IFSEC Insider is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.
Robert D. Grossman is president of R. Grossman and Associates, an electronic security consulting group specializing in casinos, government facilities, and commercial and retail applications. He has worked for Sensormatic Electronics Enterprise Accounts group, Vicon Industries, and American Dynamics/Tyco Safety Products. Throughout his career, Bob has been associated with some of the largest, most complex electronic security projects in the world including for the MGM Grand, US Postal Service, and IBM. He has authored numerous articles for electronic security industry publications and has also conducted training classes and spoken at many industry events on topics ranging from designing electronic security systems to the future of technology in the industry.
The consumer market drives demands for 16:9 monitors, but there are still times when a 4:3 monitor is a better fit.
As people get more acclimated to technology change in their personal life, it often spills over into their professional life. While this is generally a good thing, we’re seeing one area where the change doesn’t always make sense. This came up recently on a request to substitute a monitor for a project under construction. I thought the issue might have wider appeal and was worth bringing up here.
The project in question involves replacing the digital video recording system, for various reasons. All of the existing analog cameras are in excellent shape and are remaining. They will be connected to multi-channel encoders and recorded on the new NVR-based system. Since the cameras all have a 4:3 aspect ratio, we specified 19″ 4:3 format monitors, which were the biggest size commonly available in that aspect ratio and will fit into the existing monitor console.
The integrator wanted to substitute a different monitor, as the one we specified only had a VGA connection. His reasoning was that he couldn’t find a video card that met our specifications and had VGA connections. DVI, he also claimed, would allow the client enjoy higher resolution images.
The problem was that the proposed substitute monitor was a 16:9 (widescreen) format monitor instead of the 4:3 format we had specified. In comparing the specifications, we noted the following:
Image Size: As all video images on this project were 4:3 aspect ratio, a monitor with the same aspect ratio format provides a larger picture size. With the proposed 16:9 aspect ratio monitor, a full screen 4:3 image will be seen in a 12.4″ X 9.3″ viewing window, versus a 15.2″ X 11.4″ viewing window on the 4:3 monitor specified. This means a viewing area that is 50% larger on the specified monitor (171 square inches versus 115 square inches).
Resolution: The proposed widescreen monitor had a resolution of 1366 X 768, translating to a pixel count of 1,049,088. The 4:3 monitor had a pixel count of 1,310,720 due to its 1280 X 1024 resolution. However, viewing a 4:3 image on the widescreen monitor further reduces the pixel count to 786,432 as the effective resolution becomes 1024 X 768 due to the aspect ratio.
Interface: While a VGA connector is analog and a DVI connector is digital, the VGA connection is capable of resolutions as high as QXGA, or 2048 X 1536. This translates to 3,145,728 pixels, well above the demands of this particular project. Sure, there are other advantages to a digital connection, but none that relate to resolution, and none that would be visible viewing encoded analog cameras.
Another option that had not been considered by the integrator was to use a DVI to VGA adaptor or an adapting cable. These adaptors are currently available for between $3 and $7, and adapting cables cost under $12 each for a 10′ cable. Alternately, there are still 4:3 monitors available with DVI connections.
Now, I fully understand that 4:3 format monitors are going away, as the economies of scale provided by consumer TV sales ultimately have an impact on commercially available products. But it is important to consider the reduced image size when viewing 4:3 images on a 16:9 monitor. In the case of the 19″ monitor described here, a 24″ widescreen monitor is needed to provide a comparable image size. While not everyone understands or recognizes differences in color depth, contrast ration, refresh rate, or the dozens of other monitor specifications, no one wants the picture to get smaller!
Free Download: The Video Surveillance Report 2023
Discover the latest developments in the rapidly-evolving video surveillance sector by downloading the 2023 Video Surveillance Report. Over 500 responses to our survey, which come from integrators to consultants and heads of security, inform our analysis of the latest trends including AI, the state of the video surveillance market, uptake of the cloud, and the wider economic and geopolitical events impacting the sector!
Download for FREE to discover top industry insight around the latest innovations in video surveillance systems.
