Subscriber Discussion

Row Of Axis Fisheye Cameras At Retailer Checkout - What Do You Think?

Avatar
Ari Erenthal
Jan 23, 2017

I saw this at A.C. Moore, a craft store:

Those are M3007s fisheye panoramic cameras.

Thoughts?

Avatar
Kevin Nadai
Jan 23, 2017

That is a great camera. I have one. It was the first fisheye camera I ever liked.

Like all wide angle cameras, these "spread out" the pixels over a wide area. Awesome coverage, but pixel density drops off dramatically with distance. I would not expect much detail when magnifying the image. This may the reason for the extended pendant mount -- to get closer to the target. They could have accomplished the same thing with better aesthetics using cameras on the ceiling with less of a viewing angle. Varifocal is obviously within their budget.

Many pixels are wasted on that front wall, the one to the right from this picture's perspective.

Camera point of view is less than ideal for facial recognition but near perfect for watching POS activity. Perhaps there is another camera at the exit for matching faces?

If this accomplishes what they want, fine. I would have designed something less obtrusive.

(3)
(1)
Avatar
Marc Pichaud
Jan 23, 2017

Ari , you obviously know the answer. What kind of fool could imagine to get details (identification / inspection) with traffic (reco , detect)  cameras wasting pixels on 360°.

After few days, the cashiers will discover that products and  cash can't be clearly recognized, neither detailed , don't expect with such an installation to cut off your losses...  oups

Bizcases for Video Trainings.

(2)
(2)
UE
Undisclosed End User #1
Jan 23, 2017

Generally speaking, and I don't know this store but why would the cashiers find anything out?  They should have no access to anything resembling a monitor (in my opinion).  I have used this camera in a different setting but I think it would fit the bill for a general "over-watch" camera.  The security/surveillance personnel would have to be neglect at doing their job not to be able to determine if items were going to walk out, cashiers not scanning items, etc... If it is the store manager watching, that could go either way. As someone mentioned aesthetics, this is a check out line at a volume looking chain retail store, aesthetics really should not come into play, having obvious camera's at the check out line is clearly the intent here.  Just my 2 cents.

 

PS: I keep seeing these pop up a retail stores, I was with my wife in a hand soap and candle chain store in a mall over Christmas and they had 3-4 down the center of the store, I thought good idea, but the ceilings were so low and the marketing materials almost to the ceiling, I was assuming that most of the usefulness would be lost in that setting.

(2)
Avatar
Lynn Harold
Jan 23, 2017

I'm more curious to know what you were doing at AC Moore?  Scrapbooking?  Knitting? 

(1)
(4)
U
Undisclosed #2
Jan 23, 2017
IPVMU Certified

Where do you get your "Duck" Tape from?

Avatar
Ari Erenthal
Jan 23, 2017

Art supplies. 

U
Undisclosed #2
Jan 23, 2017
IPVMU Certified

That M12 lens, if its like my 180/360s, may be field replaceable just by unscrewing.

For around $25 you can get a decent lens with a narrower FOV.

Avatar
Armando Perez
Jan 23, 2017
Hoosier Security and Security Owners Group • IPVMU Certified

 waste of money, poor design. See it all the time around here, not sure how to cover what they want so they just cover everything with a blanket of mediocrity.

(2)
(4)
MI
Matt Ion
Jan 24, 2017

not sure how to cover what they want

And how do you know what THEY want?

(2)
Avatar
Armando Perez
Jan 24, 2017
Hoosier Security and Security Owners Group • IPVMU Certified

I suppose you're right. It's possible they asked for the lowest possible pixel density with the highest cost per pixel. I don't know that that is not what they want, but it seemed like a safe assumption at the time.

(1)
(5)
MI
Matt Ion
Jan 25, 2017

Or they just want situational awareness from these cameras, or they're to aid people counting... there are lots of possibilities if you stop assuming that everyone does things the same way you do.

(2)
Avatar
Armando Perez
Jan 25, 2017
Hoosier Security and Security Owners Group • IPVMU Certified

I'm open to any of those and I'm open to being wrong, I still don't see that many of them that close together being the ideal for any of those possibilities.

