City Video Survelliance

8/8/2019 City Video Survelliance

1/28

While the publicity goes to mega-cities deploying video surveillance, city wide videosurveillance is becoming very cost-effective, valuable and viable for 'normal sized' cities

throughout the world.

The media coverage for the New York and Chicago city deployments can make city-wide video

surveillance seem daunting. It appears that you need:

y Tens of millions in funding

y Homeland security grantsy Defense contractors

y Deploying complex new wireless networksy Integrating military style command and control systems

In reality, though, most any city can benefit from mature, inexpensive and flexible city widevideo surveillance.

The City ofLongmont, Colorado provides a nice example of how to deploy city wide videosurveillance. Over the last few years, Longmont (population 71,000) has developed a first classcity wide solution. Working with Volpe Industries and using video surveillance solutions from

Axis Communications and Detexi Systems, Longmont now has a powerful surveillance solution.

This article explores some of the key principles used in this deployment to build a successful city

wide surveillance system.

Principles for Success:

1. Use Existing IP Networks that the Municipality Manages

2.D

eploy NVR servers at Facilities Throughout the Facility3. Use DirectWireless Links to Connect Camera to Facilities4. Share Video from the City with the Police Department's Command Center5. Expand the System Step by Step, Year by Year

Principle 1: Use Existing IP Municipality Networks

Most cities manage their own internal networks for city facilities. These networks are a simple

and low cost way to build a city wide surveillance system. These networks generally connect city

facilities across the municipality and often provide high speed connectivity, to boost.

The integrator, Volpe, worked closely with the Longmont's CIO to put the IP video surveillance

system on the municipalities network. The incremental cost of adding the system was practicallynil as it leveraged this existing infrastructure.


2/28

Principle 2: Deploy NVR severs at Each Facility

For each facility using IP Video Surveillance (le.g., ibraries, schools, city hall, police stations,

etc), an NVR server was deployed to store and manage video from the local cameras. This takes

advantage of video being recorded much more often than it is viewed. While video must be

streamed from the cameras frequently or constantly to enable recording, only occasionally doesthe video need to be viewed by city officials such as the police. Placing an NVR on each sitesignificantly reduces the amount of bandwidth needed on the municipalities network that

connects different facilities. This is important in making the addition of video surveillance as lowimpact as possible on the municipalities networks.

While centralizing video storage offers some savings in server and storage consolidation, like

most organizations, Longmont benefited more from minimizing the impact on the city's network.

Principle 3: Direct Wireless Links from Facilities

A number of outdoor locations needing surveillance were economically addressed through direct

wireless links originating from city facilities. From the roof of city facilities, wireless links wereestablished to various points of interests within a few miles from the facility. As these

connections were direct (point to point or point to multipoint), they were rather inexpensive andsimple to establish.

Principle 4: Share Video

The hundreds of cameras now deployed across the city can now be leveraged by the police to

help respond to emergencies or critical investigations. By using the city's IP network, the Police

can access any of the NVR servers in the city to view live or recorded video. This has alreadyhelped handle real time incidents as well as solve cases where criminals have moved across the

city.

Principle 5: Expand Step by Step

While city wide surveillance is often thought of as a massive project, Longmont demonstratesthat the system can grow incrementally. Indeed, at Longmont, new facilities have been comingon line every year for the last couple of years.

This allows city wide surveillance systems to grow in small chunks requiring tens of thousandsof dollars rather than millions of dollars. By leveraging the city's LAN and deploying

surveillance at city facilities and their surroundings, step by step, the city can grow the system.


3/28

This can be quite valuable in budget allocations and in building public support for the value ofthe system.

Future Considerations

City wide video surveillance systems can and will continue to grow. While Longmont is a greatexample of leveraging your existing resources and starting with simple, high value uses, city

wide video surveillance has the potential to expand to address other concerns. Below are anexample of those future considerations:

y Interfacing with Local Business NVRs/DVRs: A lot of interest exists in sharing video

between cities and local business to help respond to crimes or disasters. This requiressupport or interaction with many different manufacturers of NVRs/DVRs. Currently,

Longmont, like many municipalities has standardized on a single NVR platform fromD

etexi. This provides great simplicity as all cameras are managed by this system.Nevertheless, it is common that one manufacturer's NVR cannot access or view camera'sfrom another NVR system. Command and Control systems can be put in place to access

multiple NVR systems but this can significantly increase cost and complexity.y Using Non-City IP Networks: Some facilities and some points of interest are not served

by the City's IP Network. In those cases, the use ofDSL or cable modem from the localtelecommunications providers will be necessary. This will require some added

complexity to provide security, etc. but is increasingly becoming an accepted andstraightforward part of city wide surveillance systems.

y Provide Broader Camera Coverage: In some cases, cities want to deploy cameras inplaces where there are no wired networks and direct wireless connections are not feasible.

Wireless mesh networks are an ideal solution to this problem. They are designed tohandle obstacles, provide greater redundancy and cover broader areas. Nevertheless, they

also are more complex to design and more expensive to deploy.

