PPF Test - Getting High Quality Surveillance Video

By John Honovich, Published on Apr 04, 2010

Megapixel cameras foster hope for much higher quality surveillance video but how much more and in what conditions? In this report, we answer these questions in depth based on extensive testing.

The most aggressive marketing claims suggest a single megapixel camera is equals 95 CCTV cameras. Does that mean you could literally replace 95 CCTV cameras? If not 95, is it 25 or 16 or 4, etc.?

A 'Magic Number'

The megapixel vendors are now advocating a 'magic number' of 40 pixels per foot. They claim that if your Field of View provides 40 pixels per foot (e.g., a 1920 x 1080 camera covering a 48 foot wide FoV), then you can see facial details and license plates clearly.

Some vendors qualify their number by saying it is a 'minimum' but then fail to offer any further disclosure or explanation. This is as helpful as the government coming to your house and telling you owe a minimum of $1,000 in taxes.

Our Test

Over a 3 week period, we went out and tested these assumptions using a variety of cameras, resolutions and Field of Views. The video below overviews how we approached our tests:

Our Findings

The following points are our key findings / recommendations:

Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News
Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News

  • In 'ideal' lighting conditions - even daytime lighting, no shadows, no glare - you need closer to 50 pixels per foot to see facial features clearly and read US license plates.
  • In even slightly challenging lighting conditions - moderate shadow or glare - you need ~20% more pixels to 'overcome' decrease in contrast.
  • Since almost all surveillance scenes have some levels of shadow or glare throughout the day, if you want to ensure that facial features are clearly seen, you should target 60 pixels per foot.
  • At night, even with 5 to 10 lux of lighting (from street lights), quality will drop significantly. As we show in the results, video will be displayed but the visible noise level will significantly reduce the range where meaningful details can be seen. At night, you might need 120 pixels per foot (or more).
  • Image quality gradually degrades as the FoV width expands. There's no single point where quality goes from good to bad. Details gradually appear or disappear as the FoV width changes.
  • We found numerous levels of varying quality for surveillance use. While traditionally, surveillance applications had 3 quality levels (often called personal, action, scene), we found at least double that number. As quality degrades, some details still remain. Those details can still provide benefits depending on the application.
  • What quality level is good enough is somewhat subjective. Because quality gradually degrades, some users may find different levels of quality to be sufficient. For example, two people may view video from the same camera and one will judge 45 pixels per foot to be sufficient while another may prefer 55 pixels per foot.
  • Vertical distance covered varies dramatically with the focal length / horizontal angle of the lens. With a wide angle lens, it is nearly impossible to get facial features at more than a few feet distance from the camera (even with megapixel). With a telephoto lens, facial features can be captured at fairly far distances. The tradeoff of course is the width of FoV covered.
  • Moving from HD to 5MP provided benefits for wider FoVs. In FoVs narrower than 20-40' wide, it is unlikely that significant material difference can be visually observed. At wider FoVs, modest increases in ability to detect meaningful details was shown.

How to Perform Comparisons

Please view the video below to understand how to use the sample videos provided and how we conducted these comparisons.

Download Sample Videos and Comparison Slides

For your review, we are sharing a number of the original sample videos and slides we created.

We recommend you focus your review on the comparison slides as those slides provide a synopsis of images from a variety of FoV widths and resolutions.

Additionally, here are a few of the original video clips so that you can watch the 'raw' video to see how we performed the tests:

Lighting Variance Issues

In the remainder of the report, we provide estimates for scenes with 'ideal' even lite daytime conditions. In the screencast below, we emphasize 3 major common lighting variances that create significant issues:

  • Modest shadows/glare can increase the number of pixels needed for the same level of visible identification even during the middle of the day.
  • Outdoor scenes with solid levels of artificial street lighting will still significantly reduce visibility, demanding dramatically higher pixels per foot to identify images at the same level as day.
  • Variances in lighting at night can create shadows and glare so bad that megapixel resolution will provide little to no practical benefits over SD resolution.

Pixels Needed / Quality Provided

For ideal lighting conditions, we have segmented 7 discernible quality levels from the test videos we examined. Below are the categories (overlap occurs because of small variances between cameras, setups, etc.)

