Subscriber Discussion
Facial Recognition Tested?
I tried to find a topic on IPVM or a discussion on facial recognition software but I was not successful.
If I missed it, my apologies. If not, what is you experience with any of the software available today?
Full testing on face rec software is not something we have done.
It is something we have discussed internally, though. Part of our discussion has involved how to best test performance so it generally indicates field performance.
For example, do we optimize image gathering and minimize variables on the camera side to test software performance, or do we put that at peril in order to use it in challenging spots - in crowds, high cameras/low PPF, variable lighting, and so on.
In other words, If face rec performs good/bad in our tests, will that translate into member applications? It would be bad for everyone if our results failed to apply.
Face rec is one area that generally needs very tightly controlled imaging environments to work well, but we're juggling how to test it in a pragmatic fashion.
If anyone has feedback or ideas, your comments are welcome.
Dear Brian, thank you for the explanation.I understand the issue involved. Regarding the software, there are many on the market today that I am not sure which to choose or test before.
I will list them a bit later and then if someone has any experience can add comments.
Ok here it is:
Herta, 3M, fst biometrics, etc...
Any experience?
Brian, I know little about facial recognition software, but I'd only be interested in ones that integrate with major VMS platforms.
I am also in search of a viable facial recognition software to deploy on the IP cameras at my site, to be able to automatically recognize and alert (such as by a pop up box and alarm sound) if known troublemakers/hostiles come onto the property (i.e. matching against a database of photos). I am using NX Witness VMS.
Imagus (imagus.com.au) have facial recognition. They claim to have very good results even with low resolution, poor video. They come from Australia and are used in the US etc.
Last year I received an in-house demo done of what it is like with a PC and a web camera. It worked just fine to spot myself and the presenter in a lighted office. I don't know how exactly this would integrate with NX Witness.
I would very much appreciate real testing/reviews of Face Recognition software, such as Imagus, VCA, AllGo Vision, etc. Any testing would be better than no testing. For me, relevant testing would be in low-light, in daylight and in WDR scenes, outside entrances, at beginning of a driveway/property edge where a camera was, etc. Crowd testing would also be good. But right now any independent testing would be much better than what seems to be available online.
NEC also claim to be a major leader in Face Recognition.
It is my understanding that Panasonic's facial recognition software can integrate to Genetec. To me that would be an interesting test.
Thanks all for the comments. I know, in the end, I will only see how it performs once I buy it, lot of $$$ spent at the startup.
Thank you all for comments.
We have used a Hikvision camera for this, model iDS-2CD8426G0/F-I.
Matchting stats were quite good, multiple faces at the same time.
Guessing the correct age was way off though, not usable.
Then again, it's more about matching the correct face, age is less relevant
Thanks John for the good points on this. Good point re the professional services cost aspect.
Hi Jonathan, that model iDS-2CD8426G0/F-I sounds good.
Would it work with a VMS, such as Milestone or NxWitness, or does it need the Hikvision VMS?
Historically, there have been a few structured evaluations. You can search for FRVT, FERET, etc. and usually all roads lead to NIST (USA Standards group).
NIST is hosting an FR evaluation now. I've participated in several of these over the years. Preparing to compete is a fire drill on steroids in the best of times, and not entirely congruent with commercial product development. But it is very helpful to place well for all to see, as opposed to buyers simply taking vendors' claims at face value.
www.nist.gov/programs-projects/face-recognition-vendor-test-frvt-1n-2018-evaluation
This from NIST:
In the meantime, our existing evaluation of 1:1 face verification algorithms remains open:
www.nist.gov/programs-projects/face-recognition-vendor-test-frvt-ongoing
Skip, while I have seen the NIST tests for more than a decade, it has never been clear how to map those test results for 'commercial' offerings. For example, what does the NIST test tell buyers about the FST system or the Hikvision system or the Herta system, etc?
Yes, I agree. I think of NIST as a technology test, not a product test. It is still helpful to know something about the potential of the underlying technology when considering a product purchase. The usefulness of the NIST results may be constrained by how the test was structured, but I do give them high marks for being thorough and objective. I suppose one may look at Cognitec's results and infer something about FST's potential performance, I know I would, but it may be wading in too deep for many integrators.
Another issue to consider is the relationship between the tested algorithm and the algorithm that a vendor actually deploys, or deployed in the past (if you have an older system). This is especially critical when you consider the advances in facial recognition algorithms over the past decade
we have seen a couple brands - planning on testing:
http://www.princetonidentity.com/
a little bulky on the reader (doesn't use off the shelf cameras) but they work.
they are the software Samsung Galaxy8 is using for iris recognition technology
also http://bluelinetechnology.com/
They have drivers to a few cameras - based upon Pixels on target to get accurate detection.
they have a case study where all you need is a valid face read to get entry. That way they have a "log" of anyone entering facility.
Hi Tomislav,
This is a good discussion. I agree with the comments above. NIST tests technology, and more importantly algorithm performance. Testing a product in the field is another story with its own challenges.
As others have indicated, the positioning and configuration of cameras is very important, and in turn may require professional services of the solution provider. Edge computing (on camera) simplifies the deployment and maintenance and generally will reduce the need for professional services. Ultimately, the proper tools and training should remove the need altogether.
Good discussion so far. I was recently working on an overseas project that required facial recognition for over 100,000 cameras.
Needless to say that the types of technology that could be deployed at this level weren't your stock standard commerically available ones.
I ended up looking at systems from NEC, Qognify and Allevate (Tygart).
All came with considerable price tags. The Allevate one was interesting in that it offered FRAAS (facial recognition as a service), based on the number of searches it does and how big your "watchlist" is.
Might save the huge capex.
http://allevate.com/index.php/2017/10/05/five-serious-criminals-arrested-rio-shopping-mall-first-weeks-use-cloud-face-recognition-system/
A system this large is very interesting. Did all the cameras share the same watchlist? Are you able to share how large the watchlist was? What sort of correct recognition vs. false alarm did you experience? Was the output a single ID, or a list of potential matches? If you can't get into details, was your impression that the FR delivered value? Did it work in the eyes of the customer?
Hi Skip,
Personally I don't think this specific project will happen as they have unrealistic expectations on what their cameras can deliver - most are probably in the wrong locations so will be useless for FR.
Watchlist is in the thousands and yes, the intention was for them all to be on the same watchlist with distributed servers to cope with the load.
Testing for this project hasn't commenced yet but i will let you know when it is ready.
Our partner has a similiar deployment in the Middle East so will try an get you some more info.
In our case, I believe it's difficult to quantify value - as it's not a commercially motivated purchase. It's in the category of CT - Counter Terrorism, public safety - well at least that's how it has been dressed up.
I personally think it's a good excuse for mass surveillance so how do you put a "$£€" on that? We have just priced it up as we would any other project - but with lots of margin built in.
Newest Discussions
| Discussion | Posts | Latest |
|---|---|---|
|
Started by
John Honovich
|
7
|
less than a minute by Undisclosed Manufacturer #2 |
|
Started by
John Honovich
|
4
|
less than a minute by Undisclosed #1 |
|
Started by
Undisclosed End User #1
|
10
|
7 minutes by Undisclosed #3 |
|
Started by
Donald Maye
|
4
|
less than a minute by Donald Maye |
|
Started by
William Miller
|
2
|
less than a minute by Brian Rhodes |
