Avatar photo

Regional Director, Northern Europe, Axis Communications

Author Bio ▼

Atul is the regional director in Northern Europe for Axis Communications. He has recently authored a whitepaper detailing the security and business benefits network video can offer end-users in the retail sector. He is one of the most experienced network video professionals in the security sector, having focused on this subject area for over 15 years. Acknowledged among his peers for a well defined understanding of the network video market, he has also been involved in some of the UK's most high-profile video deployments (including those for a number of Tier 1 retailers). With a diverse background spanning business development, account management, pre-sales, and training disciplines, as well as being a regular speaker at numerous industry events, over the years Atul has played an active role in articulating the benefits of network video to security buyers. He was also instrumental in designing and launching the Axis Academy in the UK, one of the most comprehensive training initiatives in the market supporting the ongoing migration from analog to network video systems.
March 21, 2013

Sign up to free email newsletters

Download

Whitepaper: Multi-residential access management – The move to digital

Are CCTV cameras better than the human eye?

The human eye can see things at an incredible resolution — an estimated 576 megapixels. That huge number would have seemed insurmountable years ago, when digital technology struggled just to cross the megapixel barrier. Today, even digital cameras are often as high as 16 megapixels, with the upper end of the market offering 80 megapixels.

As camera technology evolves, it’s certain that images that are considered cutting edge today will seem run of the mill tomorrow. This got us thinking — what will the camera of the future be like?

[mk_mini_callout]

Download the 2016 Video Surveillance Report

Get the latest report on CCTV and video surveillance in 2016 by downloading this free report[/mk_mini_callout]

Gigapixel images

As camera manufacturers, we’re constantly striving to get the highest-quality footage we can, and what’s possible with today’s technology is truly incredible. For instance, it’s already possible to produce images with more than a gigapixel, but these are normally achieved by stitching together a sequence of images. Therefore, it’s not possible to produce moving footage at that sort of resolution.

The other issue is storage; a gigapixel image takes up a lot of room. Even if it were possible to capture footage of that resolution, the camera that filmed it would need to contain some weighty storage just to record that much data.

In fact, the world record for highest-resolution image was recently broken by BT. Its stunning 360-degree image of London was made using this method and measures a whopping 320 gigapixels. It includes a view of UBM’s offices in London, which you can see below.

UBM gigapixel image

UBM’s offices viewed from the perspective of BT’s 320-gigapixel image.
Click the image to have an even closer look.

We’re not quite there yet. Having said this, the same could have been said a decade ago about today’s technology, and with storage solutions and image resolution improving so fast, what may look difficult today looks eminently realistic tomorrow.

Cameras do more than the human eye

We don’t have surveillance cameras that can surpass the human eye yet, but given enough time, I’m absolutely certain that threshold eventually will be crossed.

Even though the resolution isn’t quite there, in many ways, cameras can already do more than the human eye. IP surveillance cameras can already see beyond the spectrum of light visible to the human eye. With infrared lights, many outdoor-ready network cameras can see in what the human eye would perceive as pitch black.

Surveillance technology has also made leaps and bounds over the last 20 years or so. Gone are the grainy images so stereotypical of analogue CCTV cameras. Today 1,080p HD footage is commonplace among modern IP surveillance cameras. When twinned with optical zoom levels that can reach 36x, this means that, even though 576 megapixels is still some distance away, cameras can already see distant objects more clearly than the human eye.

Are surveillance cameras perhaps already better than the human eye? They can’t quite get the same resolution yet, but the features we’ve covered only scrape the surface of what they can already achieve. I’m confident that eventually the resolution of cameras will far exceed the human eye. Until then, nature will continue to get a run for its money.

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.

VideoSurveillanceReport-FrontCover-23
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
20 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sheh
Sheh
March 23, 2013 5:33 am

There is no denying the fact ….Cameras have completely revolutionized the surveillance systems across the world. The surveillance systems have been able to control lots of crimes and help the forensic experts in criminal investigations. The best thing about immense resolutions and tireless services…which human eyes are certainly not meant for. The better recording facilities associated with surveillance cameras can store even the minutest of movements without compromising on ancillary details. I think we still have lots of potential to grow in security systems through better integration of technology. 

manshi
manshi
March 23, 2013 12:40 pm
Reply to  Sheh

I think with the implementation of CCTV Cameras, the technology world of cameras did come a long way. I certainly believe its far more better than a human eye. You can focus on one direction via a human eye whereas with cameras the range of coverage is huge.   

Rob Ratcliff
Rob Ratcliff
March 25, 2013 10:57 am
Reply to  manshi

It’s a bit of a moot point in many ways, yes. I think the most interesting element of this article is the idea of a theoretical maximum resolution (or pixel count if you prefer). These are always changing and in many ways the consumers understanding (or at least thinking they understand) what a decent MP count is (probably likely to be similar to what their smartphone does) is likely to keep pushing this on.

SunitaT
SunitaT
March 26, 2013 3:10 am
Reply to  manshi

You can focus on one direction via a human eye whereas with cameras the range of coverage is huge.
, no doubt. Existing cameras do have lot of advantages compared to the human eye, but if we can increase the resolution of these cameras then it will definitely help us to improve the security. It would be even better if we can improve the image quality in low-light conditions.

