When considering the transition from analogue to networked video, there are a number of different schools of thought. One is to rip out all the old technology and start again. This opinion is often put forward by those with a lot of networked video kit to sell, and a need for an order that covers end-to-end replacements. Hybrid video management and recording systems are another option, allowing the two technologies to co-exist in one seamless system.
In the last issue, concluding in this issue, Benchmark looked at hybrid video recorders. The units are not as prolific as you might think they’d be, and conversations with manufacturers have indicated that the units are not always seen as lucrative when compared to the potential to sell cameras and encoders with a network-only solution. This situation might change, but thus far there has been resistance from some quarters to deliver what the market needs.
The use of encoders has also been suggested. The approach is probably one of the oldest methods of handling the transition, allowing the signals from analogue devices to be converted into networkable streams. Of course, the issue here can be that the original streams were captured using conventional cameras, so some of the benefits of moving away from composite video are lost. Which ever way you consider it, transition
requires change with regards to hardware and infrastructure. The question is how that transition can be carried out in a cost-effective manner, in the immediate future. The day will come when most systems - especially advanced solutions - will have made the leap to a new infrastructure. However, right now, there doesn’t seem to be an endless queue of users willing to undergo wholesale change.
One barrier that is often mentioned is the cost
of creating a dedicated ‘security network’, allowing the video surveillance elements to stay (sensibly) off the corporate network. However, the estimated high costs could be something of a red herring.
Many security devices - cameras, codecs,
recording and management devices, etc. - are, in effect, servers. As such, if the central element (NVR, VMS or the like) has the capability to allow control, the only additional devices needed will be switches. If the control element doesn’t offer this, then a workstation will be needed. Dependent upon the application, this could be something as simple as a desktop PC or laptop. The largest expense is often the cabling; not the actual cost of the cabling, but the time spent
pulling the cable across the site. Of course, if that cable was already there, the overall costs would be significantly reduced, and the transition would be more affordable. One solution that is increasingly talked about in the video surveillance world is EoC, or Ethernet- over-coax!
By eliminating the need to replace much cabling, these systems permit a cost-effective upgrade, thereby hastening the transition to a networked solution. It is true that they play a somewhat limited role in allowing analogue and networked video to co-exist in a system. However, they certainly could hasten moves to higher resolution systems with inherent flexibility, and that alone might make a few end users sit up and take notice.
In this first part of the Benchmark test, we look at the units’ features and functions and assess how they fit in to surveillance systems. In part 2, published next issue, the units are performance- tested with a range of cameras to see how they affect overall image quality.
Comnet CWFE1COAXM
Comnet is a fibre optic and ethernet connectivity manufacturer, and whilst the roots of the business
www.benchmarkmagazine.com 31
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68