void occurs or bring it all transactions over $100). The downside is that doing this integration can be challenging because your video management system vendor must support your POS vendor. If anyone wants to discuss this further, I am happy to comment more.

Thanks. Axis is claiming 50% storage reduction for H.264 over their MPEG-4. Do you know what improvement you are seeing?

http://ipvideomarket.info/report/asis_2008_announcements_review

I am trying to think through the tradeoff between using megapixel cameras and PTZs. It's obvious from using them that a 23x analog mechanical PTZ can zoom in far greater than even a 16 megapixel camera. I have tested this and while the megapixel camera is incredibly impressive for a fixed camera, it did not come close to the level of zoom possible in a 23x analog PTZ (now, i know there are important tradeoffs like a megapixel's ability to record the whole area). My calculation is that a 16 MP camera offers the equivalent of a traditional 8x PTZ camera, far less than a 23x PTZ. I came to this by multiplying the traditional resolution of an analog camera (640 x 480) by 8 which approximately equaled 4872 x 3248 imager (the resolution of Avigilon's 16 MP camera). 1. Can someone carefully look at these calculations and tell me if I have made an error? I don't want to base a theory on flawed math. 2. How are you deciding on when to use megapixel versus PTZs?

Hi Guys, I wrote a review of ASIS that I thought you might be interested in: http://ipvideomarket.info/report/asis_2008_announcements_review Basically, key takeways I had from ASIS was that: - Traffic was low (except for IP video companies) - megapixel cameras have momentum - storage cluster companies are releasing innovative offerings - more companies are moving into managed video Anyway, just wanted to share. Did you say new interesting products at the show? Best, John

Hi Robert, It's fairly common for camera manufacturers to use larger image sensors but lower resolution. They bin or downsample the image from say 3mp to 4CIF. Doing so can improve image quality. Or at least that is my understanding. Best, John

Here we go, Axis do have some. Also: http://www.cieffe.com/products/cameras/IP/nettuno_megadome Are you sure those are megapixel cameras? Those Axis cameras look standard definition.

I think this will be an interesting topic for debate Yesterday, I released an article comparing Axis and ACTi's approach: http://ipvideomarket.info/review/show/149 My basic point was that ACTi does not have all the bells and whistles of Axis but was good enough for many applications and is far cheaper. As such, I claimed that ACTi is doing a lot to make ip cameras more mainstream. I cited discussions on this forum as references. While I did not mention Vivotek, it has been mentioned in the comments as another low cost, solid alternative to Axis. What do you think?

Hi Survtech, That's a great description of the subtleties and challenges involved in migrating to IP cameras. One question on the proprietary encoders. Was the manufacturer of the encoders open about them being proprietary? One trend I am noticing is that vendors claiming they are more open than they actually are. Thanks, John

I was talking to an integrator recently who was telling me how much time his company is spending researching and testing products for their migration to IP cameras. I put together a short essay on some key points involved: http://ipvideomarket.info/review/show/178 Summary: * Determine if your DVR supports IP cameras * Determine what IP camera manufacturers your DVR support * If needed, assess options for NVRs or IP Video Management Software * Determine if IP cameras can eliminate long distance analog cabling * Determine if higher resolution cameras can help you * Assess the increased bandwidth impact on your networks * Determine if you can afford increased storage for megapixel cameras I thought this would be an interesting topic to discuss on the forum. Agree? Disagree? Add something?

Hi Thomas, That's a good point. I have modified the article to address this. Best, John

Were you able to determine how it worked with NVR systems? Is Ocularis an NVR or is Ocularis software that you use to manage NVRs? or both? I talked with OnSSI fairly extensively and I could not understand their answers to this.

Hi Survtech, Yes I have seen the demos. For those that are interested, there are 8 video clips of Ocularis demos at http://www.onssi.com/ocularis/index.html What did you most like? The touch screen use interface? The time slicing? Something else? Thanks, John

If you are using PTZs, how will you know when "intruders from outside" cross the perimeter. PTZs are valuable for operators to control manually and scan an environment. However, they are very poor when it comes to generating real time alerts when someone crosses the perimeter. I do not think 4 PTZs are enough, even if you fix each PTZ to look down one side of the perimeter. You also run the risk of the PTZs being moved away from the perimeter and you missing an alert. Also, motion detection in PTZs is generally not that good (especially from Bosch). If you really want to know when intruders cross from the outside, I think you have to use fixed cameras with analytics designed for perimeter violation. Please let me know what you think.

Note: I recently released a new article on top 5 disadvantages of IP Cameras: http://ipvideomarket.info/review/show/156 This might be interesting for further discussion. I have been getting more questions these days about using IP cameras. More than just a technical issue anymore, it seems to be an emotional issue. The perception seems to have gone negative on analog cameras (kind of like VCRs began to be perceived in the last few years). I put together a paper to help look more carefully about when and where it makes sense: Advantage and Disadvantages of Using IP Cameras? Here are the key points I see • The larger the facility being secured, the more valuable an immediate transition to IP cameras. • The more mature megapixel cameras become, the more valuable an immediate transition to IP cameras. • DVRs will continue to catch up to NVRs and will as such extend the life of analog systems. What are you guys seeing? I noticed a lot of you are recommending megapixel cameras when people ask questions. Are you mostly using IP or megapixel cameras? Please share.

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.

If you are looking to secure the facility from outsiders and want alerts if someone crosses the fence, you are likely going to position cameras on the perimeter. With a 300 x 300 area, I would use 8 cameras on the perimeter. 2 cameras for each side, mounted on the middle of each side, with one camera pointing right and the other left. This will divide the coverage into ( 8 ) 150 meter zones. You may also want to consider using 1 or 2 PTZs positioned inside the facility looking out towards the perimeter to track suspects when alerts are generated. I don't see a problem using wireless. 200m is not a problem for wireless (assuming you don't have obstructions - e.g., buildings or trees in the way). Whether not you should use wireless is a factor of how difficult laying new cable is. Wired is generally preferred because it is certainly more reliable. However, if you need to be trenching, you may be forced to go with wireless. The key challenge here with the motion detection is how many false alarms you are willing to tolerate. Smart cameras that generate low false alarms are usually expensive (2,000 USD or more). I will leave it at that to start. Please let me know what questions or feedback you have. Best, John

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

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

"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.