Maintenance cost IP and Analogue system

[e_konta]

Hello Users/Readers,

I am a student who is doing an analysis on the difference between analogue and digital(IP) camera. After finding a lot of information on the internet I have a lot of question answered exact for one. And that is what is the difference in maintenance cost. Everywhere I look on the internet I find pages/people/whitepages say: “The maintenance cost are reduced”.

My question is what kind of maintenance cost do you have with analogue system that you don’t(or less) have with a digital system. And what makes it happen that these cost are so reduced. To get a picture lets say with a system that has 30 camera’s.

Regards and thanks in advance,
E.Konta

[bsiddell]

Long Term Advantage

The issue of maintenance costs is associated to the "scalability" of the system. Good or bad, the trend is toward digital equipment as it is very easy to scale upward and outward. Also you are eliminating power supplies to the cameras and access control devises as with POE (Power Over Ethernet) this is eliminated at the device. Further, you don’t have to have multiple systems – the video surveillance / access control / intrusion alarms / corporate computer network. Instead – it can all run on one network provided you have the adequate “pipeline” and “horsepower”. The key is to ensure you get your advice on network security systems from network administrators and integrators. Analogue systems can be installed by electricians and plumbers. Digital systems require network experience and expertise.

[ACP01]

bsidell, are you one long rolling advertisement?

I see you have posted 7 times and every one of them looks like an ad.

[N. A. Corbier]

Yes. Yes he is.

[john_harrington]

Actually, the maintenance costs should be about the same for both systems. Once the cameras are installed, focused and are recording on a DVR (or NVR in the case of IP cameras) little maintenanace should be required. Cameras require little user maintenance other than an occasional cleaing of the lens or housing.

In my opinion, IP solutions are not ready for prime time. Until the manufacturers take the compression out to the edge device (whether that is the camera or encoder) the network bandwidth required for decent frame rate transmission is excessive.

Let me know if I can answer any further questions.

[e_konta]

John,

Thank you for the answer.

I would like to tell you the conclusion I made so far. The research is not ended so this can change.

I think IP camera’s are not completely ready to replace analogue camera’s. Cost reducing in the long run, definitely. Especially in larger facilities. My research focuses on companies that have no security at all but need to get security. What is a wise choice analogue or IP?

Of course this depends on a large amount of factors and it is different for every facility. But in general I think you can say, even IP camera’s are not completely ready to replace analogue camera’s , that if the facility IP network can handle the big data streams the best choice is to go for a fully digital system. It will save a lot of money in the future.

[john_harrington]

I agree with your assessment.

The approach I have been taking is that all CCTV cameras will be cabled with CAT 6 cable to a closet no further away than 330'. Then we use UTP baluns such as Nitek VB-43ATFs to transmit the analog video over one of the unshielded twisted pairs in the cable leaving the other pair for power and/or PTZ data. This approach will allow the analog cameras to be replaced with IP cameras in the future without replacing the cabling.

If you are dealing with an IT centric organization who is going to use their video for post incident assessment, they will likely be satisfied with the image quality of IP cameras and have available bandwidth.

If you are planning on using video in a control room, perform a careful analysis of which looks better in that format. During the design phase of the last SCC I designed I had the Pelco truck show up on site and demo their IP Endura solution compared to their tradition Matrix switch solution with DVRs- the client hands down chose analog.

[Bill Warnock]

I agree with your assessment.

The approach I have been taking is that all CCTV cameras will be cabled with CAT 6 cable to a closet no further away than 330'. Then we use UTP baluns such as Nitek VB-43ATFs to transmit the analog video over one of the unshielded twisted pairs in the cable leaving the other pair for power and/or PTZ data. This approach will allow the analog cameras to be replaced with IP cameras in the future without replacing the cabling.

If you are dealing with an IT centric organization who is going to use their video for post incident assessment, they will likely be satisfied with the image quality of IP cameras and have available bandwidth.

If you are planning on using video in a control room, perform a careful analysis of which looks better in that format. During the design phase of the last SCC I designed I had the Pelco truck show up on site and demo their IP Endura solution compared to their tradition Matrix switch solution with DVRs- the client hands down chose analog.

John_Harrington:
You have solved one part of the problem, now you must work on reducing noise levels. If noise is present the modem will dutifully reproduce the noise as well as the picture. Noise is intelligence, it's just unwanted intelligence.
Measure the noise levels and then take appropriate measures to eliminate the source wherever and whatever it is.
Enjoy the day,
Bill

[integrator97]

Analogue systems can be installed by electricians and plumbers. Digital systems require network experience and expertise.

I beg to differ. Or maybe it depends on your definition of installed. Even a lot of security tech's can't do a video system well. I've gone behind so many electricians, alarm techs, and bank security systems techs (you know, the big companys that put in ATM's, tubes, cash dispensers, and these days alarm systems, access and video). Cameras that are out of focus afterr dark, washed out during the day, grainy. Poor connector termination. You name it.

[N. A. Corbier]

I guess the poster means "pull wire." Yeah, its easy for an electrician (I don't think a plumber has the proper permits to pull cable) to put some drops in, throw some gangs into the studs, and wait for the integrator to come in with the hardware and wire it up. Maybe even install some cameras following the blueprint.

However, unless these are trained installers, why would anyone think they can take the place of an installer?

[Bill Warnock]

I guess the poster means "pull wire." Yeah, its easy for an electrician (I don't think a plumber has the proper permits to pull cable) to put some drops in, throw some gangs into the studs, and wait for the integrator to come in with the hardware and wire it up. Maybe even install some cameras following the blueprint.

However, unless these are trained installers, why would anyone think they can take the place of an installer?

Nathan, as usual, you are on the mark. There is no sense of site survey nor is there a sense of this is the correct way to install and this is not. Not every sensor fits anywhere. How many technicians you know can explain the purpose of ferrite beads or RFI gaskets? Why is it important to know how much conductive and atmospheric interference is present at a particular site or in a specific location?
Enjoy the day,
Bill