Conclusion

With IP video, city wide video surveillance is becoming an affordable and valuable way to

improve security. By following the principles of Longmont's deployment, most cities can quicklyand fairly simply roll out city wide video surveillance systems that provide a strong foundation

for continuous improvement and new benefits.


4/28

While wireless can uniquely solve certain challenges, it is far riskier to deploy and use thanwired networks. As such, it is critical to understand when to use wireless systems and the key

risks in designing such systems. If you use wireless networks prudently for video surveillancesystems, the financial benefits can be quite significant. However, miscalculation in choice and

design can result in significant reliability and scalability problems.

As a general rule, you should avoid using wireless networks unless wired networks costs aresignificantly higher than a wireless system. This is because deploying and maintaining wireless

networks is far more risky and expensive than it is for a wired network. Wireless systems facemuch more serious problems that wireline networks do such as constrained bandwidth, signal

obstruction, higher maintenance cost and scalability restrictions.

Let's review these key elements:

- How much bandwidth is available?

-H

ow far can away can the wireless cameras be?

- How many cameras can I deploy?

Bandwidth

Wireless networks have far lower bandwidth than wired networks. On a wired network,bandwidth available for video surveillance can be easily 70 Mb/s to 700 Mb/s. On a wireless

network, your available bandwidth is often no more than 5 Mb/s to 25 Mb/s. It is a dramatic and

often overlooked aspect of wireless video surveillance design.

Wireless video surveillance usually has significantly less bandwidth the wireless system states.This is because the way bandwidth is calculated in wireless systems is the opposite of the more

traditional wired approach. With a wired network, if you say you have 100 Mb/s bandwidth, thismeans you have 100 Mb/s going up and another 100 Mb/s going down. In a wireless network, if

you say you have 11 Mb/s bandwidth, that is the total for both upstream and downstream. Somewireless systems are fixed to allow half the bandwidth for upstream and half for downstream.

This is a big problem for video surveillance because almost all the bandwidth used is in onedirection (upstream). Make sure your wireless system lets the upstream take up the whole

bandwidth if needed. This is common with wireless systems dedicated to video but none in

common commercial gear.

Environmental conditions often reduce the bandwidth further. Wireless networks are much more

prone to effects from the environment than wired networks. Wireless networks will only achievetheir maximum if the strength of the signal (signal to noise) is sufficiently high. If there are

partial obstructions or if the antenna shifts slightly, the bandwidth from wireless systems candrop further. In our previous example, the 11 Mb/s wireless system only offers 5.5 Mb/s for


5/28

streaming video. However, common environmental conditions can drop the bandwidth to 2.75Mb/s.

Distance of Cameras

It is quite hard to set up multi-mile wireless links to video surveillance cameras. A number offactors including obstructions, frequency limitations, power limitations, and installation precision

drive this. Note: this tutorial assumes the use of unlicensed frequency, by far the most commonchoice for deploying wireless video systems. If you are using licensed frequency, where you can

use much higher power and ensure no interference, these issues are not as significant. However,obtaining licenses are expensive and time consuming so most application use unlicensed

spectrum. The rest of the discussion assumes unlicensed frequencies.

You are constrained in how powerful your signal can be, significantly reducing the distance that

you can transmit. The government restricts the power of your signal so that you do notoverpower the transmission other users. However, this means it is much harder to push throughobstacles and go greater distances. It also means that other users of the same frequency can

reduce the bandwidth or block your signal. This is a major factor in the emergence of the 4.9 Ghzrange for use in video surveillance projects as that range is dedicated to public safety.

Obstacles are very seriously problems for wireless video surveillance systems. Most wireless

video surveillance system use frequency ranges that are easily absorbed by buildings and trees(2.4 Ghz through 5.8 Ghz). Practically speaking, you may want to transmit to a building 100

meters away but if another building is in between, the signal will be absorbed and the link willnot be possible. You can and should use mesh networks to accommodate this but you must factor

in the impact on the cost of the overall network.

Installation precision is key but issues can go wrong that may increase long term maintenance.

Because of power restrictions, wireless video systems commonly use high gain antennas thatincrease signal power by concentrating it into a narrower area. This can help greatly in going

longer distances or overcoming obstacles, however, it means the antennas must line up veryprecisely. If they do not, the performance of the system will degrade significantly. Also, if during

the life of the system, either antenna shifts, the performance of the system could degrade 'out ofthe blue.'

Number of Cameras

The number of cameras on a wireless system is severely constrained due to bandwidthlimitations and constraints on how far cameras can be placed. For any given wireless connection,

the maximum number of cameras that can be supported is generally between 5 and 15 with thecameras being less than a mile from the receiver. Even 'VCR' quality video using a good

CODEC will take about 1 Mb/s. This is significant when your are dealing with wireless links that


6/28

may only support 5 - 20 Mb/s. The total number of wireless cameras can be increased by usingmultiple wireless connections or by combining wireless and wired networks.

