I almost dread bringing this up again after reading the last one at migrating an analog system to IP, but need to, because that situation was a little different. This is a larger system with different considerations, IE, a small amount of the cable could be re-pulled. Or maybe that system had the same considerations, but weren't discussed.
This system is in a large distribution center. Perhaps 10 of the runs are 100 or so feet in the office area. However, the other 179 runs are of varying distances through the wrought iron of a large distribution center. The desire is to 'upgrade.' They think they want IP video. I think there's room for cost-benefit analysis though of IP vs HDCCTV.
For the short office runs, if IP, I could just re-pull the cable, cheaper than converting for short runs. For all the warehouse runs, it'll have to be a conversion for IP. For HD, I just re-use what's there.
Probably next week, we will replace two analog cameras that are down right now with SOMETHING, and provide a recorder for that something, then we'll do probably half the rest at the beginning of the year, then the leftovers by the end of the year. I want to make sure I've really considered things before making my recommendations for what we do next week. I know a lot changes fast with technology.
My perceived pros for IP:
- Interoperability with different systems
- More feature-rich recorders
- IT people know how to interact with it
- IT security, mac address locks for cameras, etc
- Lower (general) head end cost than HD (they seem pretty expensive to me, and only 8 channels?)
- More than 8 channels, less rack space
Perceived pros for HDCCTV:
- Less latency
- Don't have to change existing equipment (maybe power supplies, but no cable changes)
- Don't have to pay for converters, seems like the going cost now is about $300 per cable
- Better live viewing (no compression)
- No switches
- Less labor
What do you all think about the two in this specific situation? Unless there are technical issues to consider that I haven't mentioned, I think the most cost effective solution will win out, if the cost difference is significant. If it's not significant, there is appeal to being able to have some cameras at 5 or 10 MP.