Remote Surveillance Monitoring Recommendations

Author: James Talmage, Published on Nov 07, 2011

While many sites might benefit from real time surveillance monitoring, most budgets preclude hiring a security staff to perform those duties.  A growing trend is the use of third party companies to monitor cameras remotely.  This can provide similar benefits to an on-site security staff at significantly reduced costs.  Successfully utilizing remote monitoring, however, usually requires a system that was designed with that goal in mind.  This update will examine the most important considerations in designing a system that is remote monitoring ready.

Monitoring Company and Costs

The monitoring company chosen will likely have the biggest impact on a given projects success.  Researching and narrowing down the field of potential monitoring companies can provide valuable information when it comes time to design the system.  Sites that are only to be monitored during off-hours, when people are prohibited from the premises, will find the greatest savings in monitoring companies that employ event-based monitoring.  In an event-based model, the security system employs some form of automated intrusion detection, and the monitoring company only views the video when alerted by the system.  This allows a single operator to monitor many more cameras, and is the biggest driver of savings.

Most monitoring companies charge a flat base rate that includes a certain number of events, plus an additional charge for each event over the limit.  In our experience we’ve seen a wide range of flat rate prices ($350 to $1,400 per month for an 8 camera system); The higher priced services usually include a higher event limit, and additional services, such as “video escorts” (watching customers walk to their car late at night), and “guard tours” (periodically reviewing cameras that have not triggered events).  We have found per event pricing to have significantly less variation ($3.50 to $4.50 per event), but did come across one company that charged only $2.50 per false alarm, and by the minute for actual intrusion events.

Interoperability between the monitoring company and the VMS are another significant concern.  The choice of a particular monitoring company will necessarily serve to narrow the field of potential VMSs to those they support.  Users considering employing video analytics for event detection may find it easier to decide on that technology first and seek out monitoring companies who support it.

Event Detection

The best method of event detection should be evaluated on a camera by camera basis.  Indoor locations can often use simple video motion detection, or conventional PIR motion detectors to trigger events.  Outdoor locations will generally require more exotic (and expensive) solutions, such as video analytics.  Outdoor applications will likely produce more false alarms, but have the distinct advantage of alerting the monitoring company before a perpetrator gains access to the building.  In our experience, customers who would otherwise require the service of a security guard company (i.e. construction companies) are much more willing to pay the additional costs associated with outdoor perimeter detection, including the increased false alarm costs.

Deterring Theft & Vandalism

Users currently employing security guards are often hesitant to hand over guarding responsibility to a video system.  Many cite the guards physical presence and ability to respond to situations immediately as valuable deterrents.  Sirens and strobes are options, but in many municipalities, police have developed very slow response times to conventional alarm systems (due to excessive false alarms).  Some thieves brazenly take this into account, and may not leave immediately because of a siren.  

We have found that systems that allow the monitoring company to audibly challenge intruders via loudspeakers to be extremely effective deterrents.  We witnessed a significant reduction in theft attempts when audio talk downs were employed at local construction sites.  Another common niche for audio talk downs are car dealerships.  In those cases monitoring companies don’t usually challenge after hours visitors, but gently remind them that they are being watched.  Another option is the use of high visibility signage that indicates that the site is monitored.  If allowed, large conspicuous cameras might actually be a plus for some users.

Get Video Surveillance News In Your Inbox
Get Video Surveillance News In Your Inbox

The ISP

Many ISP’s prohibit the use of their network for hosting streaming video in their terms of service; some actively block it.  Such ISP’s should obviously be avoided.  Choosing an ISP and service plan that maximizes yourupstream data rate allows for higher camera counts, resolutions, and frame rates.  Since advertised and real world speeds often differ by a great margin, real-world tests should be conducted before significant investments are made.

ISP data rates are generally so much lower than that of the local network, that they must be considered during the design phase.  Reducing the required bandwidth becomes increasingly important.  Systems capable of utilizing different data rates for local recording and remote monitoring can avoid compromising the quality of recorded evidence to satisfy monitoring requirements.  Members should also study our reports on how bandwidth is impacted by the choice of codec, and (for low light scenes) the addition of IR illuminators.

Data caps are another consideration in choosing an ISP.  Especially important, is understanding how a given ISP reacts to users who exceed the set data cap.  Some will reduce throughput to a trickle, while others will cut off service (either temporarily or permanently).  For mission critical applications, seek out ISP’s who choose to simply charge for overages.  Integrators should also discourage unnecessary data consumption by the monitoring company and the end user by educating them on the data cap, and the implications of exceeding it.

