There are major economic advantages driving cloud computing in the IT world, but those same economies don’t work with video surveillance. This is glossed over and never mentioned in all the articles and ads that tout cloud computing for video surveillance. Companies just want to use the “cloud computing” label to get attention, when, in fact, if anything, video surveillance is moving in the opposite direction – more and more towards intelligence and storage at the edge.

Why doesn’t cloud computing work for the video surveillance market? After all, video compression and storage are some of the most processor intensive functions in physical security, especially if you try to add video analytics processing. But there are big differences, and once you look at the math, it is clear that someone has their head up in the clouds to be suggesting it be used for surveillance.

There are three big cost advantages coming from cloud computing in the IT world:

First, it is more economical with virtualized services. This means that you can save money running your sales management software tools on the same server as another company’s manufacturing resource planning software, or whatever other kinds of software other companies might want to run. Servers have been doing this for years in data centers. Now, they can do it across the Internet for many companies in one location.

Second, you get added savings because you no one uses their software all of the time, it is usually only needed in spurts. So, you reap the gains by sharing servers with others, by maximizing shared processing power.

Third, bringing  lots of server applications under the roof of one specialist company means they can manage everything more efficiently and take the headaches away from lots of individual companies trying to do it themselves.

For the above reasons, cloud computing service providers are saving IT managers 25% or more. That is significant. This assures that cloud computing will grow fast.

But these benefits don’t fly with video surveillance. Here are the problems:

1. You can’t virtualize NVR storage, because the video is recording continuously. This is the same problem that IP video systems have in the data room. IT managers would like to combine them onto their other servers, but they can’t do it because the video is streaming into the servers continuously. It is being recorded non-stop. In fact, video recording is so processor intensive that traditional servers fail, which is why the industry has introducing new server designs specifically for video surveillance. You can’t virtualize the NVR and run it on another server.
2. Most software applications see people retrieving data about 50% of the time  and storing data 50% of the time, but those applications are generally idle and waiting most of the time. NVR storage is recording 100% of the time, with huge bandwidth demands, while people only play back the video less than 1% of the time. The reason you can only run about 30 cameras (this varies by resolution and frame rate being recorded) on a good server is because you run out of bandwidth and processing power. So, there are no benefits gained from idle time.
3. In fact, it is far more expensive to centralize storage because of the above problems and the huge bandwidth needed by the video. This is why most hosted video services are finding that it makes far more sense to put a DVR or NVR at the site with the cameras, or to use cameras with built-in storage, rather than continuously streaming the video back to a central server. It is far less expensive.

As I said above, the real technology shift in video surveillance is in the opposite direction: Intelligent storage at the edge.

This becomes even clearer when you start talking about video analytics. Some companies offering a hosted video service are trying to stream video back to a central server. They are trying to make it sound as if cloud computing is going to save the end user money. In fact, their solution is more expensive, but if they don’t put in a DVR they can save up front costs for the customer. Unfortunately, they seriously cut back the video resolution and frame rate: You aren’t going to get anything close to high quality video this way. They won’t even be able to offer standard resolution, never mind megapixel video to their customers. It is more expensive, on an ongoing basis, but it does eliminate the cost of the DVR.

But when you try to offer video analytics, you can’t play that game: You need high quality, high frame rate video. That makes the so-called cloud computing video surveillance system a non-starter. You can’t get there from here.

This doesn’t mean that Hosted Video and Security as a Service (SaaS) aren’t growing fast. They are, and for good reasons, but none of those reasons have to do with cloud computing economics. They are growing because of superior ease of use for end users, friendly browser interfaces that they can access from any computer, and by providing remote services for end users. It is an ideal solution for small businesses and small retail stores that want to add security video.

The term “cloud computing” has been hijacked and is being treated as the next big thing for security. It is causing a revolution in the IT industry, so why shouldn’t it for surveillance? Well, because it ends up costing more, not less, to use it with video.

PTZ cameras were once king of the hill. They represented the best possible technology you could get; giving you the ability to see in every direction  and zoom into the smallest details.

Companies like Pelco, Vicon and Kalatel, to name a few, started their businesses by producing high quality pan, tilt, zoom cameras. They rode the wave, as PTZs defined video surveillance, and grew into leading video companies.

But the problem is that all the power and benefits PTZs deliver are only gained when a person is sitting there actively panning, tilting and zooming. With only a few percent of cameras being actively monitored, and only a few percent of those being watched at one time, there is no one at the helm more than 99% of the time.

