Cctv Format

[arfur mo]

i cant see how your theory can work alan. Assuming we are talking about pal not ip cams, the lens choice is as if not more important. following your theory i could use 1 yello cam with a 2.6mm lens and cover all of level one.

I think a better way would be like the fire regs and have as you say classes/grades. but it would need to say that a certain class say class 1 would need recognition on all door ways and say crowd control (5%) in ALL general areas, id in bars etc.

but it would be a bigger reg than 5839.

the only way real world i think it can work is to have proper specs that detail the requirement of the system. just like it is now for approved companies.

hi RB,

did not intend to write a complete thesis, but trust me - could if asked (waits for rush to fit extra hard drives to the server).

imho if the trade go's for an enforced system it will be dragged down to the same unfathomable level of confusion intruder alarms have suffered, where we let alone the client is often left floundering for a simple explanation as to what they are getting and the level of protection actually given. most give up at the point of insurance acceptance (who often don't really have a clue), and just ask most clients they simply won't have a clue that there are grades and Grade 1 is the lowest and why it is different to the other grades and how.

on this point, i was earlier challenged on the order of grades, alarms go G1 - G4 in ascending order meaning G4 is highest, so just think about that for a moment - anyone care to say they deliberately go out to buy Grade 3 apples or clothes instead of grade 1? - common sense decree's for clarity Grade 1 should be the highest standard and that is what j/p is entitled to think if using the norms of English phraseology, so do you still think i'm daft to say these alarm grades confuse the public?

like it or not we have to accept there is no black magic to fitting most camera's, and so there will always be room for the privateer and the various standards they apply. if the pro co's want to be distinguished in a meaningful way we then need a simple code indicator as to the type of surveillance the system offers either as a whole or where needed each individual camera offers.

exactely how this standard would be derived is open to suggestion and debate. having such standards in place would assist in visiting an existing system installed by others to take it over, stating it is a of a certain level, you will then easier be able to inform the client you intent to increase or maintain it.

regs

alan

[james.wilson]

Redbull,

Just so that I understand your point, why the distinction between PAL and IP cameras?

Ilkie

ilkie only to prevent the megapixel argument, no setup intended lol

Arf

So from a future proof std point of view and we want to mamke a higher grade that what is currently available how would we do that?

Fire will go the same way come harmonisation.

But id agree maybe the word 'grade' was poorly choosen, maybe catagory would be better.

Any chnage to any reg causes confusion but Ill save that for another thread on another day. Have a read of the current regs (NSI ones granted) and beleive it or not there is an EN reg for cctv.

[Paul Main]

You might be interested to hear that my company (ClearView Communications) has developed an "anyformat player" which decodes all analogue multiplex tape formats and most digital CCTV formats. We're up to around 450 codecs so far. The system auto-detects the appropriate format for viewing. It also corrects some of the poorer manufacturers players by (for example retrieving the time/date from the metadata and putting it back into the video picture). We've developed a single player interface for replaying different CCTV formats. The product is primarily used by police forces to simplify CCTV replay.

[Doktor Jon]

The idea of categorising or classifying CCTV installations is actually relatively simple, but in a practical sense something of a red herring.

If we forget the customer for a moment; the suggestion that perhaps fifteen to twenty years ago CCTV was intended to be a deterrent to crime, has now very much fallen by the wayside, simply because the volume of cameras installed (and the fact that the majority are not 'fit for a useful purpose'), means that criminals now benefit from what scientists describe as "habituation".

In other words, you get so used to something being present, that it no longer affects or modifies your behaviour.

Now the key point is that if a small system is naively profiled for the customers narrow requirements, any supplementary operational objectives are invariably ignored. So using the example of catching a shoplifter in a retail unit, the CCTV may well spot the individual stuffing a frozen chicken down the front of their trousers, but as we all know, with the wrong set up it's going to be next to useless at helping to identify the 'perp', at least without the benefit of thermal imaging.

Consider then that murderers, rapists and terrorists are just as likely to visit their local corner shop for a bottle of milk, so if the vital 'identification' images that the police urgently require are not available, then somebody somewhere, or indeed their family, may have to suffer the consequences of a less than ideal installation.

Devising standards for CCTV has already started albeit to a very limited degree with Licensed Premises in certain parts of the country. This will further develop in coming years, to try and ensure that whatever is supplied fits the bill, but certainly the examples I've seen so far are very much less than what I would consider acceptable. As an exercise is it rocket science? ... nah!

It's quite possible to categorise applications till the cows come home (and really not that difficult to do), but in practice a performance driven standard is actually far more important IMHO.

Now what if we consider, three possible scenarios ....

Firstly, we do nothing at all and hope that the quality of recordings from video surveillance systems, doesn't get any worse, and hopefully over a period of time with gradually improving equipment and falling prices, may actually improve to some limited degree.

Secondly, as an industry or at least part of it, we explore ways of raising standards, so that recognition is given to jobs that are done well, and this will hopefully over a period of time, design out many of the opportunities for cowboy installations.

Finally, we keep all our bits crossed and hope that the legislation that will be brought in, will allow licensing to be obtained after an appropriate level of intensive training and certification, which by my reckoning may well cost installers thousands of pounds to achieve. If you think that sounds laughable, just have a think about how much it costs to achieve 'CORGI' accreditation, to fit a gas appliance.

If you think the last suggestion is fanciful, it's perhaps worth considering that the 'powers that be' are seriously intent on developing video surveillance as a powerful forensic investigative tool, with at least if not more so, the same level of intensive development over the next few years as that applied to DNA analysis.

End users may have relatively mixed expectations at the moment, but that is something which is set to change, either by persuasion, or perhaps eventually legislation.

My concern isn't just about how the objective of improving standards is achieved, but rather how long it's going to take ... and by which route.

[Guest RJBsec]

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.

[Guest anguscanplay]

golden goose time

a CCTV system cannot and will not "identify..." every perp. never mind a single one simple as, due to the limitations of the device -

at least not till someone developes a auto focus, auto tracking, see in the dark and through a hoodie 360 degree camera that runs automatically and can track hundreds of people at once

my own feeling is WE as an industry should be moving away from making such wild promises and selling systems purely on the basis of " local observation / area monitoring..." instead

No ones yet been able to answer my original question to the O/P - what % of succesful identification without realtime viewing?

Angus

[james.wilson]

Angus we all have system that achive very high % of id, those are the systems id'ing a known issue, if you know the problem than you can design a system, just like with intruder, you wouldnt use a

[Guest anguscanplay]

Angus we all have system that achive very high % of id, those are the systems id'ing a known issue, if you know the problem than you can design a system, just like with intruder, you wouldnt use a

[Guest RJBsec]

No ones yet been able to answer my original question to the O/P - what % of succesful identification without realtime viewing?

Angus

It happens!

[Guest anguscanplay]

It happens!

and the name of the chap ?