PPF Test - Getting High Quality Surveillance Video

Author: John Honovich, Published on Apr 04, 2010

Megapixel cameras foster hope for much higher quality surveillance video but how much more and in what conditions? In this report, we answer these questions in depth based on extensive testing.

The most aggressive marketing claims suggest a single megapixel camera is equals 95 CCTV cameras. Does that mean you could literally replace 95 CCTV cameras? If not 95, is it 25 or 16 or 4, etc.?

A 'Magic Number'

The megapixel vendors are now advocating a 'magic number' of 40 pixels per foot. They claim that if your Field of View provides 40 pixels per foot (e.g., a 1920 x 1080 camera covering a 48 foot wide FoV), then you can see facial details and license plates clearly.

Some vendors qualify their number by saying it is a 'minimum' but then fail to offer any further disclosure or explanation. This is as helpful as the government coming to your house and telling you owe a minimum of $1,000 in taxes.

Our Test

Over a 3 week period, we went out and tested these assumptions using a variety of cameras, resolutions and Field of Views. The video below overviews how we approached our tests:

Our Findings

Our test results show that achieving high quality surveillance is much more complicated than the magic numbers nor multipliers being advocated today. While megapixel surveillance can significantly improve surveillance coverage, many issues and nuances exist that must be properly appreciated when designing and deploying systems. We examine these in depth in the PRO section.

********* ******* ****** **** *** **** ****** ******* ************ ***** but *** **** **** *** ** **** **********? ** **** report, ** ****** ***** ********* ** ***** ***** ** ********* testing.

*** **** ********** ********* ****** ******* * ****** ********* ****** is ****** ** **** *******. **** **** **** *** ***** literally******* ** **** *******? ** *** **, ** ** ** ** ** ** 4, ***.?

A '***** ******'

*** ********* ******* *** *** ********** * '***** ******' ** 40 ****** *** ****. **** ***** **** ** **** ***** of **** ******** ** ****** *** **** (*.*., * **** x **** ****** ******** * ** **** **** ***), **** you *** *** ****** ******* *** ******* ****** *******.

**** ******* ******* ***** ****** ** ****** ** ** * 'minimum' *** **** **** ** ***** *** ******* ********** ** explanation. **** ** ** ******* ** *** ********** ****** ** your ***** *** ******* *** *** * ******* ** $*,*** in *****.

Our ****

**** * * **** ******, ** **** *** *** ****** these *********** ***** * ******* ** *******, *********** *** ***** of *****. *** ***** ***** ********* *** ** ********** *** tests:

Our ********

*** **** ******* **** **** ********* **** ******* ************ ** much **** *********** **** *** ***** ******* *** *********** ***** advocated *****. ***** ********* ************ *** ************* ******* ************ ********, many ****** *** ******* ***** **** **** ** ******** *********** when ********* *** ********* *******. ** ******* ***** ** ***** in *** *** *******.

[***************]

Key ********

*** ********* ****** *** *** *** ******** / ***************:

  • **'ideal' ******** ********** - even daytime lighting, no shadows, no glare - you need closer to 50 pixels per foot to see facial features clearly and read US license plates.
  • ** **** ******** *********** ******** ********** - ********shadow ** ***** - you need ~20% more pixels to 'overcome' decrease in contrast.
  • ***** ****** *** ************ ****** **** **** ****** ** ****** or ***** ********** *** ***, ** *** **** ** ****** that ****** ******** *** ******* ****, *** ******target ** ****** *** ****.
  • *******, **** **** * ** ** *** ** ******** (**** street ******), ******* **** **** *************. ** ** **** ** the *******, ***** **** ** ********* *** *** ******* ***** level **** ************* ****** *** ***** ***** ********** ******* *** be ****. **night, *** ***** **** *** ****** *** **** (or more).
  • *****quality ********* ******** as the FoV width expands. There's no single point where quality goes from good to bad. Details gradually appear or disappear as the FoV width changes.
  • ** *****numerous ****** ** ******* ******* *** ************ ***. While traditionally, surveillance applications had 3 quality levels (often called personal, action, scene), we found at least double that number. As quality degrades, some details still remain. Those details can still provide benefits depending on the application.
  • **** ******* ***** **good ****** ** ******** **********. Because quality gradually degrades, some users may find different levels of quality to be sufficient. For example, two people may view video from the same camera and one will judge 45 pixels per foot to be sufficient while another may prefer 55 pixels per foot.
  • Vertical ******** ******* varies dramatically with the focal length / horizontal angle of the lens. With a wide angle lens, it is nearly impossible to get facial features at more than a few feet distance from the camera (even with megapixel). With a telephoto lens, facial features can be captured at fairly far distances. The tradeoff of course is the width of FoV covered.
  • ****** ****HD ** *** ******** ******** *** ***** ****. In FoVs narrower than 20-40' wide, it is unlikely that significant material difference can be visually observed. At wider FoVs, modest increases in ability to detect meaningful details was shown.

