The true cost of IP-based video: analog systems might have lower initial costs, but look long-term for real savings

Communications News, Dec, 2008 by Paul Smith

Many buildings today still have the same access control, alarm panels, intercom and closed-circuit TV (CCTV) systems they had in the 1990s. After Sept. 11, 2001, however, renewed emphasis was placed on how to better secure buildings, borders and assets. Today, many facilities managers are using high-tech cameras and video analytics to protect assets. Most of these systems are based on digital video recorders (DVRs), which are called hybrid systems: taking analog video streams, digitizing and packetizing them so they can be viewed over a network.

The next evolution in IP video surveillance is the network video recorder (NVR). NVRs are the first open system, IP-based solutions, since they are digital from system core to the edge. Recent industry reports conclude that an average of 15 percent to 20 percent of video surveillance installations are true IP-based solutions. Another 50 percent of video surveillance installations are based on DVR technology.

In the physical security market today, the key questions are what percentage of DVR-based installations will migrate to true IP-based solutions and how quickly? End-users and integrators alike tend to focus on initial overall system cost to determine their technology options and ultimately how much IP they install. Initial cost tells only half of the story and can be misleading. The true cost of ownership should be evaluated to ensure a valid comparison.

An open system IP video surveillance includes the following characteristics:

* End-user can deploy off-the-shelf computing hardware.

* Development platform is built on an open standard (e.g., Microsoft .NET Framework).

* Solution can employ multivendor edge devices, especially those that adhere to IT standards such as power over Ethernet.

* A full software development kit and application programming interface set should be available.

* The main operating platform brings inputs from multiple sources, such as object tracking, license plate recognition and access-control edge devices.

* The system offers customizable operator screens.

* Analog camera control is available with built-in drivers and adapters to any number of pan/tilt/zoom cameras, CCTV keyboards, matrix switchers and other legacy equipment.

IP equals open systems, which work within the standards with which the IT department is familiar and responsible.

Computing hardware. Applications should run on any standard computer hardware (Dell, HP, IBM), along with standards-based storage systems (Dell, NetApps, EMC, NexSAN) and standards-based network switching equipment (HP ProCurve, Cisco, Foundry), providing the user with multiple hardware choices that ensure lowest cost, ample options, highest performance and easy access to new and replacement hardware.

SDKs. The application should have open interfaces to integrate with other software vendor applications, such as access control, perimeter fence detection, video analytics, building management, supervisory control and data acquisition, heating/ventilating/air conditioning (HVAC), and programmer logic controller systems.

Edge devices. The application should interoperate with edge devices from multiple vendors.

Microsoft .NET Framework. The development platform is critical in defining how "open" a system is. An application built on an older development framework will run into support and compatibility issues with other software applications built to the latest development framework. The importance of an open-based IP physical security system rests on the ease of installation, scalability by device, flexibility for using corporate standards and profiles, and integration ability. True IP video surveillance systems are based on IT standards and principles.

Here is an initial cost comparison between analog and IP-based video surveillance systems provided by one established integrator:

* 50 cameras, digital $120,000, analog $114,500;

* 100 cameras, digital $232,000, analog, $214,000;

* 500 cameras, digital $1,129,000, analog $1,012,000.

On first examination, the analog system is cheaper. Initial cost and the true cost of ownership, however, can be worlds apart.

Moving beyond cost comparisons of initial system installation, consider if each system option provides the following features and functionality:

* reduction in hardware;

* unlimited digital inputs and analog inputs and outputs;

* ease of adding edge devices;

* increased productivity, shorter investigation time and more successful prosecutions;

* 30 frames per second recording on all cameras at four common intermediate format resolution or better;

* dual-stream technology;

* open integration options;

* significant reduction in electrical and HVAC support;

* one-wire installation for video, audio, telemetry, power, alarms, relays and access control.

An analog-based DVR system cannot scale by one camera, since it is based on a 16-camera configuration; it does not use off-the-shelf storage, since DVRs are typically "black box" solutions; and it does not fit the IT notion of a software-based solution where integration and upgrading are easily performed.