This Is Why You Cannot Trust Tri-Ed

Author: John Honovich, Published on Jan 05, 2015

Tri-Ed, now Anixter's security division, proves that they care far more about passing off manufacturer hype than supporting their customers.

Tri-Ed Promotion

Here's Tri-Ed promoting one of the worst gimmicks in the industry:

"The Intensifier .... works with minimum illumination of 0.0005 lux and .... these cameras amplify existing light with no distance limitations, all objects display in perfect clarity with minimum light."

You can watch it in their promotional video below:

Actual Intensifier Test Results

IPVM has tested the Speco Intensifier HD IP cameras.

In low light, like every non-IR camera, the Intensifier is noisy.

Here it is tested at .1 lux, 200x greater light than the camera says it needs:

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

Though, this is misleadingly good, because Intensifier causes blurring of moving images. If you stop the blur, at 0.1 lux, the image looks like so:

The blurring makes it worse than today's generation of 'true' 'super' low light cameras.

Problems With Tri-Ed Claims

As such, there are three very serious problems with Tri-Ed's claims:

  • Minimum illumination specifications are not to be trusted. Worse, Speco's is outrageously rigged. Intensifier's 0.0005 lux specification is 100x lower than Samsung's SNB-5004, a camera that beat Speco in that test, even when Speco had the unfair advantage of its 'Intensifier' / blur mode on.
  • Tri-Ed's 'no distance limitation' claim is just silly. All cameras have distance limitations and this is just mindlessly copied from Speco's marketing material.
  • Tri-Ed's 'perfect clarity' contention is not only debunked by the obvious high noise levels captured in our tests but by the blur introduced as well.

No Trust in Tri-Ed

Distributors like Tri-Ed want to be taken seriously and promote how integrators can depend on them for product advice and recommendations.

This shows that Tri-Ed does not care about fact-checking even obviously extreme claims that industry pros have known for a long time to be wrong.

Now, Tri-Ed is Anixter's security division, though Anixter has its own problems understanding technology, like their much-maligned Anixter Claims H.264 Video 'Pretty Much Unusable' With Cat 5E.

Comments (25)

Only IPVM PRO Members may comment. Login or Join.

Honestly, this post goes with your other post about lack of intellectualism in the industry.

This is the sort of video that any person with even a passing interest in product knowledge should be able to call bullshit on, and express their outrage to Tri-Ed for perpetuating such garbage.

The fact that Tri-Ed (and other distributors) put out "informational" videos like this, AND people fall for them, speaks volumes about the lack of basic mainstream knowledge in many integrators.

Do people really fall for them though? I wonder about that.

Do people really fall for them though?

Either people are really dumb enough to fall for them, or Tri-Ed is really dumb enough to think people do...

You're leaning towards the second option, no?

In fairness, I wouldn't call buyers 'dumb' here. There is some expectation that sellers are going to tell the truth or at least not wildly stretch it. Naive perhaps.

Related, I doubt the people at Tri-Ed who produce this know how good or bad products are. I blame management for setting low standards that allow such claims to pass without question or review.

Correct, second option. I think they put this out there and think people are buying it.

The Speco booth at ISC East last year was full of guys who believe this type of BS. They were very well versed.

Speco Rep - So you guys doing any IP yet? It's a real pain in the ass right?

Me - No, it is not really hard at all. I actually prefer it.

Speco Rep - BULLSHIT! You know it's a pain in the ass! BULLSHIT! You know it!

Me - OK then, have a nice day....

You would think they would be wise to your game after ASIS - Chicago. ;)

Oops, I typed the wrong show name. It was in fact ASIS Chicago. I never attended the ISC East show. My bad. You have a very good memory though, I must say.

Who could forget a story that ends with "we left laughing our asses off!".

See you at the Speco booth, ISC West. :)

I wholeheartedly believe that IP cameras are, in fact, too complicated for the Speco reps to understand. They're like cavemen trying to sell you fire by convincing you that Zippos are too complicated for the average Neaderthal to understand, so you should use their flints instead. Here's a very flashy powerpoint presentation that explains why their proprietary flints are better than any other flint on the market.

