Surveillance Monitoring Station Best Practices

By: John Honovich, Published on Feb 03, 2011

We examine key considerations in the design and use of video surveillance monitoring stations. All too often, the tendency is to hang multiple large monitors (42” or larger) on the wall, see how impressive it looks and be happy. Not only is that often not the best solution, it regularly wastes money and decreases the efficiency of surveillance monitoring.

Monitor Selection and Location

To avoid common mistakes, we recommend following 4 key principles in selecting and positioning monitors for watching video.

  1. Purchase surveillance-rated displays: End users are often tempted to purchase COTS displays, or in some cases, TV’s, instead of paying more for surveillance displays. What is typically lost when this happens are reliability and picture quality. Consumer displays are not designed to be turned on 24/7/365. As a result, their failure rate increases dramatically, sometimes lasting under a year. Consumer LCD’s also are prone to image retention or “sticking”, which is a phenomenon similar to burn-in of CRT’s, in which a faint outline of a previous image remains on the screen when the image changes. Menus and other GUI elements commonly stick. Surveillance displays are designed to run 24/7 without failure or image retention. We have seen too many end users purchase displays for their surveillance system at the local electronic store for $600, only to be dissatisfied in a matter of months. Expect to pay $1,500-3,000 for a professional-grade surveillance display.
  2. Ensure the right size images on the display: We recommend .5 to .75 inches tall for each foot of distance between the operator and the display. For example, an operator located 12’ away from a display should be viewing camera frames approximately 6” tall. On a 42” monitor, this equates to a 3x3 tile layout of nine cameras at that distance. Width will vary, given the different aspect ratios of SD and HD cameras. This also assumes full frame, and does not allow for image cropping or special views such as Axis’ corridor format. This ratio typically provides adequate detail to an operator so they may enlarge a camera view or send it to a spot monitor for further inspection.
  3. Avoid mounting these large displays too high. Many think the best monitor placement is up and out of the way, as monitors are very large and protrude from walls several inches. However, height increases the distance from the operator’s eye to the display, reducing the monitor’s usefulness, and forcing an operator to look above horizontal for extended periods of time results in discomfort, which reduces effectiveness. Monitors should ideally not be mounted above 15 degrees above level, based on the operator’s eye.
  4. Avoid too many displays: Following the guidelines for sizing images, if you end up with a video wall that causes any given operator to physically turn their head more than a few degrees from center to view them, the display is too large. Steps should be taken to create camera sequences to reduce the size of the required display, or reduce the number of cameras a single operator must watch and bring that display closer to them.

Determining Monitoring Approach

The more cameras you have, the less possible it becomes to monitor them all - even if that is all a person does. If you have more than 8 or 16 cameras, the probability of you missing significant events by simply looking at the screen is almost guaranteed.

Below we examine two main monitoring approaches: (1) proactive and (2) reactive. Almost all surveillance operations use a combination of the two depending on the role/significance of the camera. Best practice is to create “job descriptions” for each camera, as well as the system as a whole. These requirements should be reviewed with each operator, so they can understand the purpose of the system as a whole. These requirements can then be used to determine how you will monitor each camera - proactively or reactively.

Cameras Used Proactively

This category includes systems where an operator is actively watching video for any incidents as they happen. Many times this means active control of PTZ cameras. Proactive systems can often become burdensome to monitor due to limitations in how much video a human can actively view. Industry lore varies in respect to this topic, but common numbers cite between 12-24 cameras being monitored for somewhere between 15 minutes and two hours as being the human limit. We would tend to believe the lower side of both of these figures.

In systems such as these, most often the only option is to view the cameras on a large display or displays. If there are numerous cameras, responsibility for viewing is often divided amongst multiple operators, so Operator #1 watches only cameras from this area on monitor #1, and Operator #2 watches a different area on monitor #2. If there is not enough screen real estate available to view all cameras at once, camera sequences may be created. These sequences display one or more cameras in order, switching after a period of time. Most systems today allow for multiple-view sequences, so different four-by-four camera views may be shown in sequence instead of single cameras. Anecdotal evidence suggests that showing operators a random sequence of cameras improves monitoring performance, by removing some of the routine from the task.

Cameras Used Reactively

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

This category includes systems in which video is only monitored upon occurence of an event, either electronically or humanly generated. For instance, a door being forced open, or an analytic event, could trigger alerts on one or more cameras in the vicinity, attracting an operator’s attention. A dispatcher manning cameras only when a 911 call comes in is an example of a human-driven event.

Typically speaking, these systems may be monitored with much less screen space than proactive systems, as video does not need to be watched at all times. Two small monitors on the operator’s desk is a common setup for this monitoring style; one monitor used for multi-camera views, and another used to view the highest-priority or last-in event in full screen. This understandably decreases hardware and installation cost, since smaller monitors are less expensive, and multi-output video cards are not required.

Events used to drive video should be carefully selected, and reevaluated regularly. Used in conjunction with an access control system, for example, the surveillance system may pop up cameras upon a forced door alarm or an attempted use of a stolen credential. “Blue light” emergency phones, common on college campuses and in parking facilities, may trigger PTZ cameras to spin to preset positions up activation. Some schools are now issuing staff wireless panic buttons, which trigger recording and other events on the security system. And last but not least, however definitely most hotly debated, analytics may be used to call operator attention to specific events on specific cameras.

