Cctv Format

[Guest anguscanplay]

that should be pinned at the top of the CCTV forum IMO

[Doktor Jon]

that should be pinned at the top of the CCTV forum IMO

I couldn't agree more

Nice one Ilkie

[james.wilson]

Yep great post ilkie, i also love the drill a wall with a food mixer quote

but im not so sure about this

A professional security company would no more install an alarm that they would know from the outset would not detect nor should they install a CCTV system that will not provide best evidence, even if the the end users instructs (through lack of knowledge) otherwise.

I think your on the right lines but if the advise is against what it is the client is insisting on and you have documented this then just the fact that in our eyes it isnt up to job shouldnt be a reason not to do it. I agree you should highlight this wont work etc, but refusing to do it i think is unrealistic.

James

[Doktor Jon]

I think your on the right lines but if the advise is against what it is the client is insisting on and you have documented this then just the fact that in our eyes it isnt up to job shouldnt be a reason not to do it. I agree you should highlight this wont work etc, but refusing to do it i think is unrealistic.

James

It's an age old problem redbull, and whilst we're not really in a position to tell others what they should or shouldn't do, I've always subscribed to the philosophy that if I can't do the job well, I'd just rather not do it at all.

That may be great for building a reputation, but even I have to admit it doesn't help to pay the bills

In theory, the adoption of workable standards should help to "level the playing field", and then that situation need not arise.

Time will tell ....

[Guest RJBsec]

It's easy to do a 'Doktor Jon' and impose our will over the customers budget but as the good 'Doktor' says, it doesn't pay the bills and just ends up passing work from your company to someone elses.

In general terms unmanned CCTV on a budget (such as a driveway, small unit etc) does two things, it gives a degree of peace of mind to the customer and acts as a degree of deterrent to the 'villains', but of course it is only suitable for low-grade risks.

Not many homes/small businesses are going to have a high CCTV budget so what they want and get is the best compromise between equipment and budget - the results and effectiveness will be a compromise accordingly.

Of course purpose-built, high-end equipment will give maximum results but you may find the cost of the DVR is about what the customer has to spend!

[james.wilson]

Of course purpose-built, high-end equipment will give maximum results but you may find the cost of the DVR is about what the customer has to spend!

Agreed

[Guest anguscanplay]

It's easy to do a 'Doktor Jon' and impose our will over the customers budget but as the good 'Doktor' says, it doesn't pay the bills and just ends up passing work from your company to someone elses.

In general terms unmanned CCTV on a budget (such as a driveway, small unit etc) does two things, it gives a degree of peace of mind to the customer and acts as a degree of deterrent to the 'villains', but of course it is only suitable for low-grade risks.

Not many homes/small businesses are going to have a high CCTV budget so what they want and get is the best compromise between equipment and budget - the results and effectiveness will be a compromise accordingly.

Of course purpose-built, high-end equipment will give maximum results but you may find the cost of the DVR is about what the customer has to spend!

so the question is - should we be installing it at all

[arfur mo]

In the case of intruder alarm systems the customer covering the cost of what is requied is enforced to a large degree by the insurers for cover, ACPO for response and the inspectorates for limiting the 'cowboy' factor; however the situation is quite different with the majority of CCTV fitted today.

Whilst there are indeed some requirements laid down for the likes of pubs and clubs (and rightly so) it is a whole different ball game for such as the corner shop, the community hall, the small workshop and the private house. Enforcing standards of equipment and thereby increasing the cost to the end user, (who may well be perfectly happy with results that are less than 'forensic' quality because they suit his requirements/budget), is in my view an unlikely scenario, which would serve to reduce the number of instances of small CCTV installations, which wold be a shame as they do remain a local deterrent whilst being a useful tool for the user and possibly of value to the authorities as a by-product.

Scenario 1 - Workshop unit broken into, intruders steal and flee, police arrive and issue crime number.

Scenario 2 - As above but small local CCTV system identifies how many involved, type of vehicle used, maybe some specifics.

Scenario 2 wasn't bourne out of a requirement for expensive kit, (had it been it probably wouldn't have been installed), yet it provided some useful and maybe vital information as a bonus.

the above i'm giving credit where credit due as a very good post, especially for me the last few lines which encapsulates my much of my view.

it's no good berating this or that cctv system as rubbish because it did not get faces in a robbery, if the owner did not want to spend 1k per camera just to watch the crisp stand for shop lifters, naturally he is on budget so by buying cheaper he can buy more camera's so he can see more of his stock to prevent loss, so in a loss prevention sense this truly presents a better value than having less of desirable high end camera's.

work that down to the dvr quality and the same economics's model fits, so DM is replaced by say a Q316 (with full respect to SQ).

i think you can discuss quality issues into the ground, but end of the day the cost is a big factor with most clients, and we all like a big bang for our buck. i don't hold that instalers of cheap systems makes thm cowboys, as long as it is installed properly.

so like said above if the police know it was 4 blokes and 3 girls in the gang who drove off in a transit not a mecede's, but did not get anyones face looked like, it still has a lot of valued if not more than a single crisp facial recognition or one prior unkown bandit.

regs

alan

[Guest RJBsec]

so the question is - should we be installing it at all

Yes of course we should - customer wants CCTV, customer gets CCTV same as him going to Comet for a 72" plasma screen and coming away with a 32" LCD.

[Guest anguscanplay]

Yes of course we should - customer wants CCTV, customer gets CCTV same as him going to Comet for a 72" plasma screen and coming away with a 32" LCD.

bet you`ve got a salad spinner in the back of one of your cupboards, fact is from reading whats posted here the "customer wants CCTV..." but thats not what he`s getting, at best he`s getting a facsimile of what a CCTV system should be

Way I see it is if we don`t get our act together someone else is going to "force..." us to