Thanks for information.

FYI: The content for these videos is written by the manufacturers who pay for the spot. The cost is $600 per product / per month. The videos are then narrated and produced by SP&T News in Canada. I doubt Tri-Ed has much involvment in the actual claims of each manufacturer.

That's good color. I appreciate it.

The point is that Tri-Ed should have involvement in those claims because it is placed under Tri-Ed's brand and introduction, unless Tri-Ed's position is that they will promote anything regardless of what the claim is.

I believe this really shows the true difference in knowledge between Integrators. I learned long ago that Spec Sheets and such are glorified technical sales pitches with all kinds of "gotchas" in there.

Just taking the Distributor's word on a product doesn't seem like a good idea unless they (your rep) have proven to be knowlegable and reliable. I really see Distributors and someone who is just moving boxes from A to B. I don't ever expect them to be technical experts, even though I have talked to and have met spome reps who are very technical.

In the end, I think it's really up to the Integrator to do their research, testing, learning from IPVM or how ever else they can to be knowledgable as possible on as many aspects as possible.

Blah Blah Blah big fancy numbers Blah Blah. What a bore of a video.

I dont use Tri-Ed but I doubt they even know what they are reading/putting up on the screen - that info is probably given to them by the manufacturer or some marketing guy just put together tidbits from each manufacturer.

Not saying its an excuse, its more likely just a bad choice to not fact check what they are pushing/recommending. It does bring into question their knowledge as an organization - probably more than it does thier integrity.

Scott, that's good feedback.

I agree with you that they most likely did not do this maliciously (though you have to ask yourself, shouldn't Speco know how their product really works? and if so what does that say about Speco? :).

Even if it's just ignorance, hard to trust someone for advice if they show such willful indifferent ignorance.

Speco? Yes, their marketing speaks volumes about their integrity.

That's exactly right. We get offered this type of opportunity all the time by ADI or Tri-Ed: get on the website or on their phone answering system or in print if we pay $$$. The distributors have no say whatsoever on the content that is supplied, they just want their $$$.

"Thanks for calling Tri-Ed, while you are on hold for the next 10 minutes have you considered the Speco Ultra? It sees through walls, alerts on Al-Qeada members and so much more, plus this month only, get an extra 5% off."

I do use TriEd but not for technical information. I agree with Undisclosed E Integrator wholeheartedly. Give them a model # (and be specific) and you'll get a decent price quote pretty quickly. I do my own independent research using IPVM, talking directly to the factory tech support guys etc. Its the integrator who has to live with the service issues if they sell crap to the customer so its the integrator who should make the informed product selection decision.

There is nothing wrong with having both. It is entirely possible for a distributor to get moderately technical information and products to the integrator. I reward my distributors (my company uses distribution maybe 20% of the time if we arent ordering direct) when they help me with the ideas and generate solutions with products during my engineering and design phase by ordering from them.

While the distributor doesnt always know the super duper tough solutions, the ones I use usually have the ability to input different products that might be able to accomplish what I am looking for and within the priceframe I am looking for. Sometimes the distributor/technical sales help is enough to hit the nail on the head and point me to the right solution right away, other times I have to do some digging - but if the staff is trained right and updated with the newer products and options available - they can help save me a lot of headache on an area that I don't have an overwhelming strength of knowledge on.

Btw, Speco is at it again, this time with a twitter 'ad':

So they photoshopped an image to pretend it was 'low light'. Obviously, a real 'low light' image would look nothing like that.

I fixed it to be more accurate:

ADI advertisement passing similar bad Speco claims:

I suspect the 'no distance limitation' is an implied slight against IR cameras (which specify IR distance ranges). However, almost any IR camera would beat Speco Intensifier at short or long ranges. Beyond that, every camera has distance limitations, simply because the farther an object is away from a camera, the wider the FoV is, meaning the lower the pixel density is until it is impossible to make out any details, whether it was day or night (worse, of course, with Speco Intensifier noise).

"No, these Speco's are different, they actually amplify existing light no matter how far it has travelled so far."

try that one out on your integrator buddies after work at the pub; see what kind of reaction you get.