The other disadvantage of PTZs is that the moment you’ve zoomed in to see a license plate or to get a close-up of a person’s face, you lose the ability to see everything else. You can easily miss something more important.

If you want to look across a site, PTZs are valuable tools. But if they are sitting there, not being actively driven most of the time, they are expensive cameras. That’s why many PTZs are set for continuous tours, where they move from one preset location to another, auto-panning. This also partly overcomes the problem with missing things when it is zoomed into one area. They move from one point to another to cover a wider area. This allows one expensive camera to cover the whole area. That’s the hope, anyway.

However, belts, gears and motors don’t last long when the PTZ is set for continuous tours. The best quality models need replacement parts every year, when set for auto-panning. Cheaper model PTZs wear out even faster. When that one expensive camera fails at the site, you’ve now got nothing.

Megapixel cameras have taken a big chunk out of the once powerful PTZ. No motors, belts or gears to wear out. Even when you zoom in, you can still keep on recording the whole scene, so you won’t miss anything. This is ideal for recorded video. Megapixel cameras don’t give you anywhere near the full zoom capability of PTZs. You are limited to about 3X-8X for a megapixel zoom, not the 20x-30x you get with a PTZ, but in many cases that’s fine.  And, you can buy two megapixel cameras for the price of one PTZ.

Video analytics are also changing the world of PTZs. The applications where PTZs are most important – were live monitoring is needed – that’s exactly where video analytics provide the biggest bang. They enable security personnel to monitor far more cameras much more effectively, by proactively popping up cameras when the analytics see potential threats.

Why not use video analytics with PTZ cameras? You can, and we sell such systems all the time. But if you want to be sure you are going to catch an intruder, you can’t have that PTZ panning all over the place. Fixed cameras are the only way to assure you never miss a threat.

For example, let’s say you have a site where you want one PTZ camera to auto-tour across four different preset locations. The PTZ would move to one preset, watch for some time and then move on to the next. How much time will the camera spend watching any one area? Less than 25% of the time! That means more than 75% of the time you have no visibility on what is happening. With more than four presets, it is even worse. That’s a huge blind spot in your protection!

The alternative: You can put up 3-4 cameras with video analytics built-in for about the same cost as a PTZ camera with analytics, and you won’t have yearly replacement costs for the motors, belts and gears. Most importantly, the analytics won’t miss what is happening – so you get much better security. In fact, it is the only way to go, when you need surefire protection.

In other words, fixed, non-moving cameras with analytics now give the best site awareness. With active video analysis doing the watching for you, it is better to have more fixed smart cameras than a panning PTZ.

So, the new king of the hill is a megapixel camera with analytics built-in. This gives you zoom, a wide area of coverage that is never missed, and analytics to detect potential threats so that you know which camera to be looking at.

Even better, add a PTZ camera at the site if you want the ability to zoom in for a close-up. That’s where the PTZ excels. It’s a tool for extreme close-ups. This combination system has persistent protection because the megapixel cameras continue watching the areas they are trying to protect. They never look the wrong direction. Plus, the analytics watch for threats continuously, even when no one is watching the monitors.

The PTZ will be around for a long time and still plays an important role in surveillance. However, it is not quite as important as it once was. It once was king. Now it is a good soldier. The world has changed for PTZs.

They gave us excellent feedback, which we’ve used to make the iCVR better.

Besides the extremely positive responses, however, we heard something that surprised us: Almost all of the CSOs we talked to said that they would love to put up more surveillance cameras, but they were concerned about the liabilities. Could the iCVR reduce the liabilities inherent with video cameras?

What they were referring to is the potential lawsuits that can arise when a camera is installed, if it isn’t monitored. The public can see the camera and imagine that it is being watched. If something should happen, they expect a response.

The problem is that less than five percent (5%) of surveillance cameras are monitored today, because it has been too expensive to have people watching cameras all the time. The general public doesn’t realize this, however.

The CSOs weren’t raising a needless concern. They could each recite the lawsuits that had already proven this is a real problem. They could tell you how big the settlements were for.

Apparently, there are a number of cases where the courts have ruled that when people see cameras, there is “a reasonable expectation of response.”

In other words: Yes, there is an increase in liability for any cameras you have installed that aren’t being monitored.

These CSOs were from the Fortune 500, so they knew the danger of increasing their company’s risks. However, they also knew that adding cameras could make their properties safer for employees and customers. So, they weren’t happy about not putting up cameras. In many cases, they accepted the risk simply because they felt safety and security was just too important.

The minute they saw the iCVR with its built-in video analytics, they saw it as a potential boon for increasing protection without increasing liabilities. They could each think of a dozen locations where they wanted to add cameras if they could solve the liability problem.