  • Difficult to detect person: < 8 pixels per foot
  • Rough guess of person (age, gender): 5 - 12 pixels per foot
  • Higher probability guess of person (hair, accessories, etc.): 15 - 24 pixels per foot
  • Blurry face (could identify if you already knew the person): 25 - 50 pixels per foot
  • Clear face (could identify a stranger): 50 - 80 pixels per foot
  • Like TV quality (very sharp details of face and body): 80+ pixels per foot)
 

In the screencast below, we discuss how we developed this and our observations of quality differences:

Differences in FoV Width for Various Resolutions

Increased resolution can increase the width of FoV that a camera can cover. In the table below, we approximate ranges that a SD, 2MP and 5MP camera can provide. A few key points to note:

  • All of these, assume ideal lighting conditions. As the shadows, glare increase and light levels decrease, the advantages of more resolution decreases.
  • In narrower FoVs (like 20-30 feet), you are unlikely to find any meaningful difference between a 2MP and 5MP camera.
  • The big jump is from SD to 2MP, a much smaller jump occurs from 2MP to 5MP (to be expected given the relative increase in pixels). Moving from 2MP to 5MP helps with areas of 30 - 150 feet wide.
  • At a 100' width, an SD camera only captures 'blobs' of human but a 5MP camera can provide details on the age, gender, race and clothing of a suspect.

In the screencast below, we discuss how we arrived at this table and some key conclusions of this analysis:

Variances in Pixels Needed for License / Number Plates

License / Number plates show interesting variation. Both the size of the plates and the background images on the plate can cause issues. This is especially important for US plates and for certain states that allow background images that lower contrast on the plate.

In the screencast below, we discuss our findings and how we tested for license plates.

Variances in Distance to Target with Difference Lens Choices

In the study so far, we have primarily concentrated on the FoV width. Of course, the same FoV widths can be achieved with various lens options that can radically impact the vertical coverage area.

Many megapixel providers advocate the use of wide angle or super wide angle lenses so that you can cover far greater areas. The downside is that pixel 'density' drops significantly the wider the angle selected. The most important impact is the ability to detect facial details. With a wide angle lens, a target more than 10 feet from the camera is highly unlikely to have their facial details captured. As a practical example of this significant tradeoff, view our test results from Theia's wide angle MP lens.

As a reference, below is the Pixels Per Foot one can expect using various lens options. Notice that the more telephoto the lens, the more gradual the drop off is pixel density. [Note for a 1/3' imager, a 90 degree FoV is achieved with a 2.4 mm lens, a 45 degree FoV with a 9 mm lens and a 15 degree FoV with a 18mm lens.]

As an alternative view, see the table below which visualizes this relationship.

 

Summary Findings

Repeating our introduction>, The following points are our key findings / recommendations:

  • In 'ideal' lighting conditions - even daytime lighting, no shadows, no glare - you need closer to 50 pixels per foot to see facial features clearly and read US license plates.
  • In even slightly challenging lighting conditions - moderate shadow or glare - you need ~20% more pixels to 'overcome' decrease in contrast.
  • Since almost all surveillance scenes have some levels of shadow or glare throughout the day, if you want to ensure that facial features are clearly seen, you should target 60 pixels per foot.
  • At night, even with 5 to 10 lux of lighting (from street lights), quality will drop significantly. As we show in the results, video will be displayed but the visible noise level will significantly reduce the range where meaningful details can be seen. At night, you might need 120 pixels per foot (or more).
  • Image quality gradually degrades as the FoV width expands. There's no single point where quality goes from good to bad. Details gradually appear or disappear as the FoV width changes.
  • We found numerous levels of varying quality for surveillance use. While traditionally, surveillance applications had 3 quality levels (often called personal, action, scene), we found at least double that number. As quality degrades, some details still remain. Those details can still provide benefits depending on the application.
  • What quality level is good enough is somewhat subjective. Because quality gradually degrades, some users may find different levels of quality to be sufficient. For example, two people may view video from the same camera and one will judge 45 pixels per foot to be sufficient while another may prefer 55 pixels per foot.
  • Vertical distance covered varies dramatically with the focal length / horizontal angle of the lens. With a wide angle lens, it is nearly impossible to get facial features at more than a few feet distance from the camera (even with megapixel). With a telephoto lens, facial features can be captured at fairly far distances. The tradeoff of course is the width of FoV covered.
  • Moving from HD to 5MP provided benefits for wider FoVs. In FoVs narrower than 20-40' wide, it is unlikely that significant material difference can be visually observed. At wider FoVs, modest increases in ability to detect meaningful details was shown.

 

Questions?

The report examines a wide variety of issues, not of all which we have elaborated on in the report. If you want clarification or expansion on certain topics, please ask.

8 reports cite this report:

How to Read Blueprints For Security Projects on Aug 20, 2014
Reading building floorplans is a fundamental skilled needed for professional...
Armored Car Robbery Video Examined on Jan 25, 2012
Continuing our analysis of real-world surveillance video, in this update, we...
IPVM Top Reports and Reader Stats for 2010 on Dec 21, 2010
In this report, we review the top read reports for the year and provide an...
Sony Fixed IP Camera Guide on Nov 20, 2010
Like many camera manufacturers, in the last 2 years, Sony has rapidly...
Video Surveillance RFPs Reviewed - Vol 1 on Nov 08, 2010
In this report, we review 4 recent real-world video surveillance Request for...
Training: Megapixel / HD Basics on Aug 17, 2010
This report provides a 95 minute video series that teaches the fundamentals...
Megapixel Challenges Discussed on Jul 22, 2010
Moving to megapixel IP cameras brings a number of challenges and...
Megapixel Camera Cheatsheet on May 12, 2010
Determining how wide a field a view a megapixel camera can be tricky. ...
Comments : Members only. Login. or Join.