A prudent practice is to use both wireless and wired networks with the wireless portion

minimized to only the specific scenarios where deploying a wired connection would be cost-

prohibitive. A typical example is getting a network drop in a building (either off the internalLAN or from a telco) and deploying a wireless link from the building to camera locations closeto that building on poles or fence lines.

In any of these approachs, CODEC choice and resolution selection are key factors in the number

of cameras that can be supported. In a wired network where 70 - 700 Mb/s networks arecommon, not compressing video heavily can work. However, in a wireless network, with 5 Mb/s

to 15 M/bs available total, a single MJPEG standard definition camera could consume all of theavailable bandwidth by itself. Similarly, given the bandwidth constrains, megapixel cameras are

especially challenges. Even with various optimizations, megapixel cameras can consume fargreater bandwidth than standard cameras (assuming you use the same frame rate).

Conclusion

Wireless networks can solve applications where wired networks are far too expensive. Byrelieving the need for expensive construction projects, video surveillance can be deployed in

places where it would otherwise be cost unjustifiable. However, wireless networks offer fargreater challenges and risks in design and maintenance. As such a clear understanding of these

elements and when to prudently use wireless systems will contribute to success wireless videosurveillance systems.

S

The Making of the Map

Over the last five months, a small but dedicated group of New York CivilLiberties Union (NYCLU) volunteers walked the streets of Manhattan insearch of video surveillance cameras. This group sought out every camera,public or private, which records people in public space. Mostly by foot, but

occasionally by car, they covered every block in the borough. From therecords they made of all camera locations, the volunteers produced acomprehensive map of surveillance cameras in Manhattan.

The map includes cameras that are readily visible from the city streets. Thismeans that the cameras may be located in private or public spaces, but


7/28

record action in the latter. However, we cannot represent that all visiblecameras are continuously functioning.

The private cameras may be inside an alcove and pointed out, above agarage door or affixed to the wall of a private building and pointed down a

block. The public cameras may be on traffic or streetlight poles or affixed to apublic building. Cameras are labeled as either public or private based uponthe assumed ownership of the structure to which they are affixed.

Although the group saw 2,397 cameras in Manhattan, the map they created isfar from exhaustive. As slowly as they walked and as carefully as they looked,cameras have escaped their search. A few because the volunteers werebusily writing down the location of a camera nearby, but many more becausethe cameras were hidden from sight. Whether tucked surreptitiously out of theline of vision or small enough to escape detection, we believe many more

cameras currently watch our city streets than appear on the map. Andnumerous others are continually being installed.

Creating a map of Manhattan is just the first stage of the project. The NYCLUplans to expand the map to include all cameras that record public spaces in allfive boroughs. Then, the NYCLU will continually update the city-wide map toreflect what we predict to be a growing number of surveillance cameras in thecity.

The Philosophy Behind the Project

Video surveillance cameras have arrived on the streets of New York City. Butit is up to us to decide if they are here to stay, and if they are, then under whatconditions. Commonplace outside private companies, storefronts andapartment buildings, in parks and at intersections, surveillance cameras havebeen passively accepted as necessary for our personal safety. At this stage intheir proliferation, we need to take an active, not passive, role in the decision-

making process that allows for the installation of video surveillance cameras.In certain situations, cameras do afford us an important sense of safety: whenthey watch the entryway of our apartment buildings or the loading dock of ourbusinesses. But there is an equal, if not greater, number of situations in whichcameras become not protective, but invasive. Placed in changing rooms andbathrooms, cameras record peoples most private moments on tape, tapes onwhich footage of women undressing or using the bathroom is often reviewed


8/28

by men. In these examples, the deleterious nature of video surveillance isobvious. But in other situations the invasive presence of a camera is not asblatant, but it is equally as intrusive.

When cameras are mounted on street corners, the vast majority of the time

they monitor people engaged in innocent and lawful activities. However, theseinnocent activities may be confidential and personally damaging if the tapesfall into the wrong hands. Public spaces often serve as meeting ground forlawyers and clients, reporters and sources and businesspeople and politicianswho want to talk privately. Cameras also capriciously watch off-guardmoments: a cigarette break or a kiss goodbye, which, at one point or another,most everyone has not wanted captured on video.

Even more critically, cameras prevent law-abiding citizens who hold politicalor social views not accepted by the majority from expressing themselves

freely. Michael Rosano of the New York City Gay & Lesbian Anti-ViolenceProject feels that the installation of cameras along places like the GreenwichVillage piers, a cruising strip for gay men, will stop many same sex couplesfrom even holding hands for fear "that the tapes would get into the wronghands. " Similarly, the threat of cameras targeting certain races of people hasbeen raised. Will African Americans be automatically considered suspicious tothe camera, or the person behind the lens? We must address these issuesand question the motives behind decisions like that which led to the New YorkCity Police Department?s reported taping of large segments of the MillionYouth March in Harlem on Labor Day Weekend, 1998.

Video Surveillance cameras have arrived with effectively no organizeddiscussion or debate on their role in our city. Even less has beenaccomplished in regards to developing and implementing uniform standardsthat should apply to use of surveillance equipment. There are a slew of issuesto be raised and questions to be answered regarding the presence of camerasin public spaces. Until these are addressed, we cannot expect that everyonewho wants to install a camera will carefully weigh the pros and cons of itsinstallation, the location s/he has chosen and the ultimate destination of thevideo footage. Even after video surveillance is raised as a topic of publicdebate, informal decisions will be ineffectual without formal guidelines toregulate video surveillance of public space.

With the rapid advance of technology, the importance of these guidelinesbecomes even greater. Each video camera does not operate in isolation. Vastnetworks tie tens, even hundreds, of cameras together, allowing footage frommany sites to be compiled, watched and stored at a central database. In the


9/28

private sector, Citibank's video infrastructure sets a new standard innetworking. From a central hub in Midtown, workers monitor cameras locatedat every branch in the city and its suburbs, cameras under which a quarter ofa million New Yorkers pass everyday. Publicly, the New York City Departmentof Transportation brags of its Vehicular Traffic Control System. DOT employs

55 cameras to watch over Manhattan?s major arteries and one AdvancedTraffic Management to control all the cameras and traffic signals to avoidcongestion in the city. After being trapped in Manhattan gridlock for anafternoon, one begins to question the effectiveness of these methods fortraffic control and starts to wonder what other purpose these cameras mayserve the government.

Since the inception of vast databases of video footage, software companieshave been designing and marketing facial recognition software, a biometricstechnique through which a computer can identify people on tape. Visionics,one of the leading companies in the market, boasts that its software, FaceIt,can atomatically locate faces in complex scenes, track and identify who theyare totally hands-off, continuously and in real-time. Software and SystemsInternational touts it software, Mandrake, for its ability to identify faces takinginto account "head orientation, lighting conditions, skin color, spectacles,make-up and earrings, facial expression, facial hair and aging." And each ofthese identification software can be used covertly, and legally, without theconsent of the individual being tracked.

The use of video surveillance equipment, the formation of networks and theemployment of facial recognition software heighten fear on our streets. Aninnocent person walking in public has no control over his own actions: whomay record them and what the monitor may do with the tape. With the currentubiquity of cameras, the actual ends of individual tape becomes a moot point.The fear of being watched has already been instituted. The city grid morphsinto a modern panopticon, a circular prison conceived by the 18th-centuryphilosopher Jeremy Bentham. From his tower at the center of the prison, thewatchman can always peer into every cell, although not simultaneously.Because of his ability to do so, the threat of surveillance becomes as great as

the surveillance itself. Our modern panopticon is making prisoners of us all, aswe are constantly under the gaze of the camera. Whether it is acting alone oras one in a vast network, we cannot tell, we can only safely presume thelatter. We can only presume that the watchman, whoever or wherever he maybe, is watching us now.


10/28

The Status on the Streets

Two thousand three hundred and ninety seven cameras patrol the streets ofManhattan. On average, 200 cameras watch over every community district in

the borough. Approximately 2,000 of the cameras are stationary. Thestationary cameras are usually either cylindrical or three-dimensionalrectangular devices about the length of one?s forearm. Although often madeof an off-white plastic, they can also be found in black.

The stationary cameras can be found in doorways and alcoves, above garagedoors and affixed to the fronts or corners of buildings, usually between the firstand second stories. They can also be found on the rooftops of buildings,pointing down at the street, or on free- standing poles. The other type ofstationary camera that we saw less often, either for its size or for the number

that are employed, is a 2" cube, also made of off-white plastic. The cube ispredominantly used in doorways, looking out into the street.

The balance of the 2,397 are rotational and globe cameras. Rotationalcameras look very similar to the stationary cameras. The body of the camerais essentially the same, a three-dimensional rectangle, but the bracket bywhich it is affixed to a building is distinct. The bracket is larger, holds thecamera farther away from the wall of the building and rotates the entiredevice. In contrast, the globe camera resembles a streetlight. The top half ofthe sphere is usually made of white plastic and the bottom half, through which

the camera sees, is a dark, but translucent, plastic. Inside the sphere, acamera rotates and records out of sight of its subjects. The globe camera isoften found on light poles in the streets or in the parks. The full sphere, and asmaller half-sphere version, are also found on corners of buildings andoutside of stores, apartment entrances and restaurants.

The cameras have also been categorized by private or public proprietorship.Public cameras are those on federal, state or city buildings, on streetlights orin parks. All other cameras are considered private. Overwhelmingly, thecameras in Manhattan have been installed, and are staffed, by privatecompanies or individuals. Of the 2,397 cameras, approximately 2,100 areprivate and less than 300 are public. The situation is very different than theone George Orwell predicted in Nineteen Eighty Four. Big Brother, at thispoint, is doing about 11 percent of the watching. It is more likely that a privatecompany, your employer, your landlord, your coworker or just about anyonewho wants to install a camera, is watching you.


11/28

This is especially true in Community Boards 1 and 6. In CB 1, the area ofManhattan south of Canal Street and west of Pearl Street, 440 cameras patrolthe streets. In CB 6, the area between 14th and 59th streets East ofLexington/Madison, 517 cameras watch us everyday. On the west side, over70 cameras were reported in a single three block area between West 32nd

and West 35th Streets..

The Recommendations

The intent of our map, the website and this narrative is to raise awareness ofthe prevalence of video surveillance cameras in New York City, explain thethreat they pose to our individual freedom, begin a long overdue, much

needed dialogue on the topic and recommend ways to curb camerasinfringement on our right of anonymity and to move and associate freely.

In order to achieve these primary goals, we must invoke public dialogueoutside of the Civil Liberties Union. Media coverage of the map we havecreated and the issues it raises will bring the topic to a wider audience. Weencourage those who see our map and read about the pros and cons ofsurveillance cameras to bring the topic up at meetings of local civic, religiousand professional groups and/or community board meetings.

We are creating localized maps of the cameras in individual communityboards in Manhattan that can start or supplement a discussion. These mapsare miniature versions of the Manhattan map and include the total number ofcameras, whether they are rotating or stationary, and whether they are publicor private. Maps are a wonderful tool for presenting statistical information, butthey are only part of the initiative. We hope that each person who sees themap will think about it the next time s/he leaves home and walks into thestreet, and will look around her/him at the cameras s/he has walkedunknowingly by every single day. Moreover, New Yorkers need to call or emailthe NYCLU and inform us where the cameras are so that we can expand andupdate the maps. Only then will a community discussion on surveillancecameras become a discussion of every individuals civil liberties.

We call upon our government officials to address the prevalence of videosurveillance cameras in public spaces. We encourage them to go to theirconstituents, go to their local communities and call upon individuals to find outhow the people feel about the cameras. Community Board leaders, City


12/28

Councilmen and State Legislators need to hold public hearings to encouragepeople to speak openly about the surveillance cameras, and show the peoplethat they too believe in a country where we are free to criticize a governmentfor its actions. Our government officials must then open the same topic fordiscussion with their peers, for it is through the government that surveillance

has the potential to expand, and the ability to be curtailed.

The NYCLU supports, at a minimum, city and state legislation that would limitthe use of video surveillance cameras in public spaces. Clearly, the camerasare already here. We cannot realistically hope to eliminate them altogether,nor would we probably want to eradicate them from all public areas. But we doneed to regulate them. Legislation should limit the number of hours recordedmaterial, which contains no criminal acts, is retained before the tape is eitherrecycled or erased. It should also limit the distribution of, and the access to,recorded material. The legislation should require signage notifying anyonewho may be recorded on the videotape that they are under surveillance.Lastly, all video surveillance cameras in public spaces should be registeredwith an appropriate governmental agency, such as the Public Advocate'sOffice.

NYCLU Surveillance Camera Project -- 1998

y Norman Siegel, Executive Directory Ibrahim Rubama, Board of Directorsy Chris Johnson, Coordinatory Bradley McCallum, Artist-In-Residencey Greg Bezkorovainyy Allyson Boweny Mark Ghuneimy Caroline Hally Rebecca Kelleyy Greg Loftisy Leigh Ann Mahlery Matt McGuinnessy Kirsten O?Malleyy Kay Sirianniy Arthur Kimball Stanley

How IP-based Video Surveillance Works -- Way Beyond Analog

When youre shopping around for an IP-based video surveillance system, you will need to beparticularly cautious about what exactly youre looking at and what the individual terms


13/28

mean. How IP-based video surveillance works is open to interpretation as far as some videosurveillance and security salespeople are concerned -- not because they are trying toconfuse the issues, but because there is no genuine consensus on what the term IP-basedor related ones such as networked or web-based means.

Originally video surveillance was done based on analog technology -- closed circuittelevision (CCTV) and recording on video tapes. This was fine for recording what was goingon, but it didnt broadcast actual live information, so it wasnt practical for monitoringstores, for instance, from a remote location. It simply provided what happened after thefact. The picture quality wasnt great and it relied on human reliability as well -- someonehad to remember to change the tapes regularly, etc.

Digital revolutionizes video surveillance

With the Internet revolution and the ever-increasing presence of Local Area Networks,technology took great strides in video surveillance in the 1990s. Analog camera tubes were

replaced with CCD (Charged Coupled Devices) and digital cameras became affordable formost people.

This combination meant that video surveillance could do two things: go live over theInternet or a closed network for surveillance and provide clearer, crisper images that couldbe tracked and manipulated easily. For law enforcement, digital surveillance meant it wasmuch easier to zoom in on images, track particular scenes and enhance features.

The basics of IP-based surveillance

A digital camera views the scene in front of it, broadcasts the video images as a digitizedsignal over a LAN line (Local Area Network) where its then transmitted to a computer orserver. The server in turn manages all of this information. Depending upon the softwareused to manage the digital images, it can record, display or retransmit the images toanywhere in the world.

The software package can easily be upgraded to allow for analyzing data, selecting specificflagged items to watch for and a host of other functions, making it a truly customizablesecurity tool.

True IP-based digital surveillance uses CCD cameras that use signal processing that send

packetized video streams over the LAN through a Cat 5 cable rather than a coax cablenetwork, utilizing greater bandwidth and standard TCP/IP communication.

It also provides more intelligent data mining and information retrieval. If security is anissue, full digital surveillance also offers the added advantage of data encryptionopportunities to protect against image tampering -- something not possible with analogrecording.


14/28

Recently, a few companies such as D-Link and Linksys have also developed fully digitalcameras that actually have completely integrated, built-in web servers so that no externalcomputers are needed for operating them. The signal is transmitted directly to the terminallocation for storage or play-back.

Halfway there

The middle of the road of video surveillance is upgrading video surveillance by utilizing aDigital Video Recorder (DVR). A DVR system is not really fully IP-based, but is step towardthe more advanced IP technology. In actuality, a DVR system uses the same camera andstructures for cabling as the older CCTV analog systems, but the old VCRs have beenreplaced with DVR for storage of the data. The data is converted to digital so that it can bestored on hard disks, but the quality of the images captured remains analog since this ishow it originated.

When shopping for a system, be sure to ask if the system is digital based on the recording

(DVR) or on the camera, since many manufacturers consider a system digital by virtue ofthe DVR storage system even if the camera recording the images is still analog.

Going all the way

Some people will move to the hybrid models of a CCTV/DVR system when they first movebeyond an analog system because it seems like the next practical evolutionary step in videosurveillance. However, shifting to this method largely ignores how IP-based videosurveillance works.

With CCTV/DVR surveillance you have actually simply delayed the inevitable by adding on arelatively new technology (hard disk, digital storage) to an old technology (analog videoover coaxial transmission lines). Rather than moving forward into something new, you haveprolonged the demise of the old.

Advantages of IP-based video surveillance

The leap into completely IP-based technology is the best bang for your buck bothmonetarily and in terms of security by far. Digital surveillance can be done over a LANnetwork, of course, but TCP/IP transmittal of surveillance makes sense for remotemonitoring of multiple locations and for remote recording of data onto back-up servers and

hard disks for long-term storage.

With IP-based video surveillance, you can connect your surveillance camera or cameras toany network or wireless adapter, and you are extremely flexible in your placement of thecamera itself. A typical PC-attached video camera, while providing digital picture imagequality, still has to be within approximately ten feet of the computer itself.


15/28

Set-up of an IP-based video system is easy -- once youve set up an IP address, youre upand running and its extremely stable and reliable. Because this is the technology of thefuture, it is also upgradeable. You wont be outgrowing an IP-based video surveillancesystem any time soon because new developments are based on improving this market.Therefore, you will be able to add on and improve this system for years to come while older,CCTV+DVRhybrids will dead-end and become obsolete.

Comparing analog and IP-based video surveillance

A better way to understand the differences between analog and IP-based video surveillancemay be to compare the two and how they work:

Analog or CCTV+DVR video surveillance

y Easy to use -- operates like a VCRy

Changing cassettes and rewinding regularly means human error frequently interfereswith effectivenessy Image quality is poory Storage tapes wear out over timey Broadcasting images live isnt practicaly Storage is bulkyy Uses analog recording, recording in low-grade picture quality and inability to search

and track easilyy Adding DVR systems must be done in blocks of 16 channels

IP-based video surveillance

y IP-based recording means instant transmittal of images anywhere in the world.y Can monitor multiple cameras from one remote locationy No decrease in recording quality over time or with repeated replaysy Digital picture quality far superior to analogy IP-base recording is highly compressed for easier storage and can be transported

over a variety of mediay Digital images can be encrypted for security purposesy Updates and add-ons are relatively inexpensive through software packages and

Internet computer networkingy Adjustable frame ratesy Remote or shared viewing may be done over the Internet or a wireless connectiony Standard IP video compression techniques are usedy

IP surveillance cameras may be added individually or in groups according to yourneeds

If you are contemplating increased or upgrading video surveillance for your company orhome, understanding how IP-based video surveillance works will make your decision easier.It is the future of video surveillance and, although in the short term may be a bit moreexpensive, is obviously an investment in superior quality and flexibility.


16/28

IP surveillance technology has reached one of those "perfect storm" moments. Today's digital cameras are

inexpensive and easy to install. Wired and wireless networks alike are ubiquitous. And the camera-monitoring

software is robust, easy-to-use and often free. Demand for security cams is high among both businesses and home

users, and system builders stand to capitalize on this surging wave by offering installation services and support.

There's even potential for computer and server upgrades, as some companies will be looking to build dedicated

systems that have guaranteed bandwidth and quality of service (QoS) over the video network.

Cameras are popping up all over the place. You can find them at retail businesses, factory floors, homes, apartments,landmarks, schools, financial institutions and transportation centers, to name but a few. Applications range from basicsecurity and safety to quality control monitoring.