This is just one of many examples showing how video analytics are changing the equation for security.

The cost of monitoring, which can now be managed remotely from anywhere in the world, has been reduced by 90% or more with the iCVR. One person can now monitor up to 1,000 cameras, and do a much better job.

So, a person sitting in one office, for example, can monitor the cameras for all of their company’s buildings at the same time. And if they use audio over IP, they can respond immediately to prevent a crime or defuse a situation. Or, they can contract with a number of Remote Guarding companies who are glad to offer this service.

Yes, when you do have monitoring, you do indeed reduce your liabilities for the cameras you have installed, because you can respond. This improves the safety and security for your employees and customers, as well. And yes, the iCVR makes it cost effective to both monitor, and using audio you can respond immediately.

The iCVR was especially designed for Remote Guarding, thanks to feedback we got from the CSOs.

If you want more info on this, check out: www.remoteguarding.org

The amazing power of a story is how it creates images so striking that people see life through that lens. Many will even see it that way when it isn’t true. George Orwell created such a vivid picture with his book, 1984. So, today, we find people seeing Big Brother, or the fears of Big Brother, all the time.

However, there is a much bigger trend going on today that never gets mentioned: Little Brother.

Look at all the cases where people carrying cell phone cameras or camcorders have caught government officials or politicians crossing the line.

Which is the more powerful change taking place? It is clearly Little Brother.

Why is that? Because, as surprising as it might seem, technology empowers the little guy more than it does government or big corporations. It gives more power to the individual.

Back in the wild west days of America, they called Sam Colt the Great Equalizer, because the revolver by that name could take the big land tycoon and make him very equal to a single person. The invention of the gun equalized the power of established authorities.

This is exactly why democracy has grown hand in hand with technology. And this is also why we see the rise of terrorism in the world.

Terrorists can only exist when there is technology that can put the power of widespread destruction in the hands of a few. This is proof that Little Brother is the big force to be faced in the future. But all we ever hear about is Big Brother.

I hate to say it but Big Brother is more like the endangered species. It is getting harder and harder to find kings these days.

But all of this just shows the gap in perception that can come from these lenses created by a culture.

Take the article that just ran in the Boston Globe about Intelligent Surveillance:

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2009/02/08/surveillance_gets_intelligent/

It talks about using video analytics for intelligent detection and Remote Guarding.

But what is just as interesting are the responses. Read them below the article. Or you can see them on this page:

http://people.boston.com/articles/abusiness/?p=articlecomments&activityId=5896397118473455799

Big Brother shows up in the first post we see. The second person sees security professionals as a protection racket. These are lenses that come from the images presented in the media and in movies.

Later on a few professional security people added their comments. They see this new technology as a big benefit:

“This technology is needed. Unmonitored cameras have been proven to NOT deter crime. This company is actively watching cameras and making it known by speaking from them. This is real security vs. false.”

Spot-on!

exChiefofPolice said:  “In an ideal situation I too would like to see more “boots on the ground”. Unfortunately, that is not realistic economically.”

What’s even more interesting, but I’ve never heard anyone mention this before, is the way that video analytics will actually reduce the problem of people watching things they shouldn’t. We know that there are cases of people monitoring who pan the cameras to follow an attractive face, and we all know that this is exactly the opposite of what we want such equipment to be used for.

But analytics eliminates the need to be panning and looking for a problem. In fact, those who try to use video that way just about go nuts trying to watch and look for something that isn’t happening. The human brain wasn’t built for that. No wonder they try to find anything of interest to keep looking at the most boring video you can imagine. What people do very well, however, is respond when something happens. Assess the situation and knowing what to do.

So, you set up the rules for what you want to be notified about, and that allows people to review exactly those situations and respond. This makes it easy to define what people are watching.

This means that it will be easier to regulate and control how and where video is used, while at the same time providing much better security protection for everyone – especially the little guy.

In the future, I expect that video analytics will be able to extract the image of the person and will be able to encrypt it, so that monitoring folks can’t see who it is until a law has been broken or a crime committed. Then you will be able to unencrypt the video to show who it is. This will provide even more privacy.

Technology is not taking away the power of the little guy, it is making us all more powerful as individuals. Technology also makes it easier to regulate and control the proper use of technology.

However, along with all of this improvement in our lives from technology comes those who would use it for personal gain. Terrorism is going to continue to grow as technology grows. It is Little Brother that is the bigger threat in the future than Big Brother.

That’s how it looks to me, anyway, when I step way back and look at our world with a wide angle lens.