Avatar
Kevin Bennett
Jan 24, 2017

I can see where these would provide some situational awareness and a good general overview.  The 5MP resolution of the camera at what appears to be about a 10-foot mounting height wouldn't give awesome resolution at a 360-degree view, but it would probably be adequate for most retail needs.

If the intent is to monitor transactions in detail at the register then I would say varifocal (or properly lensed fixed focal length) domes or bullets for each POS location would be needed to supplement the views.

At first glance there would indeed appear to be a fair amount of wasted view on the walls behind the cashiers, but I am not sure what the effective downward viewing "cone" angle is for these.  Moving further from the wall would reduce the viewing resolution for cashier operations, which I am assuming is their primary concern based on the placement of the devices. 

(1)
MI
Matt Ion
Jan 25, 2017

If the intent is to monitor transactions in detail at the register then I would say varifocal (or properly lensed fixed focal length) domes or bullets for each POS location would be needed to supplement the views.

Just because they're not as obvious as the 360s, doesn't mean they're not there.

Or these could just be in support of DVR/POS data integration and it's not necessary to be able to read the lettering on the pennies.

Everyone calling out this setup is making some big assumptions about what this store's requirements are for these cameras, and judging their effectiveness based on that. 

(4)
(1)
Avatar
Kevin Bennett
Jan 25, 2017

Matt, with respect, Ari asked for thoughts on the setup.  The responses have been providing those requested thoughts.  It seems from the "thoughts?" question he posed that he only wanted to spark a discussion.

You are likely correct in your assertion that we do not know the actual intent of the camera placement, camera selection, or any number of other situationally-dependent factors and I never claimed to have those facts.  I was just providing my thoughts based on a picture, a camera model, and and the question posed. 

Given those very limited inputs the only way to give thoughts in this forum is to make assumptions and apply our own personal experiences and frames of reference.

(4)
Avatar
Jon Dillabaugh
Jan 27, 2017
Pro Focus LLC

While I cannot be certain of the mounting height or the spacing, it would appear that they are about 10' off the ground and about the same 10' apart. This is about the max effective range for this type of fisheye and resolution. I don't think they were hoping to gain much more coverage than this.

If the checkout lane area was their only concern and identifying details weren't the objective, I would say this is an effective solution. You effectively get multiple POVs and complete blanket coverage of the checkout lane areas.

What this solution will not provide is fine detail of the POS terminal areas. In the photo just left of the sign for the 5 station, is that a black dome on the power pole? Is it possible they have other fixed cameras for the POS areas? Are we assuming the fisheyes are the ONLY coverage?

(1)
Avatar
Armando Perez
Jan 27, 2017
Hoosier Security and Security Owners Group • IPVMU Certified

guilty. I WAS assuming that. ASS U ME.

UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #4
Jan 27, 2017

My first thought is that the target pixel density will be very low for acquiring enough detail to use as evidence. I like the Axis M3007 cameras for overviews in areas where potential slip & fall could be a factor or just being aware of the general activity &/or traffic in the proximity but fine detail at distance is not this cameras specialty. Having said that, the fact that there are cameras above the cash registers may be just enough of a deterrent but then I would think there are cheaper alternatives. Just my opinion.

SR
Samuel Rodgers
Jan 27, 2017

I agree, for general area view it works fine. but in that case they would only need 1 for the area pictured. 

Avatar
Jon Dillabaugh
Jan 27, 2017
Pro Focus LLC

Not if POV was important 

(1)
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #5
Jan 27, 2017

Poor design in my eyes. You are getting a tremendous amount of FOV overlap and you won't have enough pixel density to get detail at the registers. Would have been much better to install a 5-8MP standard dome camera a little higher. Dewarping is cool and fun, but has little utility for evidence gathering unless someone is manning the VMS.

EP
Eddie Perry
Jan 28, 2017

Normally when I use Fisheye/Panoramic cameras I use them to view a general area or intersecting hallways. they cover the whole area evenly enough to see general things that are going on. but on choke points or exits I use high quality Fixed lens or vari-focal cameras( depending on how big the exit is) to capture faces and finer details.

when you have a large retail areas or people gathering areas, Fisheyes/panoramic cameras are great for covering all of that for fights or taking stuff while you get the finer details as they exit the building.

New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions