Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Analog/Digital vs. IP

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Analog/Digital vs. IP

    When do you think IP video will become predominate in the market use? There was a very interesting discussion yesterday at the secureworld expo in the Philadelphia area about digital/analog and IP video. Steve Lasky was the panel moderator.
    Retail Security Consultant / Expert Witness
    Co-Author - Effective Security Management 6th Edition

    Contributor to Retail Crime, Security and Loss Prevention: An Encyclopedic Reference

  • #2
    i think the market is already heading to IP. We use it for our campus security here in oriskany, and have hooked up a few for some clients.

    Analog is a thing of the past for sure.
    Security is more than a job, its preservation for our future.

    Fiber Fence - Perimeter Protection Security Solutions

    Fiber Optic Products

    Comment


    • #3
      I think there's still use for analog. Mobile markets, such as in-vehicle installations, have no need for IP hubs to the IP based DVR and the added current.
      Some Kind of Commando Leader

      "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

      Comment


      • #4
        Much of the discussion was towards the fact that analog is much less expensive and the market is flooded with equipment. I used the example of a very large global company that uses IP for corporate and manufacturing facilities, but still uses analog/DVR for all of its store locations
        Retail Security Consultant / Expert Witness
        Co-Author - Effective Security Management 6th Edition

        Contributor to Retail Crime, Security and Loss Prevention: An Encyclopedic Reference

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Security Consultant View Post
          Much of the discussion was towards the fact that analog is much less expensive and the market is flooded with equipment. I used the example of a very large global company that uses IP for corporate and manufacturing facilities, but still uses analog/DVR for all of its store locations
          Agree. Cost is a major factor when evaluating security equipment. Unfortunately sometimes it comes down to cost more than reliability and quality.

          Analog. I think there will always be room for analog video. Like the mom and pop store that has 2 or 3 cameras with a monitor behind the counter to deter theft and robbery (obviously doesn't work by looking at videos on internet and Cops). The cost of a digital or IP system may be out of reach for these type situations. And, as you stated, there is alot of analog equipment out there that would take time and money to replace.

          Digital. Digital has become a mid way point in my opinion between analog and IP. Many people are still using analog cameras with digital recorders. Many people prefer this method instead of going full IP with NVR's. Also the bandwidth of a full IP system can be a problem. Networking DVR's can save alot of headaches instead of utilizing the bandwidth for camera feeds.

          IP. Camera systems that utilize IP cameras and NVR's are very costly. Not only the cost of the equipment. Many times it also means running a parallel network exclusively utilized by the camera system. Depending on the size of the network needed (for conversation lets say a 30 floor corporate headquarters) it can run into the hundreds of thousands if not millions. While installing a DVR on each floor than networking them to a security office will be alot cheaper and still maintain efiiciency.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Rooney View Post
            Digital. Digital has become a mid way point in my opinion between analog and IP. Many people are still using analog cameras with digital recorders. Many people prefer this method instead of going full IP with NVR's. Also the bandwidth of a full IP system can be a problem. Networking DVR's can save alot of headaches instead of utilizing the bandwidth for camera feeds.

            IP. Camera systems that utilize IP cameras and NVR's are very costly. Not only the cost of the equipment. Many times it also means running a parallel network exclusively utilized by the camera system. Depending on the size of the network needed (for conversation lets say a 30 floor corporate headquarters) it can run into the hundreds of thousands if not millions. While installing a DVR on each floor than networking them to a security office will be alot cheaper and still maintain efiiciency.
            I agree with you Rooney. I just took one of my customers from 42 cameras to over 160, when they built another building. We have 11 1.2T Dvr's in 7 locations throughout 4 buildings, with lots of fiber used. Also, we have a console in which every single camera is shown via multiplexers. Try doing that over IP. How much more would that cost.

            Also, with PTZ domes, such as Pelco or Vicon, etc., you can get it in coax, fiber or IP, but the camera is really the same.
            sigpic
            Rocket Science
            Making everything else look simple, since 1958.


            http://my.opera.com/integrator/blog/
            One Man's Opinion

            The Future. It isn't what it used to be.

            Comment

            Leaderboard

            Collapse
            Working...
            X