Realities of License Plate Recognition (LPR)by John Honovich, IPVM posted on May 08, 2008 About John Contact John
LPR is a very demanding application that can only succeed in limited operational conditions deployed by expert security integrators.
Historically, publicly available information clearly explaining the operational impact has been hard to find. Thankfully, Milestone has released their LPR administrator's manual providing an honest, clear and concise explanation. [Updated 2013 manual] Though this is for Milestone the points are generally consistent with the state of the art in currently available commercial systems.
The Milestone document helps to reveal 3 key practical elements:
- LPR can only succeed when a number of strict operational conditions are met.
- The costs of achieving these conditions makes LPR unfeasible for many scenarios.
- You need deep security integration expertise to succeed but only modest IT depth.
Here are the key conditions that need to be meet in approximate order of difficulty:
US license plates need to be at least 130 pixels wide. This translates roughly into an image no wider than 5-6 feet assuming 4CIF standard definition video. That's a very tight shot.
- The horizontal angle between the camera and plate is within 20 degrees. This means that if your camera is 10 feet away from the plate, the plate cannot be more than 3 feet to the right or left of the camera. This significantly limits where you can put the camera.
- The vertical angle between the camera and plate is within 30 degrees. This means that if your camera is 10 feet away from the plate and the plate is 3 feet off the ground, the camera cannot be mounted than 8 feet high. This usually can be accommodated but is low relative to normal heights for outdoor surveillance.
- There are a host of lighting adjustments that need to be made. Simply using a stock camera with stock settings will routinely cause very poor performance. For example, Milestone recommends CMOS cameras, disabling auto gain, using WDR and higher shutter speeds (if the car is moving). There is a lot of advanced details that need to be set correctly.
- You must use MJPEG and you cannot use H.264 or MPEG-4. Since the analytics in this design are being done outside of the camera and since the analytic can only process images, MJPEG is required. You could theoretically use H.264 or MPEG-4 but then you would have to decode it and the processing power can be very significant. Bottom line is this can have a big impact on bandwidth utilization especially if you are looking for a wireless system.
Clearly, LPR is feasible for the traditional license plate camera use case: A camera installed immediately adjacent to an entrance or toll booth that is only a few feet off the ground and dedicated to looking at the plate. Automated LPR makes reading these plates easier.
However, for broader market usage, this has major limitations. Lots of companies like the concept of monitoring the license plates of people who enter their premises. Setting up cameras in the specific constraints required can be very expensive. Assuming you can find a location that meets these constraints, it requires a construction project that can be $5,000 or more per camera simply for the installation and equipment.
The holy grail is reutilizing your PTZs mounted on roofs and poles. However, these conditions should make it clear that is not feasible. One, getting the resolution needed would be difficult. Does a monitor manually zoom in on license plates? Even if he does, what will the image quality be, given the lighting constraints required for LPR. Also, it will be extremely tough to stay within booth the horizontal and vertical angle requirements.
LPR analysis, with its current capabilities, cannot enable significantly new operational uses of license plate monitoring. While it should help with the traditional use case of monitoring controlled traffic flow, its constraints make it very challenging for broader use.
Security Integration Expertise
The other interesting element that the Milestone manual demonstrates is that LPR integration does not demand deep IT skill but it does demand deep expertise in security design and camera systems.
Integrating LPR is much more like using a graphics design application than it is like setting up a mail server. It depends on understanding the design objectives of security, the physical conditions of the site and the capabilities of the video tools available. The IT elements of the setup are fairly straightforward for a security integrator. The challenge lies in the design and application.
Finally, it is great that Milestone released this manual. Milestone has clearly shared operational limitations that might stop some from buying their product. It is hard for most organizations to do this. Nevertheless, in the long run, it is better for our customers and I believe better for Milestone. In this way, we can maximize the probability that projects will be successful, customers will be happy and the market expands over time.
Most Recent Industry Reports
License Plate Capture Shootout 2014 on Mar 10, 2014
What should you be using to capture license plates consistently? We tested 3 major types of cameras head to head to see the tradeoffs: Super Low Light cameras: Day / night MP cameras with advan...
IP Camera Bandwidth / Storage Shootout on Mar 05, 2014
Bandwidth consumption can vary tremendously, even with the same resolution, frame rate, compression and scene, by 50% to 80% in our tests. This is because cameras process video differently (e.g., g...
Market Guide 2014: Video Analytics on Mar 03, 2014
For more than a decade, video analytics has been the great hope for the surveillance industry. Indeed, it remains the pick as the Next Big Thing. Yet the past 2 years has been rough, with ObjectVi...
Testing Geovision MP License Plate Camera on Feb 28, 2014
Capturing license plates is one of the most requested, and underserved areas, in IP cameras. The question comes up a lot, and there are not many purpose built options. One of the few IP / MP Licen...
Book Released: 2014 Access Control Training on Feb 26, 2014
Just like we did an IP camera book, we are now doing one for access control. This is the best, most comprehensive access control training in the world, based on our unprecedented research. No...
Testing Honeywell HD WDR IP Camera on Feb 25, 2014
Honeywell is a huge name, but not one well respected in video surveillance, unless you are an alarm dealer. The company was late into IP but now offers their own IP camera line, including their hi...
Worst VMS Manufacturers 2014 on Feb 24, 2014
With the favorite VMSes revealed, we now turn to the worst. We asked 120+ integrators from more than 20 countries: "In the past year, what VMS / NVR system have you had the worst experience wit...
IP Camera Manufacturer Compression Comparison on Feb 21, 2014
Compression is very important. While resolution gets the attention, compression is critical and can be a silent killer - both for quality and bandwidth. Regardless of resolution, all surveillance ...
Camera Test: PPF Needed For IDs, Text, Money on Feb 19, 2014
Need to see the fine print of a dollar bill, euro, driver's license or text on a document? We tested 3 different types of print. Currency, both the US dollar and the Euro: Identification card,...
Favorite VMS Manufacturers 2014 on Feb 17, 2014
With the favorite and worst IP camera manufacturers identified, we now turn to the VMS manufacturers. 120 integrators from 20 countries answered the following open ended question: 23 manufact...