Challenges Facing the Networked Video Industry

You may have attended IIPSEC recently, a completely new industry exhibition, but for what industry? This brings us to the first problem: what do we call it? Video-over-IP? IP Security Systems? Ethernet CCTV? Networked Video? IP Video Surveillance? These and several other terms are being used to describe the fledgling business of networked devices for non-IT security applications. Note the “non-IT” part – this is because the IT world is full of systems for protecting IT data and equipment, but this is NOT what IIPSEC is all about. It is dominated by networked video systems, but video is not the whole story. Alarms, control devices, intruder detection, access control, audio and other systems are all part of the networked systems or “IP” revolution.
In this short article, we look at why there is so much interest in IP-based systems now, what the challenges facing the players are and what is needed to build a successful industry that can provide better systems and services to meet the security needs of demanding end-users.

Why now?
It is easy to understand why digital video recording technology has so quickly become the established norm in CCTV systems over the past 2 years. Dramatic increases in hard disk capacity combined with equally dramatic falls in costs have made the systems more affordable, but this in itself is not enough. There had to be compelling reasons to switch to DVRs and the reasons are clear:

• Instant access to all recordings

• Full automation - no human intervention required (i.e. changing tapes)

• Flexible and appropriate automatic recording schedules

• Systems responsive to alarms (e.g. increase in recording rate)

• Evidentially robust recordings via digitally encrypted audit trails

• Remote access to recordings via ISDN or networks

• Easier compliance with the Data Protection Act

. . . and many others besides. DVR systems are now available from literally hundreds of manufacturers (although only a handful really meet the standards required).
Networks, and specifically Ethernet networks have been around for a long time any self-respecting DVR has full network integration, but why is there the sudden surge in products for transmitting video over Ethernet networks? Is it a natural follow-on from network-enabled DVR systems? Is it simply that networks are now fast enough and image compression techniques efficient enough for many video channels to be transmitted over a single network? Is it just all driven by available technology, or are there clear market needs which are unsatisfied by existing non-networked CCTV and security systems? In truth, it is a combination of all these things, but one development has made all this possible: the availability of low-cost integrated circuits with video processing and networking capabilities.
Networked video systems would simply not work on older, slower networks as a number of companies have found to their cost. The cost of standard Fast Ethernet devices (switches, hubs, interface cards, chips etc.) has come down dramatically over the past 24 months. High capacity networks are now commonplace and are easily set-up and maintained.
Image compression methods have been around for a long time, but were always very expensive to implement due to the high levels of processing required, especially for real-time or near real-time video frame rates. The advent of specialist compression chips and even just higher power processors at low cost means that streaming of multiple video signals over high-capacity networks is not only feasible, but cost-effective.
For some considerable time, information technology has been creeping further and further into security applications. Most access control systems are PC-based and many communicate over standard computer networks. CCTV followed suit with digital video recording systems, PC-based CCTV control systems and computer-based video and alarm transmission systems. So over the last few years we can see that a new industry has appeared, built around the exploitation of digital processing technology for security applications, especially video surveillance. Now that surveillance video is firmly in the digital domain, it is a natural development to start moving video around over networks and benefits from the flexibility this offers.
Challenges
One of the biggest problems facing the players involved in networked video is that currently the industry is defined by its technology, not by it’s market. The markets are much more difficult to define, and therefore there is far more uncertainty (and indeed confusion) about the way forward and what systems and services are really required.
To put it bluntly, what are the compelling reasons for customers to buy into the networked video concept? This is the question manufacturers and installers are going to have to answer clearly and convincingly. Let us look carefully, therefore, at some of the pros and cons of networked video surveillance systems.

Advantages

Disadvantages:

In summary (and at the risk of repetition), it is worth emphasising that networked video systems are still in the technology-driven phase and the needs of the market have still to be developed and understood by all concerned.
So what other challenges exist for manufacturers and installers of networked video systems?
To paraphrase the Estate Agents mantra, there are three hurdles facing would-be installers of networked video systems: IT managers, IT managers and IT managers. No, I am not having a go at them – far from it! They are doing their job and are rightly suspicious of outsiders wanting to add vast numbers of network devices to their corporate network – the very backbone of many companies. The typical IT manager will not let 3rd-party network devices and software (which could potentially eat up network bandwidth) near their corporate system without a great deal of planning, testing and measuring. This all takes a lot of time and is not the way the normal CCTV industry works. This is one reason why many CCTV installers are reluctant to get involved with networked systems.
Another major problem is that Installers have little or no experience of networked systems. In addition, we cannot reasonably expect installers to have an in-depth knowledge of many different manufacturers systems, and be able to properly integrate and support them - to say nothing of understanding their end-user customer’s IT system, network topology and all the internal politics that go with IT systems and personnel in any company.
It is for this reason that specialist IT/Security system integrators are going to make the most headway in providing networked video solutions in the short-term. There are very few such companies around at the moment, but they are going to generate a lot of business!
Solutions
Given these challenges, what is the way forward for networked security systems? How do we turn the technology into solutions that give customers compelling reasons to buy, and how do we, as an industry, provide the services they will need?
First of all, manufacturers must better understand the customers needs and focus on providing integrated easy-to-install solutions, which maximise the benefits of the networked systems. This can be done by concentrating on specific application areas and providing highly integrated solutions. One example of this is integrating digital video recording with access control systems to provide far more complete information on events and incidents. Another might be combining networked video devices to provide transmission, camera control, digital video recording and a large video matrix in a single integrated system.
Networked systems, as we have already seen, are supremely flexible, scaleable and upgradeable – you can input data anywhere, access it anywhere, control it from anywhere. To expand a system you simply plug more devices into the network and expand the network where necessary. Successful manufacturers of security equipment will quickly realise that ALL security devices should be network-addressable (cameras, recorders, video motion detectors, lighting systems, acoustic or electric fence systems, video matrices etc.), and that this will increase the flexibility of the overall system still further. They must, however, grasp the need for open standards and protocols so that different systems can be easily linked together by system integrators and installers.
For their part, Installers will have to make major investments in personnel and training to cope with the new technology. As the security industry generally is under-financed, this is going to be very difficult for many companies. It’s likely that many installers will go under over the next few years.
The obvious answer to the natural (and justified) caution of IT managers is to use separate, but parallel networks. Install a separate security network, which may or may not involve the use of existing CAT5 cabling infrastructure, but not necessarily patched into the corporate network system. In due course, once the IT managers are more familiar with the systems, they might provide a bridge between the security network and the corporate network at tightly controlled points.
The end users want complete solutions. They want the simplest, most cost-effective solutions that are easy to use and will give them an integrated security system. They want the benefits of tighter security, more complete observation, better management information, full records of events, integration with alarm systems, intruder detection, fire systems, access control, EPOS, ANPR, facial recognition, video motion detection etc. Or whatever it is they need to secure their properties, protect their businesses, and provide them with the information they need to prosper. If we as an industry can give them these solutions, then we’ll prosper too.