I welcome manufacturers to ask questions like this, that seek to solve problems and get input.
For now, I'll refrain from commenting on the 6 suggestions / options listed so others can start the discussion. I will chime in later though.
More than facial recognition, motion detection, improve the quality of the motion detection. To me that would be the starting point for any analytics on the edge.
Simplify the installation and configuration.
Firstly please forgive the hair splitting, but I'm assuming you are suggesting improved face detection as opposed to face recognition? For surveillance applications I would think face detection can be nice to have, but maybe not a market wide driver. I would suggest a couple of things not on your list. Keeping to the basics, namely improved sensitivity and dynamic range. The highest quality intrinsic image is the best starting point for manual and automated detection and recognition.
Comming from a manufacturer with similar challenges to Ben I would ask something further. What camera form factors are important to you? What lens focal lengths? What resolutions? Seemingly we discussing premium class cameras with top of the line features where adding capabilities and features can be an endless discussion plus new features can add cost. I would like to know feature priority and what features are important enough that you would consider paying more for?
My priority is to focus on delivering the best quality video under the widest range of lighting and environmental conditions while optimizing for bandwidth use and maintaining frame rates.
Good camera management software with ability to send out mass firmware updates, easy IP addres configuration, etc. easy configuration of templates manipulating features such as turn off/on WDR, setting bitrate controls, etc.
The web GUI should be easy to use. Put the standard features at the top of menus and the more advanced ones down further in the tree. Mixing them all together just make sit difficult for installers.
Auto focus is a really great to have unless the price point is rock bottom. As far as latency the cameras usually have minimal latency, it's the network infrastructure and recording server/software that usually introduces the most latency.
Being able to turn on/off WDR and other features that manipulate light during the day and night so they do not conflict with each other.
I think the biggest thing is be honest. If your camera cannot do what I'm asking just say it cannot do that :)
Thanks Jason. Your list is a good one. And yes, i hear some of your frustrations when people get told a brand of camera can do something and then find out it can't - so we are always upfront and if the Canon cameras can't do something we say it straight away, no stuffing people around. Good thing for you, our cameras allow for reasonably quick and easy firmware updates, as the program detects any of your cameras on the network which you can update all at once. We are always looking at ways to improve our GUI and will look to continually take feedback on board and do this. You can turn WDR (or what we call SSC, smart shade control) on and off easily + you can set different areas the camera can look at/pan too automatically where you can program SSC to turn on at a location OR turn on at a select amount of time - which is ideal for areas where big changes of lighting conditions occur.
1. If you are a true profesisonal IP camera solution, please don't waste your time with "fake" D/N. Make true D/N cameras with IR cut filters unless it's some budget, compact interior dome or something like that.
2. Motorized zoom and focus. Saves a lot of time on install and saves on service calls that comes out of our pockets.
3. Would be nice to see more competitive multi-imager suround video products, ideally one that can provide as an option pre-stiching the pictures together before output.
4. High frame rates have their applications, but I wouldn't get too caught up in that, at least not for every model. As shown by polls on here (but can't find links to right now), most recording are 15FPS or less.
5. If you make a fisheye, 360 model, make sure it has option to dewarp images at the camera. This increases potentionial use with other VMSes that don't have dewareping at the client side.
6. Don't know how practical this would be, but maybe a connector for a dongle that gives you an option for composite video or display port/hdmi out for seperate display monitors or hand held monitors....
7. A cost effective IP LPC camera.
Backup and restore of camera settings
8. Some 16mm vairfocal lens options for domes and bullets would be nice.
9. Inexpensive indoor and outdoor dome models that have audio inputs. Don't do something dumb by only having audio inputs on your most expensive models.
10. If your quality control and technical support are not up to par, don't bother.
For casino purposes I think more advanced facial recognition capabilities would be great.
Thanks everyone for their input to this question. It is very valuable information to us to hear what people in the market, using IP cameras are looking for. At Canon we are always striving to make the best cameras available and will take all of these points under advisement and look to see how we can develope some or all of these points into our future roadmap of cameras that will come to the market over the next 12-24 months. Stay tuned for more exciting Canon IP camera developments in the future.
I actually am a big Canon DSLR fan and at one point demo'd a couple of the indoor VB-C60 40x zoom ptz and was really impressed by the lens (its Canon... duh)
One of the things that has always bugged me about Canon's offering is this:
This and a lot of your offerings appear to be designed with no security background/frame of reference. Who approves that housing design and thinks A) This fills a huge demand gap in the market for "cameras with the imager oddly on the side of the camera" and/or B) This is going to steal sales from incumbant manufacturer in the "cameras with the imager oddly on the side of the camera" market.