SunitaT
SunitaT
March 26, 2013 3:16 am

I’m confident that eventually the resolution of cameras will far exceed the human eye.
, thanks for the post. I am curious to know what is the limiting factor in increasing the resolution of the cameras ? And even if we product very high resoltion cameras will people buy them because it would take huge memory infrastrcture to store such high resolution image.

Atul Rajput
Atul Rajput
March 26, 2013 9:06 am
Reply to  SunitaT

@sunita tirlapur, One of the main limiting factors in cameras being able to maximise high resolution imaging, particularly above 5 megapixel, is the availability of lenses to fully exploit the resolutions these cameras offer. While IP camera processing power and sensor development adhere to Moore’s law, lenses and optics have not kept pace.  Consequently as you scale above 5MP cameras, light sensitivity, image clarity and frame rate start to become an issue. You make a good point about improving image quality in low light conditions. I think there should be an increased focus on better image clarity in surveillance applications … Read more »

SunitaT
SunitaT
March 26, 2013 11:14 pm
Reply to  Atul Rajput

While IP camera processing power and sensor development adhere to Moore’s law, lenses and optics have not kept pace.
, thanks for the reply. Till now processing power and sensor development have adhered to Moore’s law but I am not sure how long this trend will continue. Shrinking of transistor is becoming more difficult because of challenges in Lithography which again deals with optics.

manshi
manshi
March 27, 2013 10:44 am
Reply to  SunitaT

: Yes of course that would be great but I guess most of the CCTV Cameras do need some sort of a light isn’t it to capture things in the dark. It does not have the Night Mode facility implemented yet.

manshi
manshi
March 27, 2013 10:47 am
Reply to  Rob Ratcliff

: True mate but I feel there are certain grey areas which the camera people should look into 1st before making advancements to improve high quality to high end quality. If the issues can be solved first then the other aspects like improving quality on which has quite a good quality would be ok.   

Rob Ratcliff
Rob Ratcliff
March 27, 2013 1:42 pm
Reply to  manshi

Yes, as we’ve said before there’s a big difference between resolution and image clarity. Lenses, wide dynamic range, optics, all that stuff is really important too.

Rob Ratcliff
Rob Ratcliff
March 27, 2013 1:47 pm
Reply to  Atul Rajput

Atul, thanks for that comment. Very interesting, and couldn’t agree more. Is the lightfinder technology essentially using the IR field of light, or is it just a very long exposure of white light that is processed to remove blur?

Rob Ratcliff
Rob Ratcliff
March 27, 2013 1:58 pm
Reply to  SunitaT

Now you’re getting well beyond my understanding. I did a quick Google but none the wiser. could you explain the challenges in computational lithography for a layman? Or is it simply too complex?

Rob Ratcliff
Rob Ratcliff
March 27, 2013 1:59 pm
Reply to  manshi

Would you say that IR has reached its limitation and we need better low-light technologies or…?

manshi
manshi
March 29, 2013 11:10 am
Reply to  Rob Ratcliff

: Yes Rob but is it the difference that counts on the price of cameras as well ? I know it has some impact but not totally right ?

bhadra
bhadra
March 30, 2013 5:27 am

To better understand the answer to this question, let’s first have a quick comparison of various similarities and differences found in the working of the human eye and a photo camera. Image focusing: Human and camera lenses both focus an inverted image onto light-sensitive surface. In the case of a camera, it’s focused onto film or a sensor chip. In your eyes, the light-sensitive surface is the retina on the inside of your eyeball. Light adjustment: Both the eye and a camera can adjust quantity of light entering. On a camera, it’s done with the aperture control built into your… Read more »

Atul Rajput
Atul Rajput
April 3, 2013 4:21 pm
Reply to  Rob Ratcliff

Rob, The Lightfinder technology is the result of a fusion of factors – a meticulous choice of the right sensor and the right lens, incorporating a CMOS sensor with exceptional light sensitivity. This is then coupled with elaborate software that offers carefully tuned imaging processing through setting the degree of filtering and sharpening to give the best image quality possible and achieving enhanced noise reduction.
 
 

Rob Ratcliff
Rob Ratcliff
April 4, 2013 7:56 am
Reply to  manshi

Hm, that’s where product testing comes in, I guess. Ultimately, you get what you pay for…

Rob Ratcliff
Rob Ratcliff
April 9, 2013 9:11 am
Reply to  Atul Rajput

Great — certainly simpler to bundle all that under the ‘Lighfinder’ moniker. Thanks for that detailed explanation!

Rob Ratcliff
Rob Ratcliff
April 9, 2013 9:17 am
Reply to  bhadra

Bhadra, thank you for that almost article-length comment. You’re certainly right that eyes are still generally ahead of cameras in low-light scenarios, except of course when you throw in IR-sensitivity, a field of light our eyes cannot see. Great comment, Bhadra!

manshi
manshi
April 13, 2013 11:11 pm
Reply to  Rob Ratcliff

: Yes true but not every time. You cannot guarantee that you get the best