ONVIF Profile T Examined

By Ethan Ace, Published Dec 21, 2018, 06:21am EST

Despite ONVIF's overall success (11,000+ devices supported), ONVIF has been criticized for its limitations and problems, including VMD and video analytic issues, and various advanced integration restrictions.

Now, ONVIF has released Profile T, building on Profile S with "advanced video streaming capabilities and an expanded feature set" that aims to address these issues.

In this note, we examine:

  • H.265 Stream Support
  • Camera Side Motion Detection Support
  • Analytics Support
  • Event Support
  • Image Controls, Inputs, Configuration, PTZ enhancements
  • Camera manufacturers implementing
  • VMS providers implementing

H.265 ****** ******* *********

******* * ******** *****'* H.265 ******* ** ********* the ***** * *******, which ******** * ******** framework *** ********** ****** other **** *.***, *****, and ****-*, *** **** codecs ******* ** *** earlier ***** ***** **** by ******* *. ******* must ******* * "*****-**-***" H.264 ** *.*** ******* under ******* *, **** VMSes **** ** ************* understand ***** ** ** use. *********, ***** *** support ***** *******' *.*** stream, *** ********** ****** H.265 *******.

***** ******* */***** *, H.265 *** ***** ****** are ********** ********* ***** *****, ********* ***** ******* surveillance ******* **** ** H.264, *.***, *** *****, as **** ** **** common ****** **** ** JPEG2000, ***, *** ****. This ***** **** ********* future ****** *** ** added ** ******* ** long ** **** *** standardized ** * ***** type.

Camera **** ****** *** *********

****** ********* ** * mandatory ******* ** ******* T, ******* **** ******* and ***** **** ****/******* motion ****** ***** * standard ******. **********, ** event ********* *** *******, while **** ** **** manufacturers, ******* *** ********. The ********* ***** **** ONVIF's ******* * ************* shows ** *** ***** mandatory:

** ******** ** *******/********* motion ******, ******* * also ******** ************* ** motion *****/******* **** *** VMS ("****** ****** ******** Configuration").

*** **** ** ***** motion ********* ** * mandatory ******* *** **** one ** *****' ******* complaints ***** ******* ***** profiles, ** **** ******** this ************* * *********** for ***** *********.

Analytics ********

******* * **** ******** support *** **** ******* video *********, ********* **** detailed ***** ****, ****** position, *** ******** ***** using  ******** *********. *******, Avigilon ********* ******* * as ***** ***** ** integrating *********** *********** ***** ******* (*********** ***** ** ********* And *******).

**********, ********* **** ****** limited ** ******** ******, with ******** ***** *** more ******** **** ********* custom ***********. *******, ****** video ****** *********, ********* integration ** ********, *** required. ****** ************* *** choose *** ** ********* the ********* ******* (***** than ***** ****** *********).

More ******* ******* - ***** ********, ******, *************

** ******** ** *** and *********:

  • ****** ********* *** ******* inputs *** *** ********* as ****
  • ***** ******* ** ******** imaging ************* **** ** focus, ********, ** *** filter, *** **** *** also *** ******** ** Profile *, ******* **** more ** ***** ************* in *** *** ****** than ** **** ****** integrations.
  • *** ******* *** ******* in ******* * ** support ******** ***********. ******** specs ******** **** ******* of ******* *** *****.

****** ***** *** ******* less ********* **** ***** motion *********, **** ******* configuration ************, ********* **** support ****** *** *****'* usefulness/completeness, ** ***** ******** historically **** ******** *********** VMS ***********.

Camera ******* ******* ****

** *** *** ****** since *** *******, **** 400 ******* **** **** listed ** ******* * conformant, **** ******** *************, including ****, *****, *********, Sony, *** *******.*** *****'* *********** ********.

No *** ******* ***

*******, ** ** ***********, no *** ** *** is ****** ** ******* T **********. ** ****** VMS ********** ** *** when ******* *** ********, and *** ******** ******* Q1/Q2 ** **** ** the ********, **** **** having ** ******** ******** yet.