We’ve found that a good event detection mechanism can help minimize or eliminate concerns over exceeding data caps.  By using analytics with conservative sensitivity settings, and disallowing remote viewing except by the monitoring company, we’ve successfully deployed a fifteen camera system over 3G wireless and never exceeded the 5GB cap set by the provider.  However, doing so required constant supervision and repeated “tweaks”.  We would recommend that integrators approaching remote monitoring for the first time seek out providers with significantly higher caps.

Comments : PRO Members only. Login. or Join.

Related Reports on Monitoring

Eagle Eye Networks Cloud VMS Tested on Jul 26, 2018
Eagle Eye has become one of the most significant players in the industry in the past few years: Eagle Eye's Owner Acquired Brivo Eagle Eye...
Axis Adds LPR - License Plate Verifier Examined on Jul 24, 2018
Axis is finally releasing their own License Plate Recognition software application called License Place Verifier, but it has some significant...
Directory of Video Surveillance Startups on Jul 18, 2018
This directory provides a list of video surveillance startups to help you see and research what companies are new or not yet broadly known entity...
Amazon Ring Alarm System Tested on Jul 16, 2018
Amazon Ring is going to hurt traditional dealers, and especially ADT, new IPVM test results of Ring's Alarm system underscore. IPVM found that...
Amazon Ring Partners With Rapid Response For $10 Monitoring on Jul 10, 2018
Amazon's Ring alarm system is using Rapid Response for monitoring, IPVM has confirmed in our testing. Amazon is arguably the most feared new...
Simplisafe Acquired At $1 Billion Valuation on Jun 29, 2018
Simplisafe, the competitor alarm monitoring companies historically most love to hate, has been acquired by a mega private equity firm for a $1...
OpenEye Apex VMS Tested on Jun 26, 2018
OpenEye is a US company, founded nearly 20 years ago. In the past few years, OpenEye has been one of a few VMS providers that have pivoted to being...
Axis Guardian - Cloud VMS And Alarm Monitoring - Released on Jun 19, 2018
Axis has struggled to deliver a cloud-based managed service video platform. Video service providers have utilized AVHS for over a decade, and have...
Amazon Ring Launches $10 Monthly Professional Alarm Monitoring on Jun 15, 2018
Amazon's Ring has announced an alarm system with 24/7 professional alarm monitoring for $10 per month, a fraction of the $30+ per month traditional...
China Public Video Surveillance Guide: From Skynet to Sharp Eyes on Jun 14, 2018
China is expanding its video surveillance network to achieve “100%” nationwide coverage by 2020, including facial recognition capabilities and a...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Chinese OEM Avycon Gets ADI Push on Aug 15, 2018
Who is Avycon? An American company? A Korean company? A couple of guys relabelling Chinese products? The latter is the best explanation. While...
Backboxes for Video Surveillance Tutorial on Aug 15, 2018
Backboxes are a necessity in surveillance, whether for managing cable whips, recessing cameras, adding wireless radios. But it can be confusing to...
Genetec Stratocast / Comcast 'Motion Insights' Examined on Aug 15, 2018
Comcast recently announced "SmartOffice Motion Insights", an extension to their Genetec OEMed cloud video service (covered by IPVM here). This...
SimpliSafe Violating California, Florida, and Texas Licensing Laws on Aug 14, 2018
IPVM has verified that DIY security system provider SimpliSafe, founded in 2006 and acquired in June of 2018 at a billion dollar valuation, is...
Ban of Dahua and Hikvision Is Now US Gov Law on Aug 13, 2018
The US President has signed the 2019 NDAA into law, banning the use of Dahua and Hikvision (and their OEMs) for the US government, for US...
Cut Milestone Licensing Costs 80% By Using Hikvision and Dahua NVRs (Tested) on Aug 13, 2018
Enterprise VMS licensing can be quite expensive, with $200 or more per channel common, meaning a 100 camera system can cost $20,000 in VMS...
Nortek Sues SDS, Battle Over Unpaid Bill and Cancelled Lines on Aug 13, 2018
Nortek and SDS legal battle continues. As IPVM reported, SDS sued Nortek alleging bribery and antitrust violation. However, Wave fired back at SDS,...
Uniview Intrusion Analytics and VMD Tested on Aug 13, 2018
IPVM's IP Camera Analytics Shootout featuring Avigilon, Axis, Bosch, Dahua, Hanwha, Hikvision created some ill will with a Uniview distributor who...
ADT Employees Protest ADT CEO on Aug 10, 2018
So many ADT employees were so upset with ADT's CEO speech reported on by IPVM, that ADT's CEO was forced to send a mass email to employees to...
Axis / Avigilon Legal Battle Rises on Aug 09, 2018
In what is shaping up to be high-powered, will-not-back-down battle, Axis and Avigilon are squaring off in multiple legal contests. In 2017, IPVM...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact