Specifying Surveillance Video Quality

Author: John Honovich, Published on Mar 19, 2011

Ensuring high quality surveillance video can be difficult. The challenge starts with specifying what level of quality is needed. There are a number of specification methods but important tradeoffs exist between them. In this report, we are going to present a thorough approach to doing so. Undoudtedly, it is fairly time consuming but it provide the highest probability of delivering high quality surveillance that meets the expectations of surveillance users.

Two common approaches exist today in specifying surveillance video quality:

  • Specify Resolution (e.g., 4CIF or 720p, etc.): This is the 'classic' way of specifying surveillance cameras. The plus side is that it is easy to list and to verify as resolution is prominently stated in almost all products. The downside is that it is extremely inexact and may be overkill for some scenes and provide terribly poor coverage in others. A slightly more sophisticated approach is to specify higher resolution cameras for scenes covering large areas (e.g., only 4CIF for entrance cameras but 3MP for parking lots, etc.). All in all, this is a quick and dirty way that can be roughly accurate.
  • Specify Pixel Density (e.g., 40 pixels per foot (PPF), 120 pixels per meter (PPM), etc.): The 'new school' way of specifying surveillance cameras is to specify specific levels of pixel density - 40 pixels per foot for your entrance camera, 15 pixels per foot for your auditorium camera, etc. The benefit is that it is more exact than simply specifying resolution. The most immediate downside is the complexity or confusion about what pixel density is.

While we see specifications of pixel density (e.g., PPF or PPM), these specifications are almost always incomplete and therefore dangerous. It leads to a false sense of security yet omits crucial details that are vital to accurately achieving a system's video quality goals. Without these details, users are likely to still receive deficient quality and unmet expectations. Here are related attributes that must be specified to properly use pixel density:

  • Lighting Conditions in Scene
  • Horizontal Width of FoV Required
  • Distance from Camera
  • Vertical Range of Coverage

Pixel density is a very useful starting point but demands other related specifications. If you are just going to specify pixel density, you might as well just specify resolution. It will likely deliver the same quality levels but with less confusion. However, if you really want to accurately specify and obtain video quality matching your expectations a full specification of pixel density and the above 4 attriutes must be made. Inside, we provide videos and tutorials to better explain the issues involved and how to specify properly.

This report is the 3rd feature in our trilogy on video surveillance quality. For background, review our:

******** **** ******* ************ ***** *** ** *********. *** ********* starts **** ********** **** ***** ** ******* ** ******. ***** are * ****** ** ************* ******* *** ********* ********* ***** between ****. ** **** ******, ** *** ***** ** ******* a ******** ******** ** ***** **. ***********, ** ** ****** time ********* *** ** ******* *** ******* *********** ** ********** high ******* ************ **** ***** *** ************ ** ************ *****.

*** ****** ********** ***** ***** ** ********** ************ ***** *******:

  • Specify ********** (e.g., 4CIF or 720p, etc.): This is the 'classic' way of specifying surveillance cameras. The plus side is that it is easy to list and to verify as resolution is prominently stated in almost all products. The downside is that it is extremely inexact and may be overkill for some scenes and provide terribly poor coverage in others. A slightly more sophisticated approach is to specify higher resolution cameras for scenes covering large areas (e.g., only 4CIF for entrance cameras but 3MP for parking lots, etc.). All in all, this is a quick and dirty way that can be roughly accurate.
  • Specify ***** ******* (e.g., 40 pixels per foot (PPF), 120 pixels per meter (PPM), etc.): The 'new school' way of specifying surveillance cameras is to specify specific levels of pixel density - 40 pixels per foot for your entrance camera, 15 pixels per foot for your auditorium camera, etc. The benefit is that it is more exact than simply specifying resolution. The most immediate downside is the complexity or confusion about what pixel density is.

***** ** *** ************** ** ***** ******* (*.*., *** ** PPM), ***** ************** *** ****** ****** ********** *** ********* *********. It ***** ** * ***** ***** ** ******** *** ***** crucial ******* **** *** ***** ** ********** ********* * ******'* video ******* *****. ******* ***** *******, ***** *** ****** ** still ******* ********* ******* *** ***** ************. **** *** ******* attributes **** **** ** ********* ** ******** *** ***** *******:

  • ******** ********** ** *****
  • ********** ***** ** *** ********
  • ******** **** ******
  • ******** ***** ** ********

***** ******* ** * **** ************** ******** ******* ***** ******* **************. ** *** *** **** ***** to ******* ***** *******, *** ***** ** **** **** ******* resolution. ** **** ****** ******* *** **** ******* ****** *** with **** *********. *******, ** *** ****** **** ** ********** specify *** ****** ***** ******* ******** **** ************ * **** specification ** ***** ******* *** *** ***** * ********* **** be ****. ******, ** ******* ****** *** ********* ** ****** explain *** ****** ******** *** *** ** ******* ********.