How ** ******* ***********

****** **** *** ***** ***** ** ********** *** ** *** the ****** ****** ******** *** *** ** ********* ***** ***********.

Download ****** ****** *** ********** ******

*** **** ******, ** *** ******* * ****** ** *** original ****** ****** *** ****** ** *******.

** ********* *** ***** **** ****** ** *** ********** ****** as ***** ****** ******* * ******** ** ****** **** * variety ** *** ****** *** ***********.

************, **** *** * *** ** *** ******** ***** ***** so **** *** *** ***** *** '***' ***** ** *** how ** ********* *** *****:

Lighting ******** ******

** *** ********* ** *** ******, ** ******* ********* *** scenes **** '*****' **** **** ******* **********. ** *** ********** below, ** ********* * ***** ****** ******** ********* **** ****** significant ******:

  • ****** *******/***** *** ******** *** ****** ** ****** ****** *** the **** ***** ** ******* ************** **** ****** *** ****** of *** ***.
  • ******* ****** **** ***** ****** ** ********** ****** ******** **** still ************* ****** **********, ********* ************ ****** ****** *** **** to ******** ****** ** *** **** ***** ** ***.
  • ********* ** ******** ** ***** *** ****** ******* *** ***** so *** **** ********* ********** **** ******* ****** ** ** practical ******** **** ** **********.

Pixels ****** / ******* ********

*** ***** ******** **********, ** **** ********* * *********** ******* levels **** *** **** ****** ** ********. ***** *** *** categories (******* ****** ******* ** ***** ********* ******* *******, ******, etc.)

  • ********* ** ****** ******:
  • ***** ***** ** ****** (***, ******): * - ** ****** per ****
  • ****** *********** ***** ** ****** (****, ***********, ***.): ** - 24 ****** *** ****
  • ****** **** (***** ******** ** *** ******* **** *** ******): 25 - ** ****** *** ****
  • ***** **** (***** ******** * ********): ** - ** ****** per ****
  • **** ** ******* (**** ***** ******* ** **** *** ****): 80+ ****** *** ****)

** *** ********** *****, ** ******* *** ** ********* **** and *** ************ ** ******* ***********:

Differences ** *** ***** *** ******* ***********

********* ********** *** ******** *** ***** ** *** **** * camera *** *****. ** *** ***** *****, ** *********** ****** that * **, *** *** *** ****** *** *******. * few *** ****** ** ****:

  • *** ** *****, ****** ***** ******** **********. ** *** *******, glare ******** *** ***** ****** ********, *** ********** ** **** resolution *********.
  • ** ******** **** (**** **-** ****), *** *** ******** ** find *** ********** ********** ******* * *** *** *** ******.
  • *** *** **** ** **** ** ** ***, * **** smaller **** ****** **** *** ** *** (** ** ******** given *** ******** ******** ** ******). ****** **** *** ** 5MP ***** **** ***** ** ** - *** **** ****.
  • ** * ***' *****, ** ** ****** **** ******** '*****' of ***** *** * *** ****** *** ******* ******* ** the ***, ******, **** *** ******** ** * *******.

