NEED HELP DESIGNING SYSTEM FOR CASINO

[survtech 0]

They all knew what we wanted

 

Who is we?

The manufacturers and Integrators. They all received 4-page RFI detailing our needs and wants. In fact, latency and PTZ control were bullet points. We stated that PTZ latency must be less than 200ms, with a goal of 100ms.

 

If they either can't read or choose to ignore our specs or don't know their own system, it's not my problem.

[ssmith10pn 0]

So what your saying is (You) Gaming Commission?

Created a spec that no manufacturer can attain.

[survtech 0]

Yep. It was either that, or spend the time pulling the wings off flies.

 

The last eight months have been... enlightening.

 

 

 

 

 

Every other VMS/NVR and third party encoder manufacturer demonstrated latencies under 200ms. That includes all 5 third party encoders (Axis, Bosch, Sony, TKH and Verint, tested with Genetec Security Center 5.1), Geutebruck (tested with their own MPEG4CCTV encoder and with the Axis and Bosch encoders), IndigoVision (tested with their own MPEG4 and h.264 encoders and with the Axis and Bosch encoders) and Dallmeier, (tested with both their single-channel blades and SMatrix encoders).

 

Latencies measured as low as 130ms.

[mc4c 0]

I didn't ask. That would have been a question asked during Phase 3 of our evaluations and Endura didn't make it past Phase 1.

 

Phase 1 - Basic VMS and encoder testing - approx. 1 week per system.

Phase 2 - Intense VMS testing including with multiple IP cameras - approx. 1 month per system (in progress).

Phase 3 - Continuing discussions with manufacturers who passed Phase 2, Integrator discussions.

Phase 4 - RFP

 

Just curious if part of the evaluation included the companies current financial state. I may be wrong but I was under the impression that IndigoVision was having some financial problems. I do remember taking a look at their products a few years back, they where always very adamant about latency and compression. I was really impressed with their product at the time, glad to see they're still doing new things.

 

If you don't mind me asking, why did Genetec not make the cut?

[survtech 0]

IndigoVision has apparently resolved their financial issues since they replaced their CEO. They have also become much more open to third party IP cameras, etc.

 

Two vendors brought Genetec Security Center 5.1, which had numerous bugs and neither vendor brought Omnicast. Among the problems: it often displayed "buffering" whenever we tried to play back, especially salvos and most especially in reverse playback. Sometimes that would disappear quickly but other times it would start play - buffering - play - buffering continuously, especially playing back "synched" salvos.

 

It also puts a huge "status" box on the screen during clip creation which prevents the user from performing other tasks and which can't be minimized. That may not sound like much of an issue until you realize we often create 8-1/2 hour clips of someone's full shift. Security Center takes approximately 7-8 minutes for a 1-hour, 1-camera clip so an 8-1/2-hour clip would leave that status window, which covers at least 2/3 of the screen, up for over an hour.

 

7-8 minutes to make a 1-hour clip is par for the course. Most systems took similar times except IndigoVision. I started it on a 1-camera, 1-hour clip, started a stopwatch, looked up and it said it was done. I tried that a few times and finally had it make an 8-1/2-hour clip. It did that in 1 minute and 46 seconds. Repeatable. Amazing!

 

I finally had someone else start/stop the stopwatch while I created a 1-hour clip. I believe it took less than 10 seconds on an analog camera and around 13 seconds on a 720P IP camera running at 4Mbps.

[ssmith10pn 0]

One of the clients we Service is Omnicast Migrating to Security Center. We were going to convert them to Avigilon but Genetec practically gave their product to stay in this high profile high camera count facility. 900+ cameras and still growing rapidly. I lost count at 40 Archivers.

 

I'm in the learning stages of the two products and after working with Avigilon which is ultra simple to setup this product is very difficult.

You can add a camera in Avigilon and just about let it run like it is out of the box with very little tweaks. In Genetec just motion detection is a major pain.

 

 

Survtech just wondering if you tested Avigilon Control Center and a Avigilon PTZ? They seem lightening fast to me.