Related Reports

Nanchang, China "Sharp Eyes" Video Surveillance Project on Oct 05, 2020
China's Sharp Eyes project mandated 100% surveillance coverage of public...
Vivotek 4K S-Series Camera Tested on Sep 30, 2019
Vivotek's highest-end S-series camera claims "Supreme Night Visibility",...
Panasonic 4K Camera Tested (WV-S2570L) on Sep 13, 2019
Panasonic has released their latest generation 4K dome, the WV-S2570L,...
Avigilon H5A Analytic Cameras Tested on Oct 07, 2019
Avigilon has released its H5A analytic cameras, claiming to "detect more...
Budget Covert Cameras Tested on Nov 26, 2019
Covert cameras under $100 are widely available online but are they any...
Axis "Best Of The Best" 4K Camera Tested (Q1798-LE) on Nov 21, 2019
Axis has released their "best of the best" Q1798-LE bullet camera, touting...
Hanwha 8K / 33MP Camera Tested on Sep 14, 2020
Hanwha Techwin has released an 8K / 33MP resolution camera, the TNB-9000 with...
Video Surveillance Cameras 101 on Feb 25, 2020
Cameras come in many shapes, sizes and specifications. This 101 examines the...
Verkada Video Analytics Tested 2020 on Oct 08, 2020
In 2019, Verkada released people and face analytics but our testing then...
Camera Course Summer 2020 - Last Chance on Jul 18, 2020
This is your last chance to register for the Summer 2020 Camera Course. This...
Uniview Color Low Light Camera Tested Vs Hikvision ColorVu on Jan 07, 2020
Hikvision has been marketing ColorVu aggressively. Now, Hikvision domestic...
Directory Of 150 Video Analytics Suppliers on Dec 17, 2019
This directory provides a list of video analytics providers to help you see...
Video Surveillance History on May 06, 2020
The video surveillance market has changed significantly since 2000, going...
New Axis M30 Cameras Tested on Mar 26, 2020
Axis has released a new generation of, for them, relatively low cost M30...
Video Surveillance Trends 101 on Apr 01, 2020
This report examines major industry factors and how they could impact video...

Recent Reports

Bedside Cough and Sneeze Detector (Sound Intelligence and CLB) on Oct 28, 2020
Coronavirus has increased interest in detecting symptoms such as fever and...
Fever Tablet Thermal Sensors Examined (Melexis) on Oct 28, 2020
Fever tablet suppliers heavily rely on the accuracy and specs of...
Verkada Fires 3 on Oct 28, 2020
Verkada has fired three employees over an incident where female colleagues...
Recruiters Online Show LIVE Thursday! on Oct 27, 2020
IPVM's 7th online show resumes Thursday with 12 recruiters presenting...
Eagle Eye Networks Raises $40 Million on Oct 27, 2020
Eagle Eye has raised $40 million aiming to "reinvent video...
Hikvision Q3 2020 Global Revenue Rises, US Revenue Falls on Oct 27, 2020
While Hikvision's global revenue rises driven by domestic recovery, its US...
VICE Investigates Verkada's Harassing "RawVerkadawgz" on Oct 26, 2020
This month, IPVM investigated Verkada's sexism, discrimination, and cultural...
Six Flags' FDA Violating Outdoor Dahua Fever Cameras on Oct 26, 2020
As Six Flags scrambled to reopen parks amid plummeting revenues caused by the...
ISC Brasil Digital Experience 2020 Report on Oct 23, 2020
ISC Brasil 2020 rebranded itself to ISC Digital Experience and, like its...
Top Video Surveillance Service Call Problems 2020 on Oct 23, 2020
3 primary and 4 secondary issues stood out as causing the most problems when...
GDPR Impact On Temperature / Fever Screening Explained on Oct 22, 2020
What impact does GDPR have on temperature screening? Do you risk a GDPR fine...
Security And Safety Things (S&ST) Tested on Oct 22, 2020
S&amp;ST, a Bosch spinout, is spending tens of millions of dollars aiming to...
Nokia Fever Screening Claims To "Advance Fight Against COVID-19" on Oct 22, 2020
First IBM, then briefly Clorox, and now Nokia becomes the latest Fortune 500...
Deceptive Meridian Temperature Tablets Endanger Public Safety on Oct 21, 2020
IPVM's testing of and investigation into Meridian Kiosk's temperature...
Honeywell 30 Series and Vivotek NVRs Tested on Oct 21, 2020
The NDAA ban has driven many users to look for low-cost NVRs not made by...