Although you can use these cameras over the Web, they're not really Webcams, which are those small, low-techcameras designed for online socializing. Rather, IP-based cameras connect directly to IP networks, record at higherframe rates, and generally have better resolution then Webcams. They can pan, tilt and zoom, and many have one-way or two-way audio capabilities. They also come with monitoring and management software that lets you triggeralarms and e-mail alerts when certain events occur. For example, you can designate motion detection areas within aframe that generate alerts when motion occurs. Or you can set the system to begin recording when certain eventsoccur or timers are set. Examples of motion events might include a person walking into the frame or a car drivingacross a designated area.

Since these systems are IP-based, you can monitor, store, and archive video, audio and associated application dataover the Internet or across private data networks. The video can be carried anywhere the IP network extends, asopposed to closed-circuit television (CCTV) systems that require proprietary equipment and dedicated coaxialcabling. Anyone with the proper security clearance and a standard browser can monitor video, and control andconfigure the cameras on the network.

You need to have a fairly robust wired or wireless network set up for a successful IP surveillance roll-out. This Recipeassumes that you have a typical 10/100 wired or 802.11g wireless network already set up. We will, however, look atsome Power over Ethernet (PoE) networking equipment and discuss the advantages of that type of system as well.PoE allows you to send power over ethernet lines so you don't have to place the cameras near power sources.

Finally, a note on what all this will cost you. Simply put, pricing will depend on several factors you'll need to carefullyconsider: Labor rates, the camera(s) selected, the structure of the building(s), the location of power outlets, thelocation of network infrastructure, etc.

Big Benefits

A quick rundown of the main benefits of IP surveillance follows. Use these points when pitching solutions to yourcustomers, and they will quickly recognize the advantages.

y Utilizes existing IP infrastructure.y Highly scalable.y Flexible camera placement: PoE eliminates need for local power source; Wi-Fi eliminates need for hard-wired

ethernet cable. Wi-Fi stands for Wireless Fidelity, and Wi-Fi is pretty much a noun these days, and has evenbecome synonymous with the more generic term "wireless."

y Remote viewing from anywhere/anytime via a standard Web browser.y Standards-based, allowing multi-vendor solutions and integration.

y Better image quality than closed circuit TV (CCTV) analog systems.y Open storage and server systems scale easily and cheaply, with no need for specialized recording equipment or

training.

y Secure: Data can be encrypted across the network, so only the cameras and servers know what kind of packetsto expect across the system. Without the proper authentication keys, outsiders can't break into the network tosteal video data or feed false video into the system. Also, any interruption to the data stream can automaticallytrigger alarms and alerts.

Ingredients


17/28

Let's get into the two main areas of componentsthe cameras and the networkthat we'll need for building out an IPcamera surveillance system.

Cameras: Most professionals are deploying products from D-Link of Fountain Valley, California. The company hasbeen around for 20 years, and it offers quality cameras at reasonable prices. I recommend them.

I tested D-Link's DCS-6620G, DCS-5300G, DCS-3220G, DCS-2120 and DCS-950G cameras. I've listed them inorder from fully featured to bare-bones. The DSC-6620G is the deluxe model, with all the bells and whistles and thesuperior Charge-Coupled Device (CCD) technology.

The D-Link DCS-6620G and DCS-5300G are the motorized models; they offer full pan, tilt and zoom features. The6620G retails for about $775 on Amazon (NSDQ:AMZN). The DCS-5300G sells for about $422. (All prices aresubject to change, of course. Watch for deals!)

The DCS-6620G, DCS-5300G and DCS-3220G have microphones and 3.5-mm. audio jacks to connect speakers atthe camera source, so you can have remote two-way conversations. The DCS-3220G retails for $323 on Amazon.

The DCS-2120 has a microphone, but no speaker jack, so you can only monitor sound from this camera; you can'tspeak back to the person on the other end. I won't go into all the features here, but these cameras are quiteimpressive and take excellent, clear videos. The DCS-2120 retails for just under $320. The low-end DCS-950G is

going for a little over $140.

All the cameras I tested operate as both Wi-Fi and wired Ethernet cameras. You can set them up either waydepending upon your needs and the locations of your wired ethernet.

Once you've set up a camera, you can just plug the rest in and configure them without having to run the set-uputilities again. You can get a large facility installed really quickly this way. You simply plug the cameras into a poweroutlet and Ethernet jack, discover them with the D-Link client utility, and then configure the Wi-Fi settings according toyour router's settings. Unplug the Ethernet cable(s) from the cameras you want to use in Wi-Fi mode, and you're set.The Wi-Fi cameras can be positioned anywhere in range of your wireless router and anywhere there is a powersource. I'll cover the initial software installation in specific detail below.

The Network: You need to consider a few existing network variables before installing cameras. Ideally, your networkswitches and routers should offer a range of speeds from 56 megabits per second (Mbps) to 10 Gbps. For high-

quality feeds or large numbers of cameras, consider 100 Mbps attached cameras with backbone network speeds of 1Gigabit or higher. 10/100 Mbps networks and 54 Mbps or 108 Mbps Wi-Fi networks can be used for applicationswhere high-resolution video quality is not as critical.