Just make the cameras easy to install, and go from powered/boot to connected to the network and sending images in under 30 seconds (I think this is a highly underated and oft overlooked limitation of IP cameras). Done.
He may be sincere, or it may be a PR ploy, but either way, at least he asked. I don't see too many other manyfacturers proactively reaching out for feedback.
@Ben You have any info about these cameras?
Multiple stream capability at >=30fps, including at least one each unicast and multicast.
For box cameras, a huge plus would be a form factor that can fit inside a Pelco DF5 dome.
For integrated domes, interchangeable lens capability and the ability to accomodate both auto and manual iris lenses. Enough space between camera and dome to accomodate even very long lenses like 5-50mm. In the same vein, light weight and a non-vandal-resistant option would be pluses. Full 3-axis control with the ability to not only pan nearly 360 degrees and tilt greater than 90 degrees (with the capability to tilt beyond horizontal) and the capability to rotate the camera so that offset mounting can still obtain proper angles of view.
By the way, we will be interested in testing MP IP cameras starting early next year. A couple of manufacturers have queued up but we still welcome other opportunities. Minimum requirements are 2x 30fps streaming capability and ONVIF compatibility with IndigoVision Control Center.
Carl, I'm interested to hear what your current feedback is on the systems and units you've already tested. Based on your above specs, it sounds like the q1614 is gonna be right up your alley.... Ours too. The form factor, fps, and lens options all lend to the above. What other 30 or 60 fps cameras have you guys tested? I remember responding to a thread a while back on the 3354 and the inability to maintain 30fps while dual streaming. Have you guys tried multicasting and putting the stream duplication on the switch? I'm unsure if IndigoVision supports multicasting or not.
And while we are on the topic, why Indigo? Is it their client and video playback responsiveness? This is the only area I've heard of indigo beating out other VMS companies. I fear that the turmoil at the upper echelon of Indigo is telling of how the company is operating currently, so we've steered clear. Stability within a company is a good indicator in my opinion of where a company is headed.
In cameras, we tested the IndigoVision 11000HD and BX series, Axis P3354, P3364 and P3384 and, I believe, an M3204. We also tested a Ganz dome and a Bosch dome (don't remember the model numbers).
The Ganz had a relatively noisy picture, as did the IndigoVision BX. Neither the Axis nor the Ganz cameras could feed two simultaneous 30fps streams via ONVIF. The Bosch showed promise but we didn't test it with the IndigoVision VMS - it arrived during our tests of Geutebruck. It didn't test well with that VMS - it caused their server to reboot continuously until we disconnected it. Likely not the camera's fault as Geutebruck stated there was an issue with a dll.
IndigoVision 11000HD cameras, while lacking a few features, still outperformed all others we tested in terms of displaying reliable 30fps via at least two streams and came in second behind the Axis P-series in picture quality after a factory modification to the IR filter. IV recommends dual streaming: unicast for record and multicast for viewing. Their logic is that a TCP/IP stream is more reliable and therefor better-suited to critical recording.
IndigoVision and Geutebruck were relatively close in our test scoring with each system having advantages in some areas while lagging in others. Key deciding factors were Geutebruck's inability to demonstrate a similar installation and their reluctance to speak directly with us regarding certain aspects of their system (they claimed they didn't want to step on the Integrator's toes), plus not being able to provide competing bids (they put all of their eggs in one Integrator basket).
IndigoVision was eager to work with us on improvements we felt would increase the value of their system to us (and obviously to other casino users). That is also a huge plus for us.
IndigoVision's stability is not a concern. It appears they are well over that problem.
Ensuring Canon Continues our leading low light and wide angle lens performance
Ben, I believe this one for me is the 'nuts'.
People I speak to about Canon, invariably bring up Canon's leading low-light performance and wonder what the ramifications would be if they would, god forbid, sink into second place or worse...
The mere fact that you might not "ensure" your competitive advantage simply to say "minimize" latency or remedy some other production artifact is troubling.
We want you to Stay on Top!
Fast IP assignment tools (single click assign to multiple cameras)
Fast IP camera config tools (assign custom bitrate profile to multiple cameras in 1 click)
The handful of previous companies I've worked for have all had one main factor in choosing cameras, cost. But isn't that always the case?