#Pelco
“The question is already hackneyed, but still, in my opinion, relevant: how is IP video surveillance better than classic analog?
Are there any real advantages that you can “feel with your hands” and for which you don’t mind paying more? – Yuri GOLOVIN, Moscow”
Oleg NIKULIN, manager of Pelco by Schneider Electric, answers the reader’s question.
Historically, the security market is very conservative. Until the customer can “feel” the real advantages, new technologies are not promoted. In the matter of promoting IP video surveillance, it is easy for us to work with IT companies. For them, TCP/IP protocols are like tablets for the Jews. But for most market participants, clear arguments are still needed when choosing IP video surveillance.
I will try to formulate them.
1. Video image quality, in particular resolution.
The maximum resolution of an analog camera of 570 TVL is approximately 760 by 585 pixels, which is only 0.44 megapixels. But a number of technical specifications still require recording with CIF quality (352 x 288). A modern monitor provides a resolution of up to 1920 x 1080, which is equal to 2 megapixels.
The difference is noticeable. From the point of view of security functions, megapixels provide detailing that was unattainable in the old analog world.
For example, you can now read the license plate of a parked car from a video archive made by a camera installed on the roof of a building.
2. The ability to transmit video images over unlimited distances.
A striking example of the advantage of IP protocols is the Internet. From anywhere in the world, you can connect to a power outlet and download information stored on the other side of the planet. Hypothetically, IP video provides the same flexible and unlimited possibilities.
A safe city, a distributed object video surveillance system, a system for several thousand cameras, the unification of several transnational branch networks — all this is implemented simply, reliably and at reasonable cost.
3. Efficient use of disk space due to flexible settings.
In the old analog «client-server» architecture, cameras write only to those recorders/servers to which they are attached. And if an error was made in the design (for example, the activity of some cameras is greater than expected) and there is not enough space on one of the servers, while on others, on the contrary, it is empty, then nothing can be done. In a modern IP video surveillance system, all drives in the system can be made into one «virtual» drive and «spread» the recordings evenly across all disks, thereby maximizing the load on the disk space.
4. Video analytics.
Everyone understands that the human factor is the most serious drawback of any security system. Additional digital video image analysis, called video analytics, allows you to draw the operator's attention to an important object (for example, to focus on a car moving against the flow, or a person who jumped onto the rails) or to facilitate a quick search for such events in the archive.
In large systems, it is impossible to achieve high efficiency without this function.
And only with the advent of IP, video analytics became effective and was widely used.
5. Integration of video into other applications.
Since all modern systems are based on computer technologies, it has become easy to integrate them with each other.
It is enough to take a special developer tool and add a «bridge» that transfers information from one to another.
Therefore, the integration that was talked about for so long in previous years has become much simpler. If desired, any programmer can set up data exchange between systems.
And finally: the thesis that «IP video surveillance is much more expensive than analog» is greatly exaggerated. In many cases (especially when there are more than 100 cameras), IP technologies even provide a price advantage.