IDIS Explains DirectIP in Video

“Transition to IP” means using IP cameras instead of potentially more reliable, less expensive, higher-quality live-view alternative. Why do we want to do that?
 
Colin, make the case why every camera should be an IP camera, or stop writing articles that reflect that unexamined assumption. It makes you sound like a shill for only-IP-camera companies.
 
Also, since there is no provision for interoperability with any other manufacturers’ products, does “DirectIP” mean “it’ll work only if you buy Direct from IDIS?” 
 
Also, how much does “plug & play” in this context increase vulnerability to network-based security attacks?

Hi there IDIS Benelux, Thank you for your offer to educate us. IP video has 100% market share, the question for system designers is, whereon the local site to convert TV signals to Ethernet packets. The IDIS position, as articulated through Colin, is that it is always best to convert TV signals to Ethernet packets in the camera mount, instead of in multi-channel DVRs or IP encoders. IDIS Benelux, please give us the #1 reason why it is always best to convert TV signals to Ethernet packets in the camera mount. Here are some candidate reasons: Better live views than… Read more »

Hi Carlo, IP video really does have ~100% market share: Every surveillance site moves video off site over IP networks. The question is, where to convert TV signals to Ethernet packets? IP cameras convert TV signals to Ethernet packets in the camera mount, CCTV cams and HDcctv cams allow the designer to defer the conversion to other locations on the local site. You have mingled IP video and IP cameras. Don’t accuse the savvy buyer of being ignorant of technology. All we want is to deliver fit-for-purpose solutions at attractive total cost of ownership. Thank you for the straight answer,… Read more »

Hi Carlo,
Thank you for confirming that if the customer needs low-latency HD video, then HDcctv remains lower latency even than the IDIS IP camera solution.
Meanwhile, you’re arguing that per-camera single-channel compression engines are more cost-effective than multi-channel on-site compression engines. This argument is counter to the I.T. argument in favour of compute servers. 
These are not valid reasons to force IP cameras into every mount. Which leaves us wondering, why does Colin’s article presupposes that there is a “migration to IP,” by which he means that every camera should be an IP camera?
 

Hi Carlo, You continue to confuse “IP camera” and “IP video.” We’re all doing IP video, mate, the question is where is best within the local site to convert TV to IP. These detailed calculations are entertaining but irrelevant: The computational load of encoding TV signals for IP network transmission is the same whether in N separate subsystems baked into cameras or in one N-channel subsystem that allows for mixing and matching TV cameras from various manufacturers (true multi-vendor plug & play!) “HDcctv is too late to matter” was an argument against HDcctv cameras back in 2009. Now that HDcctv… Read more »

Hi Carlo, Ethernet and HDcctv are simply transport mechanisms for HD video. “IP at the source” reflects more confusion: MP IP cams and HDcctv cams share the same lenses, images sensors, and image processing pipelines, and the video at the other end is stored and transmitted remotely in similar ways. After initially chastising me for not understanding IP camera technology (a well-worn IP cam sales response to reasonable objections), now let’s continue your education about the alternative: Is transmission distance a real concern? Cat5e/Cat6 provides for 90m transmission between cable cabinets. That’s *shorter* than the 100m of HDcctv 1.0 you’re… Read more »

Hi Carlo, HDcctv is a comprehensive electrical interface, like USB or HDMI or, indeed, Ethernet. Ethernet and IP video are different. There is no comprehensive standard for IP video, that’s one of the many problems IP cam vendors face. 100% multi-vendor interoperability is one of the many advantages of global standards compliance. Worry-free mix & match gives installers and integrators great product selection. A strategy to lock in customers to a proprietary protocol is doomed to fail, for the usual reasons. The only way to develop a sustainable business is to differentiate on the value proposition. Just because you can’t… Read more »

Hi Carlo, Yes, if we keep going with this thread, we attain the “rank” of “supreme general” and our comments appear in single-character-wide format. I wonder if anyone besides us is even reading this thread. I’m sorry that you do not distinguish between a comprehensive electrical interface standard such as USB, HDMI, HDcctv, or Ethernet, and a communications protocol recommendation, like ONVIF. The technicians connecting the network analyzers and Phabrix signal generators to HDcctv devices under test would be amused to hear that they were testing a mere protocol. I didn’t say coaxial cable is immune to EMI. I corrected… Read more »

I’ve been on holiday, just got back to read this discussion. Very interesting stuff all round, and just to note, I’ve tried to deal with the issue of the threaded discussions ending up about 2px wide but to no avail.
For my part, Todd most of the stuff you’re saying I’ve heard before, so there’s not much I can add to it. But it’s certainly positive to see the HDcctv Alliance talking directly to IDIS about concerns over IP video sales and marketing activity.

Hi Rob,
Colin pointed out that choosing “oldest first” instead of “threaded view” at the top eliminates the indenting issue. Thanks Colin!
Rob, I think you should still justify the editorial assumptions in the original article. Do you think “migration to IP” means that every camera should be an IP camera? If so, why? If not, then why write as if that is what you mean?