Problems in Selecting Surveillance MonitorsThe consumer market drives demands for 16:9 monitors, but there are still times when a 4:3 monitor is a better […]
Robert D. Grossman
IFSEC Insider | Security and Fire News and Resources
Subscribe
28 Comments
Oldest
NewestMost Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JonathanL
August 27, 2013 12:44 pm
This was actually an issue when we received a new security system the screen we had to view it on was 16:9 ratio and was used to display multiple camera feeds at one time. It really killed the real time viewing capabilities of the system.
THe instance you are referring to is really related to the processing power of whatever was generating the images and displaying them on the screen — DVR, NVR, or workstation.
Or did he mean that the screen was just too small for so many images? (Maybe not). How many images should a decent NVR be capable of streaming back in real time?
SunitaT
August 28, 2013 2:40 pm
Common users always feel happy moving to new technology. But this example of monitors shows that it is not always recommended or desirable to move to new technology without considering our own unique requirements and other related equipment. Sometimes it is actually like impeding the performance of the rest of the system by replacing only one gadget with new technology.
@ Robert Grossman, No I don’t want my pictures to get smaller but they really do. Moving from 19″ monitors to 24″ widescreen monitors is quite a big shift both financially and space-wise to get the comparable image size. It will certainly require much more space that may not immediately be available. Is there any other economical solution to it?
Well, currently you can stick to 19″ monitors – they are still making them, although their days are numbered. Sooner or later you’ll wind up going with a widescreen monitor, and my point was that you’ll need to get “supersized” to get the same image size on a widescreen that you were used to on a 4:3 monitor. As far as cost, you’re in for a pleasant surprise there. If you have an analog signal, you can just go with a consumer TV. Here in the US a decent 24″ TV with a composie input is well under $200. If… Read more »
@Sunita: The issue with surveillance monitors is that the display card / mirror of it gets corrupted very quickly. I have noticed several times in my working place and still we are unable t figure out the exact reason for it. Initially we thought its something to do with the quality but it seems to be not the case.
The big thing with the move from 4:3 to widescreen also is the decreasing thickness of monitors. Remember how much space an old monitor took up? Now, as you say, you can wall mount them easily and actually free up desk space.
This should be a solvable problem. I say “should be” because I really believe there are “haunted” projects, where things don’t seem to want to work right, no matter what you do. That being said, monitors — even 16:9 format ones — and computers are well documented and well understood technology and any issues should be able to be resolved.
@Jonathan Lipscomb – It’s always good to consult the vendors before you make the purchase. Sometimes I used to sit down and tell them my requirement and try to get a solution from them and match it with my ideas and opinion.
@SunitaT- When moving to new device you need to ensure that your existing components match and support the new device. Unless otherwise your replacing your entire CCTV network.
@ shehan
that is so true! You should always have a good plan of the equipment you need for your system before you start purchasing. This way you don’t miss anything and you can get exactly what you need.
@ shehan
that is so true! You should always have a good plan of the equipment you need for your system before you start purchasing. This way you don’t miss anything and you can get exactly what you need.
@staceyEI agree with you. In my company we always solicit ideas and have clear objective of our needs for our systems but what I have noticed is that our needs keep changing. To combat this , I make sure we have cut off deadline for all proposals.
In these projects, the basic, cheaper simple elements (like monitors) often get forgotten about and priority is given to the kit that we feel is more complex (operationally and installation-wise). But if you get the monitors wrong, the CCTV system is impacted from an operational perspective. I have tried to go for projection screens (more environmentally friendly apparently, with more flexibility than monitors) but the costs have usually got thrown back!
@George Brown
Absolutely! You have to set limits when it comes to accepting changes to a project. Otherwise you will have scope creeps right up to the end of the project and could end up over time and over budget.
This was actually an issue when we received a new security system the screen we had to view it on was 16:9 ratio and was used to display multiple camera feeds at one time. It really killed the real time viewing capabilities of the system.
THe instance you are referring to is really related to the processing power of whatever was generating the images and displaying them on the screen — DVR, NVR, or workstation.
Or did he mean that the screen was just too small for so many images? (Maybe not). How many images should a decent NVR be capable of streaming back in real time?
