Maybe you’re not installing a lot of (or any) IP-based systems, and maybe that has you feeling like you’re on the outside looking in at something big.
There’s a lot of upside to an IP system, most notably flexibility for future expansion, a reduction in the number of cables required and the ability to more easily capture and store high-resolution video. But for many, IP can be more than a little intimidating. And why not? To properly design and install IP systems takes a certain level of networking knowledge.
“From our dealers, 90 percent of the questions we receive are related to network setups,” says Daniel Seo, director of sales and marketing for Irvine, Calif.-based Topnos/CTring Co., Ltd. “Without that knowledge, NVRs can be almost impossible to hook up. For end-user consumers, a DVR is often much easier to understand and to use.”
Still, wherever you look, the IP machine is buzzing. We live in an IP world, where even TVs and — as unveiled at the recent Consumer Electronics Show — appliances can be connected to home networks.
This buzz begs the question: What’s the future of analog? Or, perhaps more appropriately, is there a future for analog?
Warren Brown, director of product management, American Dynamics and Software House, based in Westford, Mass., says a common misconception among dealers, integrators and even customers is that because IP is the wave of the future, analog is always the wrong choice. But that’s not the case at all, he contends. Despite all of the bells and whistles of IP and its accompanying NVRs, and the benefits they bring, and despite opinions to the contrary, there still exists a robust market for analog technology and DVRs.
“The trend is certainly headed toward IP video, but there are still some great applications and usage for analog — for the next five to seven years, maybe longer,” says American Dynamics.
Bottom line: the day when IP becomes standard practice for video systems may be coming, but it’s not as close as some might have you believe. According to Bill Taylor, president of Secaucus, N.J.-based Panasonic Systems Networks of America, it’s not even close.
The question is: When to go with an NVR and when to go with a DVR?
“Statistically, integrators and users still prefer to use DVRs. They’re economical and provide simplified installation, and they’re well-suited to small-business applications, especially those that involve one location and a handful of cameras,” Taylor says. “NVRs offer the ease of sharing information across a network and can accommodate higher-resolution network cameras.”
Until (or unless) IP becomes de rigeur for video systems, Taylor says both DVRs and NVRs can be considered a wise investment.
“Clearly IP-based networked systems using NVRs are the future, but analog systems using DVRs still represent the bulk of installed systems,” he says. “The market is in gradual transition, but the new capabilities of networked systems — megapixel imaging and widely available video throughout the enterprise — will ultimately accelerate the transition to NVRs.”
The best advice for anyone considering a “rip and replace” transition to IP? Take a step back and make sure a full conversion is the right choice based on your customer’s needs.
“There’s no need to rip out existing systems,” Taylor says. “Strategic use of DVRs, NVRs and video encoders can allow customers to continue to use legacy analog cameras for years to come. Careful product selection now can maximize the potential for future expansion and even save money over the long haul.”
2. IT’S ALL ABOUT THE MEGAPIXELS
When it comes to megapixels, the mantra seems to be more, more, more. In some cases, especially for ports, airports and other locations where security is highly serious business, the drive for higher megapixels is warranted. But, Brown says, it’s a disservice to customers — and to the industry as a whole — to push megapixels for megapixels’ sake.
“It’s not about the highest resolution possible. It’s about how to make the best use of that resolution,” he says. “You don’t need 10 megapixels with 30 frames per second for monitoring a dumpster.”
The two main reasons Brown urges restraint when playing the megapixel game are bandwidth and storage requirements. The higher the megapixels, the more of each that are required — and the more likely that a DVR or an NVR will be taxed to the max.
Capacities of both network-attached storage and external hard drives have risen and costs have fallen, making additional storage relatively inexpensive, Seo says. When it comes to bandwidth, most network managers use software to manage their bandwidth. Additionally, multi-streaming is available in most DVRs. This allows the DVR to store video on-board in high-definition and transmit at a lower resolution to conserve bandwidth. As an added bonus, customers can keep their existing DVRs.
The main areas where higher megapixel video is absolutely necessary, Brown says, are situations where high security dictates high-quality video, such as airports and ports. In other cases, Brown says, there are technologies that allow users to manage their bandwidth and storage by managing the quality of the video that’s coming in to the NVR.
For example, using video analytics to recognize when a vehicle enters a scene, a camera can determine when to crank up all of its megapixels and when to dial it down to preserve precious bandwidth and storage.
“You don’t want to be pay for extra infrastructure to be transmitting and storing 5 megapixels’ worth of an empty scene,” Brown explains.
3. SPECS TELL THE WHOLE STORY
In what’s becoming a recurring theme, feature sets and specifications are also an area where more isn’t necessarily better. In fact, Brown says, sometimes it’s not entirely clear what a particular specification actually means.
Take feet per second, which traditionally has been expressed as a cumulative number. In talking about IP and megapixel technologies, that model doesn’t work. If the spec sheet states an NVR can support 64 cameras, does that mean 5-megapixel cameras? 4 SIF cameras?
“Cumulative feet per second is a nice way to play the specmanship game, but if you don’t read the fine print, the NVR just falls over because no NVR can support the same number of 5-megapixel and 2 SIF cameras.”
Steve Malia, vice president of engineering services and marketing for Brick, N.J.-based North American Video, says installers and integrators are looking to manufacturers to offer not only a range of high-quality products, but also some more “value-priced” options that include fewer bells and whistles.
“Feature-rich DVRs and NVRs are useful in some situations, but customers shouldn’t have to pay for features they don’t need for an application,” he says. “This affords integrators the flexibility to pick and choose products according to application requirements while providing the greatest efficiencies in overall system costs.”
Brown says the best integrator conversations he has are with those who come to him with a list of the business issues their customers are looking to solve with video, rather than a list of products they’ve recommended.
“It’s easy to get excited about the technology. It’s fun,” he says. “A longer list of features isn’t necessarily better because the reality is that most customers only use 10 to 20 percent of the system capacity.”
Regardless of the technology, Brown thinks two factors drive every choice: the need for high-quality video (or lack thereof) and cost. Of the two, he says, cost is often most important.
“It doesn’t make sense to quote up a job and get a customer excited about the technology if there’s no budget for it,” he says.
Malia agrees, saying, “NVRs and IP are the wave of the future, but at the end of the day, the customer needs to get the best value and the right equipment for their needs. It’s up to the integrator to provide the expertise and resources to ensure a good result.”
No comments:
Post a Comment