“Integration” is a term that has been almost inescapable in the security business for quite a few years now. With the launch of IFSEC Global, I thought the time might be right to provide something of an ongoing guide to integrated systems — and integrated video systems in particular — that’s of use to specifiers, end users, and integrators.
First up, then: the basics.
What’s an integrated security system?
Well, the essence of an integrated system is that it’s seeking to bring together a wide variety of security and safety functions into a single management system.
It could include video surveillance, access control, time and attendance monitoring, visitor management systems, intruder alarms, lift control, fire systems, building management, human resources, car park management, guard tours, logical security, vending, and more.
The BSIA has produced a guide to integrated security management systems.
It’s worth noting that the key words here — and increasingly throughout the security and building management businesses — are “management system”.
You can see from the list above that there’s an increasing range of elements which often fall under the control of the same operators. Ensuring that they can easily control all of these elements, without switching from one system to another, is what integrated systems are all about.
What’s an integrated video security system?
To justify the name, an integrated video security system needs to integrate together all the video components of a video security system — namely, the video cameras with the video management system and its displays.
Integration may be on an analogue platform, or increasingly on a digital IP platform. And those digital platforms could be proprietary or “open”.
Proprietary platforms typically integrate a given manufacturer’s cameras, recorders, software, and displays, but have limited connectivity to third-party cameras and other devices.
Open platform systems typically adopt the Open Network Video Interface Forum (ONVIF) standard to allow cross-manufacturer compatibility as the key to the widespread adoption of network video systems.
What’s a video management system?
Firstly, it’s worth acknowledging that there is some confusion over the abbreviation “VMS”. Here I’m using it to refer to a video management system, but it’s often used to refer to video management software — one of the key components of a video management system. Which is all very useful, particularly in an industry as awash in alphabet soup as security.
Proprietary video management systems exist and are typically built around a network video recorder with embedded software.
But video management systems now increasingly refer to open platform video management software for both recording and management, together with matched server and storage hardware, and it is this definition I’ll be using in this article and in future.
What are the benefits of a VMS over an NVR solution?
- An open platform VMS allows different cameras from multiple camera manufacturers to be used. And although in practice most people wisely limit their camera choice, the philosophy helps to ensure competitiveness and future-proofing of systems.
- The potential to interface third-party alarms, video, audio, and other functionality is much greater with an open-standard video management system.
- Technical advantages aside, the VMS philosophy appears to be winning in the marketplace, which in turn helps to encourage product and market development.
On a very basic level, then, the VMS is the central component of an integrated video security system — and today’s VMSs are likely to integrate other security aspects such as access control and intruder alarms as well. I’ll look at how to go about choosing a suitable VMS next time.
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.
You raise an excellent point; there’s lots of buzz about integrated systems but many plug in boxes and call it a video system without any regard to having everything work together to solve a problem or achieve an objective. By looking at video from a “system” approach (rather than as a series of appliances to be connected together), you can truly go with best of breed without paying for things you don’t need.
No security system could produce better results if it was not integrated and networked . Integrated video security system is one such idea that could revolutionize the security paradigm. In most desirable VMS, we need high resolution cameras, motions sensors, movement identification and auto zoom with alert alarms have enabled the operators to work with efficiency and quick response action. Additionally, a foolproof and robust networking of VMS is also amongst the top priority for the customers of these systems.
My thought on the matter is to really simplify the workflow.If the integrated approach is the answer, let’s do it.I find that mind sets are difficult to change when new technology and systems present themselves.Are we afraid of change? This is no doubt a changing environment /industry and we need to keep up with the times.
Buit just look at the advantages. Who wouldn’t want one system instead of five? One interface to see all your business/life critical data? Seems like an open goal to me.
With fully integrated central controlled system, we have to look carefully for the weak links, because one hardware or software crash can cause the stop of every monitored or controlled unit, a good example of that, some years ago in a jet plane there was only one computer that control all the systems and functions in the plane and that computer crashed causing the plane to crash, the other example was road works caused the cut of an electric cable and the UPS is just able to support the servers for 20 minutes and you can imagine what happened after… Read more »
True — the systems should be capable of continuing to run independently of one another, but you are able to utilise the data from all of them to create a richer picture than you ever could were it to remain in a silo.
I do agree with you Rob, having one single control center that can give a panoramic view about an event, this will make it more easy to apply quicker and better decisions by combining all the information sources that are related to that event through just a glance, but as I said we need to look after the weak points that might cause information interruption.
I guess that in this year all the VMS’s should convert to the open source structure, in my industrial security field in KSA one of the main government regulations is to have one single platform, so the integration is a must and because of that alot of branded VMS has been eliminated from the industrial security market.
It would be a point of strength for the ISS if you have considered in your system:1- Redundant Servers2- Redundant Network3- Clustering (Either NEC or Windows)As a real case study we implemented integrated security system using one single platform, the main objective was to connect 17 affiliates owned by one company using one enterprise system, single platform and single database. and we did it with complete redundancy without any point of failure
It looks that is a well redundant net, but as I said you might have missed small weak pointes (hope not ; ) ), as an example do you have your sensors in twins ( at least the important ones) and cross connected to widely separated places, even the lights should be in twins in the important areas.
I think we need to understand one thing. In today’s precarious environment there is no concept of security without integration. All the security paraphernailia has to be put into loop so that the time for decision making could be reduces and response be made faster. A single control centre is most desirable in a situation where handling is comfortable as far as resources and manpower are concerned. The control centres could be bi or tri furcated if central unit is getting over worked and could result into shoddy response in the time of emergency.