Common users always feel happy moving to new technology. But this example of monitors shows that it is not always recommended or desirable to move to new technology without considering our own unique requirements and other related equipment. Sometimes it is actually like impeding the performance of the rest of the system by replacing only one gadget with new technology.
@ Robert Grossman, No I don’t want my pictures to get smaller but they really do. Moving from 19″ monitors to 24″ widescreen monitors is quite a big shift both financially and space-wise to get the comparable image size. It will certainly require much more space that may not immediately be available. Is there any other economical solution to it?
Well, currently you can stick to 19″ monitors – they are still making them, although their days are numbered. Sooner or later you’ll wind up going with a widescreen monitor, and my point was that you’ll need to get “supersized” to get the same image size on a widescreen that you were used to on a 4:3 monitor. As far as cost, you’re in for a pleasant surprise there. If you have an analog signal, you can just go with a consumer TV. Here in the US a decent 24″ TV with a composie input is well under $200. If… Read more »
@Sunita: The issue with surveillance monitors is that the display card / mirror of it gets corrupted very quickly. I have noticed several times in my working place and still we are unable t figure out the exact reason for it. Initially we thought its something to do with the quality but it seems to be not the case.
The big thing with the move from 4:3 to widescreen also is the decreasing thickness of monitors. Remember how much space an old monitor took up? Now, as you say, you can wall mount them easily and actually free up desk space.
It’s easy for a customer to get dazzled by the shiny new tech while not thinking about the real important issues that Robert has raised in this post.
This should be a solvable problem. I say “should be” because I really believe there are “haunted” projects, where things don’t seem to want to work right, no matter what you do. That being said, monitors — even 16:9 format ones — and computers are well documented and well understood technology and any issues should be able to be resolved.
@Robert Spurr – Thanks for sharing the valuable information, its indeed helpful when making purchases of CCTV equipment and monitors.
@Jonathan Lipscomb – It’s always good to consult the vendors before you make the purchase. Sometimes I used to sit down and tell them my requirement and try to get a solution from them and match it with my ideas and opinion.
@Robert Brown – I feel 8 images on a screen would be a good size the more you put the more difficult it is to monitor.
@SunitaT- When moving to new device you need to ensure that your existing components match and support the new device. Unless otherwise your replacing your entire CCTV network.
@sunita tirlapur – What about adjusting your screen resolution? Not sure if it will help your situation but its defiantly worth trying.
@Robert Spurr – Wow another investment. It’s always good to plan your change of systems well before purchasing the equipment.
@N De Silva – I too feel it’s because is the inferior quality, could you tell me the brand and the manufactured location and model.
@Robert Brown – ohh yes having your traditional monitors on the desk itself is a great challenge. Imagine when you have so many cameras to monitor.
@Robert Brown – at times we tend to miss some important basics when looking at a new system. Sometimes little things we already know.
@ shehan
that is so true! You should always have a good plan of the equipment you need for your system before you start purchasing. This way you don’t miss anything and you can get exactly what you need.
@ shehan
that is so true! You should always have a good plan of the equipment you need for your system before you start purchasing. This way you don’t miss anything and you can get exactly what you need.
@staceyEI agree with you. In my company we always solicit ideas and have clear objective of our needs for our systems but what I have noticed is that our needs keep changing. To combat this , I make sure we have cut off deadline for all proposals.
In these projects, the basic, cheaper simple elements (like monitors) often get forgotten about and priority is given to the kit that we feel is more complex (operationally and installation-wise). But if you get the monitors wrong, the CCTV system is impacted from an operational perspective. I have tried to go for projection screens (more environmentally friendly apparently, with more flexibility than monitors) but the costs have usually got thrown back!
Yes I agree that little things matter when choosing CCTV and its monitors
@George Brown
Absolutely! You have to set limits when it comes to accepting changes to a project. Otherwise you will have scope creeps right up to the end of the project and could end up over time and over budget.
It is true that we need to set limits in anything we do and projects need to have its limits when accepting changes
@ gbrown
If those limits are not set, it could do more damage than good to the project at hand.
I agree @STACEY ESTEY