 

If I get a chance I may try to make a demo video today.

[mc4c 0]

IndigoVision has apparently resolved their financial issues since they replaced their CEO. They have also become much more open to third party IP cameras, etc.

 

Two vendors brought Genetec Security Center 5.1, which had numerous bugs and neither vendor brought Omnicast. Among the problems: it often displayed "buffering" whenever we tried to play back, especially salvos and most especially in reverse playback. Sometimes that would disappear quickly but other times it would start play - buffering - play - buffering continuously, especially playing back "synched" salvos.

 

It also puts a huge "status" box on the screen during clip creation which prevents the user from performing other tasks and which can't be minimized. That may not sound like much of an issue until you realize we often create 8-1/2 hour clips of someone's full shift. Security Center takes approximately 7-8 minutes for a 1-hour, 1-camera clip so an 8-1/2-hour clip would leave that status window, which covers at least 2/3 of the screen, up for over an hour.

 

7-8 minutes to make a 1-hour clip is par for the course. Most systems took similar times except IndigoVision. I started it on a 1-camera, 1-hour clip, started a stopwatch, looked up and it said it was done. I tried that a few times and finally had it make an 8-1/2-hour clip. It did that in 1 minute and 46 seconds. Repeatable. Amazing!

 

I finally had someone else start/stop the stopwatch while I created a 1-hour clip. I believe it took less than 10 seconds on an analog camera and around 13 seconds on a 720P IP camera running at 4Mbps.

 

IndigoVision and Avigilon both started off as closed platforms I think they realized that model simply doesn't work.

 

Thanks for the review on Genetec, might have to take another look at IndigoVision's lined up.

[survtech 0]

No we didn't. Phase 1 was brief and we didn't have time to test IP cammeras. Besides, IP PTZs are low on our list. With ~200 PTZs, we're in no rush to replace them.

[survtech 0]

Like Avigilon, Genetec has supposedly been working on the problems. Security Center 5.2 or 5.3 supposedly fixes the buffering issue, according to Genetec.

[mc4c 0]

Like Avigilon, Genetec has supposedly been working on the problems. Security Center 5.2 or 5.3 supposedly fixes the buffering issue, according to Genetec.

 

I would hope so. We've worked with Genetec for quite a while, most of our customers are very happy with them but I always like to hear unfiltered feedback. They have a lot of areas for improvement and I think a lot of their recent business has came because of their huge reference list more so then thorough product evaluations.

[ssmith10pn 0]

Like Avigilon, Genetec has supposedly been working on the problems. Security Center 5.2 or 5.3 supposedly fixes the buffering issue, according to Genetec.

 

I would hope so. We've worked with Genetec for quite a while, most of our customers are very happy with them but I always like to hear unfiltered feedback. They have a lot of areas for improvement and I think a lot of their recent business has came because of their huge reference list more so then thorough product evaluations.

 

 

And I'm sure thats the reason they pulled out all the stops to retain our high profile client.

[mikeek3 0]

hey guys i'm thinking about going with vivotek since i can run their software for up to 32 cameras free and i can also join each server using thier cms software VAST after. 1 other question do i need to run all my wires back to the surveillance room or i can use 16 port poe switches in the ceiling at different locations and just run 1 or 2 wires back the room on another switch which will also be attached to the servers..

[ssmith10pn 0]

IndigoVision and Avigilon both started off as closed platforms I think they realized that model simply doesn't work.

 

What are you talking about?

Avigilon started life as a VMS. Cameras came afterwords.

[survtech 0]

Yes, a VMS, cameras and encoders using a proprietary codec (JPEG2000). That equals Closed.

[MaxIcon 0]

hey guys i'm thinking about going with vivotek since i can run their software for up to 32 cameras free and i can also join each server using thier cms software VAST after. 1 other question do i need to run all my wires back to the surveillance room or i can use 16 port poe switches in the ceiling at different locations and just run 1 or 2 wires back the room on another switch which will also be attached to the servers..

You can put the POE switches anywhere and run a connection from them back to the next level switch. It's normal network functionality once you get past the POE.