All of these are fine examples of ways to reduce the amount of video an operator must watch, but without maintenance and periodic evaluation, nuisance alarms may increase and monitoring staff will begin to ignore alarms, resulting in reduced system effectiveness. If an access controlled door’s request-to-exit PIR is malfunctioning, for example, forced door alarms may become routine, prompting the operator to ignore all alarms of that type. Analytics, if not properly evaluated and deployed, may produce repeated false positives, causing an operator to ignore the camera. It is therefore imperative that these integrations be maintained, as ignoring video increases risk and decreases ROI.

Conclusions

Most monitoring centers only have a single operator watching cameras. In this common case, the single best action to improve monitoring ease and performance, is connecting video to events whenever possible. No longer is the operator forced to stare at hours upon hours of video. Under normal operations, the guard could manually or automatically view sequences of cameras (aka video guard tour), with events drawing his or her attention from his routine. In single operator setups, avoid the multiple large display pitfall, as no single operator will ever be able to monitor that much video at once.

Comments : PRO Members only. Login. or Join.

Related Reports

Directory of 68 Video Surveillance Startups on Sep 18, 2019
This directory provides a list of video surveillance startups to help you see and research what companies are new or not yet broadly known. 2019...
How Cobalt Robotics May Disrupt Security on Sep 13, 2019
While security robots have largely become a joke over the last few years, one organization, Cobalt Robotics, has raised $50+ million from top US...
Genetec Stratocast VSaaS Tested on Sep 05, 2019
The VSaaS market is rapidly expanding in 2019, with Verkada, Meraki, Eagle Eye, Avigilon and numerous startups growing their market share. When we...
Security Integrators Outlook On Remaining Integrators In 2025 on Aug 22, 2019
The industry has changed substantially in the last decade, with the rise of IP cameras and the race to the bottom. Indeed, more changes may be...
Proactive CCTV "Only Affordable Video Archiving Solution" Profile on Aug 12, 2019
Proactive CCTV is claiming to offer "the only affordable video archiving solution on the market", reducing the storage typically required for H.265...
Razberi Technologies Company Profile on Aug 06, 2019
Razberi says they have doubled their revenue in the first half of 2019, citing their proprietary camera hardening and cybersecurity capabilities...
Avigilon Blue VSaaS Tested on Aug 05, 2019
Avigilon says Blue is a "powerful integrator cloud service platform", easy to set up and configure, quickly scale business, by leveraging cloud...
Online Video Surveillance Sales Comparison - Amazon, B&H, CDW, LTS, Super Circuits, More on Jul 31, 2019
IPVM has uncovered the key trends and top options being offered across commonly used surveillance sellers. How has the market shifted since we...
Avigilon ACC7 VMS Tested on Jul 22, 2019
Avigilon's Control Center 7 boldly claims it will "transform live video monitoring" with the new Focus of Attention "AI-enabled" interface. We...
Lens Focal Length Tutorial on Jul 10, 2019
3mm, 6mm, 2.8 - 9mm, 5 - 50mm, etc. Camera specifications often list lens lengths but what do they mean? These metrics are important in...

Most Recent Industry Reports

ONVIF Suspends Huawei on Sep 20, 2019
Huawei has been 'suspended', and effectively expelled, from ONVIF so long as US sanctions remain on the mega Chinese manufacturer. Inside this...
Open Access Controller Guide (Axis, HID, Isonas, Mercury) on Sep 19, 2019
In the access control market, there are many software platforms, but only a few companies that make non-proprietary door controllers. Recently,...
Axis Perimeter Defender Improves, Yet Worse Than Dahua and Wyze on Sep 19, 2019
While Axis Perimeter Defender analytics improved from our 2018 testing, the market has improved much faster, with much less expensive offerings...
Directory of 68 Video Surveillance Startups on Sep 18, 2019
This directory provides a list of video surveillance startups to help you see and research what companies are new or not yet broadly known. 2019...
Uniview Prime Series 4K Camera Tested on Sep 18, 2019
Is the new Uniview 'Prime' better than the more expensive existing Uniview 'Pro'? In August, IPVM tested Uniview 4K 'Pro' but members advocated...
US Army Base To Buy Banned Honeywell Surveillance on Sep 17, 2019
The U.S. Army's Fort Gordon, home to their Cyber Center of Excellence, has issued a solicitation to purchase Honeywell products that are US...
Vivotek "Neural Network-Powered Detection Engine" Analytics Tested on Sep 17, 2019
Vivotek has released "a neural network-powered detection engine", named Smart Motion Detection, claiming that "swaying vegetation, vehicles passing...
Schmode is Back, Aims To Turn Boulder AI Into Giant on Sep 16, 2019
One of the most influential and controversial executives in the past decade is back. Bryan Schmode ascended and drove the hypergrowth of Avigilon...
Manufacturers Unhappy With Weak ASIS GSX 2019 And 2020 Shift on Sep 16, 2019
Manufacturers were generally unhappy with ASIS GSX, both for weak 2019 booth traffic and a scheduling shift for the 2020 show, according to a new...