If you don't want to run Ethernet cable, 802.11 wireless access points and wireless cameras are an option. The 54-Mbps 802.11g standard is sufficient for many video surveillance applications. Current wireless security standards, likeWi-Fi Protected Access (WPA), offer robust authentication and encryption for the wireless signal to prevent snoopingand interception of the video signal.

You should estimate throughput and peak demand requirements that will be placed on the network and examine howthose demands may impact other network applications. Also, consider Quality of Service (QoS) mechanisms toprovide the desired level of video quality to your IP Surveillance cameras and monitoring applications.

If you have a client that needs a larger installationwith 200 to 300 cameras, for exampleyou can go with Gigabit

and 10-Gigabit Ethernet. Some organizations are easily using more than 1,000 cameras at a time with these high-speed networks.

Installing the Cameras and Software

As I mentioned earlier, the camera installation process is quite easy with the equipment I'm recommending.


18/28

So let's start with the installation of the DCS-6620G camera. First, connect the Ethernet cable to the camera asdepicted in the following photo. The Ethernet cable must be connected at first for set-up purposes; it will be removedlater.

Next, connect the power cable, as shown in the following photo:


19/28


20/28

Once the program finds the camerathis takes just a few secondsyou'll see the following screen. Place a checknext to the camera you want to link to and configure.

At this initial stage, you are prompted to confirm IP and networking settings for the camera. The following screendetails the settings given to the camera by my router:


21/28

Clicking "Next" brings you to the wireless set-up, which looks like this:


22/28

This is where you can configure security and encryption options. Before we start though, you might want to bone upon wireless security. If you do, see my earlier TechBuilder Recipe, An Easier Way To Secure Wireless Networks.

The next screen you get allows you to exit from the initial configuration. You can now unplug the Ethernet cable fromthe camera. The wireless functionality is set.

Clicking on the install wizard desktop icon again brings up the "searching for cameras" screen again. The list ofavailable cameras comes back, including the wireless camera.

When you place the check mark and click the link that says "link to selected device(s)" in the upper right corner of thescreen, the program launches a standard browser window with the live camera feed and options for manipulating andconfiguring the camera further.


23/28

This camera is now set with its own IP address that the router will recognize each time you search for cameras. Youcan take the camera anywhere there is an electrical outlet (within range of the Wi-Fi network), plug it in, and beginmonitoring the room. The camera is discovered every time.

sAnalog vs. IP-Based

Let's take a quick look at the differences between old-school analog systems and the new wave of IP-based network

systems.

Analog closed-circuit recording systems (CCTV) are limited, because they are only as smart as the person monitoringthe system. With IP networks you have access to a wide-range of automated software settings and alert systems thatmake security management more efficient and intelligent and less error prone and less costly.

On the other hand, IP camera systems handle motion detection, event triggers, and alert automation (via e-mail,pager or phone call), and have a multitude of options for changing frame rates, resolution and timed record cycles.

Analog camera systems can't do this without digital conversion.

This particular D-Link IP surveillance application has room for 16 cameras, as shown here:


24/28

The next screens you'll see offer motion-detection and monitoring scheduling. After that, you can manage alert,recording, and snapshot settings.

All in all, this particular program is highly flexible and can accommodate virtually any scenario and alert response.Best of all, it comes free with the more high-end D-Link cameras.

Power over Ethernet (PoE)

PoE switches and adapters are useful for times when local power outlets are not available. Power is drawn from thepower source near the switch and then routed over ethernet cables. This is possible because the CAT5 Ethernetspec enables both data and power.

As always, pricing depends up the various equipment involved on a site, along with such network variables as thenumber of ports, switch capabilities, vendors deployed, etc. Make sure all of these fit within yours and yourcustomer's budget.

PoE (short for Power over Ethernet) is basically a power extension via ethernet cable. It requires a PoE switch or PoEadapters. PoE switches will send power and data to either:

y A PoE enabled device that can take power and data from a single ethernet cable and the attached PoE switch; ory A PoE terminal adapter that splits the power out of the ethernet cable at the end of the line and connects to a

standard power input on the networked device (in this case a camera).

The second scenario is shown in the next photo. The PoE router is on the far left, the terminal adapter is in themiddle, and the camera is connected on the far right with a power bridge cord and a second Ethernet cable. With aPoE enabled camera or device, you wouldn't need the terminal adapter.


25/28

If you plan on using a non-PoE switch or routerbecause you don't have power outlets near the location you'd like toplace the camerathe following set-up will apply:

1. Attach an Ethernet cable to your router, as shown here:


26/28

2. Attach the PoE base unit adapter to the other end of the ethernet cable like so:

3. Plug in the base unit's power cable:

4. The opposite side of the base unit takes an Ethernet cable that now carries both power and data. It's thecable in the middle with the pen on it here:


27/28

5. That middle Ethernet cable with the pen on it could be really long and go anywhere in an office or home. Thecamera has power and Ethernet connectivity at the very end of the line:

6. And here it is, ready for use:


28/28

City Video Survelliance

Documents

Transcript of City Video Survelliance