Related Reports

Dahua Forbes 'Next Web Crisis' Vulnerability Dispute on Nov 16, 2017
The buffer overflow vulnerability in Dahua products is not in dispute, in fact we covered it when it was first published. What is in dispute is...
Hikvision China Criticizes The WSJ on Nov 15, 2017
Hikvision, through the Chinese government's authoritative news service, has criticized the WSJ investigation into Hikvision. In this...
WSJ Investigates Hikvision on Nov 13, 2017
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has released a detailed investigation into Hikvision's government ownership and cybersecurity problems, hitting the...
Ingram Micro: The Blind Lead The Blind on Nov 02, 2017
Ingram Micro, as a huge as they are overall, with $40+ billion in annual sales, has never been a force in physical security, despite, or perhaps...
Avigilon H4 Mini Dome IR Tested on Oct 24, 2017
Avigilon has released their successor to the aging Micro Dome, the H4 Mini Dome, claiming easy install, a patent-pending surface/recessed...
Anixter End User Sales Troubles on Oct 23, 2017
End user sales have and continue to be a major problem for Anixter's physical security business. Every year, according to various Anixter people,...
Axis 'Sold Out' P3707-PVE Multi-Imager Tested on Oct 18, 2017
Axis faced significant product shortages over the summer. Perhaps the most notorious and significantly sold out model was the Axis P3707-PE 8MP...
Geovision GV-EDR2100 Tested Vs Hikvision on Oct 16, 2017
A number of ADI's top selling IP cameras are, at least surprisingly to us, from Geovision. We recently bought and tested the Geovision EDR2100...
Hanwha 20MP Multi-Imager Tested (PNM-9081VQ) on Oct 09, 2017
Hanwhwa has introduced the latest in their multi-imager camera line, the PNM-9081VQ, a Wisenet 5 20MP model with four repositionable 5MP camera...
Deceptive ASIS Attendance on Oct 06, 2017
ASIS is being deceptive with its conference reporting, effectively inflating the event's real actual attendance. What they try, but struggle to...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Camera Multi-Streaming Usage on Nov 22, 2017
IP cameras typically support multiple streams, allowing a single camera to transmit multiple streams at different resolutions, frame rates and even...
Law Breaking Longse Enters USA on Nov 22, 2017
Longse has established itself as world class, at least in spamming the industry, ripping off Milestone and Video Insight as well as Hikvision. But...
Amazon Key In-Home Package Delivery Examined on Nov 21, 2017
Interesting idea or invitation for criminals to rob you? Amazon's recent announcement of Key, a service that will help manage visitors, welcoming...
Top Maglock Provider Warns Against Using Maglocks on Nov 21, 2017
Do not buy my company's product. It sounds strange indeed, but a senior Allegion consultant stated that maglocks should not be used in common...
CBR vs VBR vs MBR - Surveillance Streaming on Nov 21, 2017
How you stream video has a major impact on quality and bandwidth. And it is not simply CODEC choice (e.g., H.264 vs H.265). Regardless of the...
Hikvision Chinese Government Owner CETHIK Exposed on Nov 20, 2017
Hikvision deceives about its Chinese government ownership. Contrary to their claims about 'independence' and simply having 'shareholders' that are...
Dahua Hard-Coded Credentials Vulnerability on Nov 20, 2017
A newly discovered Dahua backdoor is described by the researcher discovering it as: not the result of an accidental logic error or poor...
Panasonic Unified Surveillance Strategy Analyzed on Nov 17, 2017
Panasonic is now a "Unified Surveillance" offering, as their ASIS 2017 booth proclaimed: Looking to make a comeback in the security industry,...
Amazon Cloud Cam Is Poor (Tested) on Nov 17, 2017
Retail behemoth Amazon has entered the surveillance market with the Amazon Cloud Cam, the eyes of its just-announced Amazon Key delivery...
Nest Secure Alarm System Tested on Nov 16, 2017
Google's expansion continues, this time into home security with their Nest subsidiary's move into alarm systems. They paid more than a...

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