[...]The Big Video Analytics Lie « Spot On Security[...]…

Thanks for the added information about your intelligent encoder.

Here is a quick comparison with VideoIQ’s video analytics encoder, if you are interested:

You license each of your behaviors separately. Some appear to double the cost of the system, but all our behaviors are included in our encoder at no extra cost, along with the software to monitor alarms and view live video. Plus, you can use all of our behaviors at the same time on multiple regions of interest for each camera.

Our encoder also ships with a hard drive, so you don’t need a DVR. This eliminates most of the bandwidth and prevents the loss of video if the network goes down. Plus, it saves money.

I like the approach you are taking to educate and help the integrators know where and how to use. This is probably the most important thing we can do. This is exactly the right approach to take and I compliment you on doing this.

You are absolutely right that there are no analytics with 100% performance. But there are still big differences in performance, especially outdoors. I’ll put up another post to help show the differences.

Check out my other blog post on the gap in perception: http://spotonsecurity.com/2009/02/06/the-gap-in-perception/ and John Honovich’s article I listed there. We, as manufacturers know how well our equipment can work when set up and used properly, but the question is how easy is it for any integrator to get the same results? There is often a big gap there.

This is often true with new technologies. However, breakthroughs don’t usually become popular until they are as easy to use as the untrained person expects them to be.

We think our products are there now, although, we still see lots of room to get even better.

I agree that side by side testing is sometimes the only good way to see the difference. I’ll second that recommendation.

Thanks.

Doug.

Good points.

You’re right – the customers don’t know the difference and no one is telling them. In most cases, I don’t think the integrators realize the difference either. We see that all the time.

I agree with your point about AVMD. On the screen it can look the same. But the performance is not close. And what I find interesting is that in most cases it is not any less expensive. Compared to our products at VideoIQ, for example, it is generally more expensive to buy AVMD.

I also agree with you on the whole licensing issue. Not having developed it, the manufacturers often don’t know the strengths and weaknesses. This can also make it a challenge for them to provide good tech support.

Thanks for the comments.

Doug.

Yes, feel free to translate and post this on your site. Adding a link back to this blog and my name as author would be perfect.

I agree that most people are not aware of the issue.

Let me know what you hear back from your readers.

Thanks for helping to get the word out.

Doug.

Thanks for clearing up that we don’t have issues in our manual. Since I’m the product manager I’m responsible for the marketing of our behaviors.

We have 7 different behaviors available on the intelligent encoder. One of which is adaptive motion used mainly for outdoor motion detection.

If the customer is trying to detect people going the wrong way in an airport exit they wouldn’t buy the adaptive motion behavior. They would buy our directional motion behavior.

To address your concern that we don’t give customers enough warning, I’m working on a video analytics design guide that will help customers design analytics for the right application. A lot of this information is already out in the public domain.

When I went to Google to search for Pelco video analytics it brought up a UK company marketing our product. Since we have a lot of resellers around the world it is very difficult to control the messaging. On the Pelco.com web site, and in our marketing materials, we market the 7 distinct behaviors for each customer application.

I would like to respond to our behaviors working in outdoor environments. It is a matter of setting them up properly. Our behaviors will learn the scene including motion from trees over a period of time. We also have a sensitivity setting to reduce the false alarms. I believe the industry experts that say “analytics are not 100% accurate”. If your company or any other company is claiming this, they are not telling the truth. Analytics is a balance between proper configuration (sensitivity) designed for a particular application that is also usable (reduced false alarms).

We have a team of engineers that have been working on Video Analytics for 5 years. I agree with you that people mis-market their capabilities in manuals and websites.

At Pelco we carefully craft our marketing messages to our customers. However they have their own expectations of video analytics from either past vendors or unsuccessful installations. My advice to anyone reading this blog is to have a shoot out for their particular application between video analytics vendors. The proof is in the pudding. You can contact me at domalley@pelco.com for more information.

Thanks,

Dan O’Malley

Another part of the problem in terms of creating a large grey area where understanding does not exist is that many hardware manufacturers have relationships with 3rd party software companies that design the analytics. These analytics may exist for purchase directly from the software company, so essentially the hardware manufacturer is a reseller of something they don’t completely control. I’d prefer to purchase such 3rd party applications separately, since in many cases they truly are nothing but a 3rd party application that’s been rebranded or the DVR/NVR manufacturer simply doesn’t advertise that it’s not really theirs. I’d just as soon skip the delusions and have the manufacturer either buy the third party company or at least clearly indicate that the applications are 3rd party so that integrators and consultants don’t have to spend a whole lot of time sorting through the weeds to determine where it’s coming from. The second paragraph is really more of a soapbox than the primary issue, but it’s one that I think also causes problems.

I have accidentally found this very interesting article. I live in Poland, Your point of view is not very popular in my country, but I agree with it. People here don’t even wonder about it and I think it is worth of mentioning. I have got a question than: could I translate this text to my mother tongue and publish it on my site (about security too)? Of course with link to Your blog and Your name there. Sorry I am asking here, but I couldn’t find Your e-mail address. Now You know my address, so You can answer the way most comfortable for You.

Thanks, regards.

Thanks for your response.

Yes, Pelco is one of the companies I was referring to. But the manual is actually not the problem in Pelco’s case.

If you run a simple Google search for “Pelco Video Analytics,” you will see the Endura Encoder promotes Video Analytics. It opens up to a web page that shows an outdoor scene with trees and bushes in the field of view. It looks just like any video analytics scene. Once those trees and bushes are blowing in the wind, do you think it is going to generate false alarms? Will it be able to correctly recognize a person? What about when there are leaves on the tree? Is that a good example of the type of environment where it will work reliably?

The product spec sheet also goes on in length about the Video Analytics behaviors.

However, this sales material does not warn about the limitations of the technology, or about the fact that it is not the same as the Video Analytics systems everyone has been reading about from other companies, even though it sounds and looks as if it is.

When you go to the manual for your product, you are right, it is right up front about the warnings, which are some of the points I listed in my blog post. Those very points would suggest that the scene with the trees and bushes would not be a good application. That’s how it looks to me, at least.

Also, in the manual it is called Adaptive Motion Behavior rather than Video Analytics. So, the manual actually looks pretty good.

Perhaps the marketing department is playing on the Video Analytics image, while the engineering department writes the manual and they are trying to be more technically accurate? I don’t know, but there is a gap that the customer won’t see until after they’ve bought it and tried to use it.

Another thing to keep in mind: Outdoor use is far more difficult than it might seem.

All of the leading video analytics companies spent 3-4 years working through unexpected challenges. Even today, many of those companies have real difficulty in most outdoor applications, even with all the advanced video analytics tools they have. Using only Motion Behavior, I think you will find, falls far short of most users expectations, except in special cases. It might work in a parking garage, where there is little background motion and stable lighting, but this is not what most people think of when you say it works outdoors.

I agree that the important issue here is that Motion Behavior should not be confused with more advanced approaches.

I hope this feedback helps.

Thanks for asking.

Thanks.

Doug.