** *** ********** *****, ** ******* *** ** ******* ** this ***** *** **** *** *********** ** **** ********:

Variances ** ****** ****** *** ******* / ****** ******

******* / ****** ****** **** *********** *********. **** *** **** of *** ****** *** *** ********** ****** ** *** ***** can ***** ******. **** ** ********** ********* *** ** ****** and *** ******* ****** **** ***** ********** ****** **** ***** contrast ** *** *****.

** *** ********** *****, ** ******* *** ******** *** *** we ****** *** ******* ******.

Variances ** ******** ** ****** **** ********** **** *******

** *** ***** ** ***, ** **** ********* ************ ** the *** *****. ** ******, *** **** *** ****** *** be ******** **** ******* **** ******* **** *** ********* ****** the ******** ******** ****.

**** ********* ********* ******** *** *** ** **** ***** ** super **** ***** ****** ** **** *** *** ***** *** greater *****. *** ******** ** **** ***** '*******' ***** ************* the ***** *** ***** ********. *** **** ********* ****** ** the ******* ** ****** ****** *******. **** * **** ***** lens, * ****** **** **** ** **** **** *** ****** is ****** ******** ** **** ***** ****** ******* ********. ** a ********* ******* ** **** *********** ********, **** *** **** results *********'* **** ***** ** ****.

** * *********, ***** ** *** ****** *** **** *** can ****** ***** ******* **** *******. ****** **** *** **** telephoto *** ****, *** **** ******* *** **** *** ** pixel *******. [**** *** * */*' ******, * ** ****** FoV ** ******** **** * *.* ** ****, * ** degree *** **** * * ** **** *** * ** degree *** **** * **** ****.]

** ** *********** ****, *** *** ***** ***** ***** ********** this ************.

Summary ********

********* *** ************>, *** ********* ****** *** *** *** ******** / ***************:

  • **'ideal' ******** ********** - even daytime lighting, no shadows, no glare - you need closer to 50 pixels per foot to see facial features clearly and read US license plates.
  • ** **** ******** *********** ******** ********** - ********shadow ** ***** - you need ~20% more pixels to 'overcome' decrease in contrast.
  • ***** ****** *** ************ ****** **** **** ****** ** ****** or ***** ********** *** ***, ** *** **** ** ****** that ****** ******** *** ******* ****, *** ******target ** ****** *** ****.
  • *******, **** **** * ** ** *** ** ******** (**** street ******), ******* **** **** *************. ** ** **** ** the *******, ***** **** ** ********* *** *** ******* ***** level **** ************* ****** *** ***** ***** ********** ******* *** be ****. **night, *** ***** **** *** ****** *** **** (or more).
  • *****quality ********* ******** as the FoV width expands. There's no single point where quality goes from good to bad. Details gradually appear or disappear as the FoV width changes.
  • ** *****numerous ****** ** ******* ******* *** ************ ***. While traditionally, surveillance applications had 3 quality levels (often called personal, action, scene), we found at least double that number. As quality degrades, some details still remain. Those details can still provide benefits depending on the application.
  • **** ******* ***** **good ****** ** ******** **********. Because quality gradually degrades, some users may find different levels of quality to be sufficient. For example, two people may view video from the same camera and one will judge 45 pixels per foot to be sufficient while another may prefer 55 pixels per foot.
  • Vertical ******** ******* varies dramatically with the focal length / horizontal angle of the lens. With a wide angle lens, it is nearly impossible to get facial features at more than a few feet distance from the camera (even with megapixel). With a telephoto lens, facial features can be captured at fairly far distances. The tradeoff of course is the width of FoV covered.
  • ****** ****HD ** *** ******** ******** *** ***** ****. In FoVs narrower than 20-40' wide, it is unlikely that significant material difference can be visually observed. At wider FoVs, modest increases in ability to detect meaningful details was shown.

