Video Inside EAC Or Access Inside VMS?

There are multiple ways that access and video surveillance are integrated together. Usually this means choosing one platform and integrating the features of the other into it.

For example, I can integrate access control into my VMS system, where I maintain the full depth of control of video and only integrate a select number of access system controls into the interface (eg: lock/unlock, door hold open alarms, user/credential card reads).

The opposite is often true as well: I can take a full featured access management platform (eg: badge printing, user management, etc) and integrate some video features into it like door open event playback, PTZ controls, rudimentary video searching, and live view.

Based on your experience or preference, which platform is the 'Top Box', or 'Primary Interface'? The VMS or EAC management platform?

What about unified ? i.e. both EAC and Video in a single interface

Genetec Unified = "Access Inside a VMS" :)

To be accurate its "Video Inside a EAC"... Security Center 3.0 started life as EAC only with Federated Omnicast Video...

But I also agree with Harold because Security Center gives you the configuration and setup within 1 interface, where as youre talking about having a separate management system for the VMS and EAC where you are just forwarding events to the other systems client interface. So I also vote for Unified

My insides are beaming at this argument.

In our testing, I would agree that Genetec's Synergis element in Security Center show to be indeed both an EAC platform and VMS. I hate calling it 'unified', because that term is used by so many, and often means different things.

Interesting to see that after having evaluated Security Center you conclude: "Access Inside a VMS" , we have used version 5.2 and it feels pretty much unified

I am mainly teasing you because 'unified' is Genetec' marketing message.

I wouldn't call it unified, I'd call it what is - a PSIM :)

wow low blow...

already off the Christmas card list.... no fear now :)

True that Genetec uses the term unified but I would not call it a PSIM, its not a do it all super duper systems as PSIM vendors claim theirs do. But its a powerful unified system nevertheless

That's because PSIM vendors are better / more aggressive liars than Genetec. PSIM vendors can 'claim' what they want, but what most deliver is very similar or less than Genetec Security Center. And that should not be totally surprising as Genetec has a much bigger engineering team behind SC than any PSIM has for their 'PSIM'.

Agreed and I think they're going to have to continue down this path. Avigilon is starting to seriously eat into their midsize (1,000 cameras and under) projects. It's tough to compete with Avigilon's hardware pricing at this point so Genetec is becoming more and more limited to mega projects in which they're usually a sure-in because no one else has expereience with 100,000+ camera systems. It's great to win these mega projects but it will cause serious fluctuations in revenue as I'm sure you know these projects get tendered, awarded, cancelled, re-tendered and then sometimes scraped all together. More then 3 years ago I sat down with Genetec and told them they need to come up with a strategy to defeat Avigilon's hardware-software price war but nothing ever came to fruition.

Please offer an example of what you mean. Lots of platforms claim it, but relatively few genuinely get it done.

He means Genetec.

In any case I`m not in this discussion to promote Genetec, I`m an integrator and as such I also like many other manufacturers and respect their efforts to develop and release better software and specially in the "unified" EAC-VMS sector which I believe is the way to go to simplify security operator`s tasks.

This exact question/debate is how we ended up with Lenel OnGuard as our VMS. At the time we made the VMS decision we knew that there was a 75% chance we would be moving from Picture Perfect to Lenel EAC. At that point the question was go with Genetec, ONSSI, various other lower end VMS’ or OnGuard. We liked pretty much everything we looked at more than OnGuard, but in the end decided the integration would be better if it was pure, meaning the same company same product name for VMS and EAC.

After looking at numerous other enterprise level systems in place around Michigan I still think that was the right decision. The feature set of OnGuard is not near what the other VMS’ have, but it is still ahead of what we actually NEED. When we start to transition our EAC over to OnGuard the team is already familiar with the Lenel OnGuard name/brand, what it looks like, how it works, etc. That is huge when you have a large department with multiple Officers and Operators.

With the change to Lenel pretty much at a 100% certainty I am glad we went the way we did.

The person who voted 'none' gets the grumpypants award...

I think, that we can consider this question from technical side, not marketing.

"Video inside an EAC" means that you have complete access control management system (you can configure devices, users, access levels and so on), but not sure about what you can do with video.

"Access inside VMS" means that you have complete VMS, but can you configure access ? Most of integrations is just events monitoring and may be control, but not configuring access control devices.

PSIM is 3rd system on top of 2 (video and access control), so usually, it will not allow you to configure devices, only manage events.

So, the right answer is not in this list. Because, what customer needs is one system to completely manage devices from both fields.

Genetec and Lenel are good examples of this type. But how to call it, I don't know. Unified ? Maybe.

I certainly believe Genetec has a good product however I also believe end users shouldn't be cornered into a manufactured proprietary arrangement for both categories or at all. Shouldn't the debate be about what the best solution is, not the best product that may accomplish it the easiest for the installing dealer which may eliminate the agnostic open standards approach?

What is the best network arrangement between the surveillance and the access system? Isn't the integration generally an event push? ie. from the ACS - invalid card read, access denied, door prop, or/ NVR - motion detection, line crossing, light on, etc.

Life without another proprietary headend would be good. ACS devices, just like surveillance edge devices, should be ONVIF and/or other open standard to allow for either push or pull. My 2 cents.

Well Genetec does integrate with all the major Access Control companies in addition to Synergis and everything seems to be moving towards the Edge so it should be easier to switch to software should the need be. I'm curious what percentage of Genetec's revenue is from Synergis? I don't think it's doing that well, I know AutoVu is doing much better for them.

Access control seems like a harder market to penetrate then Video Surveillance. Mostly large accounts that are all ready locked into properitary systems that would not be economic to upgrade. Anyways, take my thoughts with a grain of salt, I don't sell Access products and don't plan on doing it any time soon.

In my experience the Access Control System is either already there ( so Video is being added later) or takes prime position as the designers think Access Control first.

I do not believe anyone would construct a commercial building without Access Control... but plenty are opened with little or no CCTV.

Also, Monitoring Centres are used to the green screen/text message alerts of Alarm monitoring, to be enhanced with Access Control alerts ( also text based)

Integration involves a screen popup in the EACS display ( with replay controls) when a defined Access event occurs.

Now both of the above may be both historic and cultural... in the Australian context, the market is dominated by 3 players, only 2 of which provide an SDK so I agree with David above... untill the ONVIF standard for Access control arrives it gets real difficult real quick!