**** ****** ** *** *** ******* ** *** ******* ** video ************ *******. *** **********, ****** ***:

[***************]

Key ******* ** ****** *** ***** ********

*** ***** ********** ****** *** ************ ** ***** ****** ********* 3 *** ******:

  • ****** ** *** ***** ***** ******
  • ***** ******* ***** **** ********
  • ***** ******* ******** **** ** ****** *****

In ****** - ******* ** ********

*** ** ******* ***** ********** ***** ***** *** *** ** plan *** ************** ** ****** ********* ********* *********, *****, ****** and ******* ****. ** ******:

  • *********** ****** *** **** ******* (***** ********* ********* *****)
  • *********** ********** ***** ** **** *****
  • ********* ******** **** ******
  • *********** ******** ***** ** ** *******
  • ******** ****** *************** (***** *** ****** ******)

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Related Reports on RFP

IP Camera Specification / RFP Guide 2017 on Aug 14, 2017
RFPs are hard. Do them 'right' and it takes a lot of knowledge and time. Do them 'wrong' and you can be (a) unwittingly locked into a specific...
Bluebeam Revu Security Floorplan Estimation App Test on Jun 15, 2017
Bluebeam Revu is a construction design markup tool that claims it is "used by 94% of top US contractors", but what role does it have for physical...
US Government Entities Hard Spec Hikvision on May 26, 2016
The US and Chinese governments are working together. Now, US government entities are not only buying video surveillance products from the Chinese...
Poorly Written College Town Camera RFP Examined on May 25, 2016
State College, PA issued an RFP for a neighborhood surveillance system that leaves out many key details required to invite qualified bids. We...
Large Video Surveillance Systems Guide on Oct 29, 2015
This 14 page guide explains the key uses, design factors, and players in the large system surveillance market. A global group of 80...
This Spec Wizard Makes a Mockery Out of RFPs on Dec 05, 2014
Terrible RFPs are commonplace. If only there was a way to make it easy to generate terrible RFPs. Well, Honeywell, Vicon and Aiphone are working...
Ridiculous $100K Project / Now Stalled on Oct 31, 2013
Update 10/31: When we first published this in July, we broke down how flawed the RFP was. Now, the city is delaying the project as it works through...
Bad RFP Leads to Homebrew System on Oct 29, 2013
Bad RFPs continue to plague the industry. In the case of one city, a poorly written RFP led to a contract that likely fails to address one of the...
10 Top Discussions This Summer on Sep 01, 2013
This year, IPVM launched its own discussions, with over 10,000 comments so far. Now, we have improved it with 12 new features. Here are 10 Top...
Design-Build - A Better RFP Process? on Aug 28, 2013
Almost everybody in the security industry has a horror story of a "low bid" system installation that has gone terribly wrong. Many city, county and...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Final Day Save $50 - IP Networking Course September 2017 on Aug 17, 2017
Today, Thursday, August 17th is the last day to save $50 on the September IP Networking Course. This is the only networking course designed...
Knightscope Raises $10 Million With $3,320 Average Per Investor on Aug 17, 2017
Congrats to Knightscope. And condolences to their legion of little investors. Knightscope has disclosed they have raised $10+ million from their...
Axis and Arecont Legal Conflict Over Multi-Imager Cameras on Aug 17, 2017
Arecont threatened Axis. Axis has responded by moving to invalidate an Arecont patent. It is an important contest. Multi-imagers are Arecont's...
Directory Of Consumer Security Cameras on Aug 16, 2017
The consumer camera segment continues to grow, with new startups and models from existing players released seemingly every month. In this report we...
Cat 5e vs Cat 6 vs Cat 6a Network Cable Usage Statistics on Aug 16, 2017
Cat 5e? Cat 6? Cat 6a? What do integrators use in practice, today? 140+ integrators told IPVM. Here are the results: For those who want to...
Hikvision Responds To Cracked Security Codes on Aug 15, 2017
Hikvision has responded to IPVM's report on Hikvision's security code being cracked, both with a 2 page update to dealers and communication...
Stolen Video NVR / DVR Statistics on Aug 15, 2017
"But what happens if someone steals my recorder?" Anyone who has done more than a handful of jobs has probably heard this question several times....
Hikvision Europe Cutting Out Unauthorized End User Sales on Aug 15, 2017
The days of anyone buying Hikvision from anywhere off the Internet are numbered, at least in Europe, if Hikvision's plan comes to fruition. In...
Axis Laser Focus PTZ Tested on Aug 14, 2017
Axis has been touting its new Q6155-E laser focus PTZ as 'always in focus' and 'always in color'. Does it really deliver? We bought and tested...
Vulnerability Directory For Access Control Cards on Aug 14, 2017
Knowing which access credentials are insecure can be unclear, especially because most look and feel the same. Even the most insecure 125 kHz types...

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