**** ******** *** *********** greater ********** ** *** integration ** ***** ********, as **** ***** **** not *** ********** *** performing **** ***** ** displaying ******** ********* ** Profile *, **** ** motion ****** ********, ******** rule *****, *** ******** boxes, ***** *** ******* entirely *** ** *******. By ********, **** ************** on *** ****** **** is *** ******* ** users.

Potential ******

**** ************* *** *********** have **** **** ***** did *** ** *** enough ** *********** ******* and ***** ** ***** replace ****** ****** ***********. The ******** ** ********* H.265 *******, ****** **** VMD, *********/***** ***********, *** imaging ******** ***** **** advanced ******** ***** **** pointed ** ** ***** of * "****" ***********.

************, ******* *'* **** complex ******** ********* ************ make **** ******** ***** analytics ************ ******** *** ONVIF, ***** ************ **** required *********** *** ***********, with **** ****** ************' analytics *** ********* ** many ***** (********* ** our** ****** ********* ********). ************* **** *** region ******** *** ***** format *** ****** ** increase ********* ******* *** potentially ****** ******** ************, as ***** *** ** able ** ********* ******** analytics **** *** **, instead ** ******** ******** camera *************' **********.

Poll / ****

Comments (16)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

12/21/18 02:37pm

Great article! The more information out about ONVIF the better! Now give us Point of Sales and this will be a happy holidays!

 

They also put together this document that is also great!

ONVIF Profile Feature Overview v2.2

Avatar

Igor Falomkin

AxxonSoft | 12/26/18 10:45am

However, as of publication, no VMS or NVR is listed as Profile T conformant

In AxxonSoft we have implemented Profile T and tested it during ONVIF Plug Fests, but till this time were unable to apply for the conformance. Because to apply we have to test our integration with at least 3 certified cameras from different vendors, but the majority of cameras on the ONVIF site were certified only in this month (December). I think other VMS vendors had the same problem.

 

Avatar

Marc Pichaud

12/26/18 04:28pm

Profile T brings advanced features but the next revolution will also come  when the "Q" is released, given as a real multiple brand remote setting monitoring.

It will simplify installations and maintenance processes. It's in the onvif road map pipe, but when is that really coming ... no lo sé ( as you know I'm training also technicians and it's a true mess with these hundreds of utilities, some with backdoors )

The old Onvif Device Manager should also be soon upgraded to support mister T profile, I presume, mmhh ? do you know more about that ?

Avatar

Ethan Ace

IPVM | In reply to Marc Pichaud | 12/26/18 04:41pm

Profile Q has been released since July 2016, but adoption has been very poor so far. No VMSes are listed as conformant, and only 109 cameras. By contrast, Profile T was released in October of this year, and already has 4x the camera support, with multiple VMS developers telling us it's supported, but they haven't been able to apply for conformance listing yet due to the lack of available cameras to test with.

I agree it would be nice to standardize these settings across VMSes, but it hasn't happened in the past couple years since its release.

Avatar

Marc Pichaud

12/26/18 06:20pm

I do agree Ethan. 

It will come from the large users when they will mention "Q" devices or Q Vms for example in large public market tenders. At the time being, the level is so poor that the power users didn't even realize the benefits for the IT chain and costs (bandwidth, Cpu, Gpu, storage)   of super compression options (smart compression, Dgop, H265) . So many great things coming and so few people able to understand or to use it ! Anyway, it's  good for our training business but it does also explain why most large installations are not working properly.

Avatar

Luca Fogliati

02/07/19 03:27pm

Actually UNV claims their NVR support ONVIF T.I Havn't tested it yet but if you look at the specs of their products

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Luca Fogliati | 02/07/19 03:31pm

Luca, thanks for sharing. Interesting to see.

As of right now, no NVR or VMS officially supports ONVIF Profile T, as checked from their conformant database:

This obviously will change. When it does (tomorrow, two months) remains to be seen.

Avatar

Murat Altuev

AxxonSoft | In reply to John Honovich | 02/16/19 09:00am

Update: AxxonSoft is first and only officially supports Profile T!

Kudos to our dev team :)

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Murat Altuev | 02/16/19 01:48pm

Murat,

Thanks. I checked the ONVIF conformance database and Axxon is the first and only so far listed:

Question, on your Profile T Declaration of Conformance, most of the Profile T features listed, Axxon lists as not supporting, see excerpt below:

Am I misunderstanding that or?

Avatar

Murat Altuev

AxxonSoft | In reply to John Honovich | 02/16/19 11:15pm

The problem is to find devices supporting all this optional features to pass all tests.

Currently we don’t support only 3 points from the list above: OSD, JPEG snapshot and PTZ Home Position.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Murat Altuev | 02/17/19 02:53pm

Murat, thanks. If I understand correctly, you are saying the reason that the DoC shows 'No' for things like relay outputs and digital inputs is because you do not have devices to test those features with but that the functionality is included in the firmware?

Avatar

Murat Altuev

AxxonSoft | In reply to John Honovich | 02/17/19 03:51pm

I'll ask our dev team to comment regarding certification procedure.

I've got this list marked with green (supported) and red (not yet) from our side.

Avatar

Igor Falomkin

AxxonSoft | 02/17/19 04:36pm

The test procedure consists of the next steps:
- Save all the network traffic between our product and a camera using Wireshark network sniffer.
- Provide the saved traffic to the ONVIF test utility
- The utility analyses the traffic and infer what features are supported by the product

To confirm that the product supports a feature the utility must confirm the feature for at least three ONVIF Profile T cameras from different brands. If one of these cameras does not support a feature than the feature will be marked "No" even if the product supports it.

To get suitable cameras we contacted with 8 brands: Axis, Bosch, Sony, Hanwha, Hikvision, Uniview, Dynacolor, Honeywell. The brands those we used in the test were the brands those implement all Profile T mandotary features, were able to provide us a device and were most operative in communications.

John Honovich

IPVM | 07/31/19 11:38pm

Update: Avigilon ACC 7 supports ONVIF Profile T now, joining Axxon:

Horace Lasell

02/17/21 03:16am

It's a day or so later, and I notice that ONVIF cites 7442 compliant products. I wonder if this actually means anything? Is it time for an update, asking, users and integrators, "Do you use this? Was the promise (eliminating multiple incompatible software, interfaces, and backdoors) realized?"

Avatar

Ethan Ace

IPVM | In reply to Horace Lasell | 02/22/21 04:43pm

It's now 7,586 products total. The issue with that number is that most of them are cameras, and VMS support is still limited. If you search for only Clients (VMSes, NVRs, etc.), the total is only 280 out of the 7,586. But it doesn't stop there...

Of those, 252 are Hikvision NVRs. Another 19 are duplicates, because they are different versions of specific VMSes (e.g., XProtect Corporate vs. XProtect Expert vs. XProtect Professional). If you actually remove the duplicates, it's only 14 unique manufacturers. But it doesn't stop there...

That list is missing most of the most common VMSes, including Exacq, Genetec, and Network Optix/Hanwha Wave/DW Spectrum, along with ipConfigure, Video Insight, Salient, and more. But it doesn't stop there...

Of the Profile T integrations we have seen they have not been much different from Profile S, with the addition of H.265 being properly supported and conformant. I have seen some limited analytic event integration via Profile T, but no integration of configuration, which is optional in the profile (though may be included in Profile M when it's finalized). The additions of some config options like focus and exposure are nice, but not necessarily game changers.

So to answer:

Was the promise (eliminating multiple incompatible software, interfaces, and backdoors) realized?

My opinion is no. Conformance needs to be much more widespread, first, and some of these optional features fully integrated until we can say that.

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,810 reports, 914 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a member? Login here | Join now
Loading Related Reports