*********?

*** ****** ******** * **** ******* ** ******, *** ** all ***** ** **** ********** ** ** *** ******. ** you **** ************* ** ********* ** ******* ******, ****** ***.

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Other Reports on IP Cameras

One Day Left - Camera Course Spring 2016 on May 04, 2016
Tomorrow is the last day to register for the Spring 2016 camera course. Here is what is new for the 2016 course: HD analog: Expanded coverage...
Network Ports for IP Video Surveillance Tutorial on Jan 20, 2016
Network ports are critical for remote video viewing and recording and without proper configuration, IP video will not work.  In this tutorial, we...
H.265 / HEVC Codec Tutorial on Jan 19, 2016
H.265 / HEVC has been promised for many years as the next big CODEC and the successor to H.264. Now with many H.265 IP cameras starting to ship,...
IP Camera Pricing and Markups Statistics 2015 on Dec 11, 2015
100+ integrators told IPVM their average IP camera pricing and markups. In this note, we share statistics on: The average IP camera pricing for...
Camera AoV / Focal Length Comparison on Nov 24, 2015
Use the IPVM Camera Calculator to better understand the tradeoffs between different Angle of Views (AoV) / focal lengths. The video below shows...
How a Security Camera is Made on Nov 18, 2015
While in China, we toured factories, seeing how cameras were made. In the 15 minute video inside, we show step by step how a camera is made /...
IP Camera Trolling - Cybersecurity Showcase on Nov 09, 2015
If you want to convince your customers about the importance of cybersecurity and the risk of being the next Hikvision, Foscam or Trendnet, show...
Network Connectors for IP Cameras Guide on Nov 05, 2015
Fewer installation tasks are as nuanced as terminating cables and attaching connectors. Fortunately, this task is easy to manage and get right if...
IP Camera Bootup Shootout 2015 on Nov 04, 2015
IP cameras, like PCs, take some time to boot up. And just like PCs, the amount of time can vary greatly. Many people do not care but some people...
Network Cabling for Video Surveillance Guide on Oct 30, 2015
In this 14 page guide, we teach the fundamentals of network cabling for video surveillance networks, how they should be installed, and the...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Panoramic IR Illuminator Tested (Axton Nano) on May 04, 2016
The Axton Nano is designed to illuminate large areas from above, aiming to cover much wider areas, up to 4,600 square feet, unlike typical...
Integrator Competitiveness Survey 2016: Mass Market Worse, Higher End Robust on May 04, 2016
150 security integrators told IPVM about competitive trends in the security industry over the last 3 years. Overwhelmingly, integrators feel...
Camera Innovation is Amazing on May 04, 2016
The innovation in the video surveillance camera market has never been higher or faster. While there is much negativity about the race to the...
One Day Left - Camera Course Spring 2016 on May 04, 2016
Tomorrow is the last day to register for the Spring 2016 camera course. Here is what is new for the 2016 course: HD analog: Expanded coverage...
BCDVideo Company Profile on May 03, 2016
BCDVideo claims better value and servers specifically selected for video surveillance, an improved experience versus working with a server...
Avigilon Is Cash Strapped, Commodity Company, Charges Analyst on May 03, 2016
Avigilon has come under attack by an analyst in SeekingAlpha charging that the company is 'cash strapped', 'becoming a commodity', with...
Software House Access Control Company Profile on May 02, 2016
In our 12th access company profile, we examine Software House's C-Cure access control platform: Comparing Software House to their...
Micropower Fails on May 02, 2016
Wireless video surveillance is a tough business. Micropower sought to deliver a wireless, turn-key, professional video solution. The most famous...
FLIR Latitude VMS Test on May 02, 2016
FLIR spent nearly $100 million on DVTel, primarily for one product - DVTel's enterprise VMS. Though FLIR has killed the DVTel brand, they are...
Ubiquiti Cloud Video Tested on Apr 29, 2016
  The cloud continues to expand in video surveillance. Ubiquiti's newest release offers a free upgrade adding cloud capabilities. In this test,...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact