Choosing a product or manufacturer used to be a lot easier. While it was full of complexities, your focus was traditionally on the product and its merits. You made a list of what your objectives were, compared features and functionality, and occasionally did a shootout. Sometimes you used an expert to help, but the product or the system was the main focus.Selecting an integrator was simpler as well. You checked references, called around, and looked at prices and past performance. Maybe word of mouth played a bigger part or made you predisposed to liking someone, but rarely did you venture into the financial aspects of the selection process.

As a result of the down economy we are presently living through, most clients of ours find they no longer have the luxury of just looking at part of the picture. The financial story behind a manufacturer, vendor or integrator is now a major part of the consideration process. In fact, it’s the first point of review on most projects. Considering the financial longevity of a supplier will impact so many aspects of your project, it’s foolhardy not to give due diligence its due diligence.

Gauging a Manufacturer’s Viability
Financial stability is arguably more important in a manufacturer than an integrator. If an integrator goes under, another integrator can usually be found to complete the project and support the system. In fact, if the payment terms and project supervision has been structured properly, replacing an integrator is usually nothing more than an inconvenience. Not so with a manufacturer.

Look for firms that are profitable and have the resources to withstand an extended downturn. Many start-ups or companies that are expanding rapidly are heavily reliant on venture capital. While this funding was readily available several years ago and is starting to materialize again, not all of the business plans that qualified for vast quantities of money will receive such largesse today. Our clients are extremely risk averse in this area; there are just too many good companies to choose from to take too many chances that a key partner will disappear.

A company being acquired by another company is not usually a good sign either. While this is harder to predict, a knowledgeable industry expert can usually gauge the likelihood of this happening and steer you clear of companies on the edge. Even a merger of two strong companies usually has casualties as duplicate product lines are rationalized and eliminated. Development can change focus, and upgrades that have been promised may never materialize.

One example of this is the acquisition of GE Security by United Technologies Corp. (UTC); it remains to be seen how the pieces all fit together. Will both fiber optic product lines remain? Is there duplication in the embedded DVR lines? With smaller companies, the issue is even more pronounced. GE acquired Covi Technologies some time ago, and another merger later that product line and technology has (from outward appearances) disappeared.

Financial difficulties often lead to staff reductions which can impact end users even after the system is installed. In an increasingly software focused world, lacking staff to perform comprehensive bug fixes and upgrades often forces a system user to perform costly system upgrades long before they are planned or put up with deficiencies that can compromise the safety and security of a facility.

In difficult times, the natural selection process doesn’t work as well either. Manufacturers are less likely to walk away from a job, even if they know their products aren’t a perfect fit. We’ve seen many projects where the manufactures simply misrepresented their products to get the job, or promised an upgrade that never materialized. While this is sometimes the nature of the competitive sales process — promise anything to get the job — it is particularly evident during lean times. Sometimes it takes some skill to determine what’s “real” and what is an empty promise.

Integrators Make Promises Too
Manufacturers aren’t the only ones suffering during lean times, and the “promise anything” approach is used by integrators as well. For example, on a recent project where bids were opened and read publicly, pricing ranged from $215,500 to $601,000 for a system that was tightly specified. Since there were almost no variables (product performance requirements demanded stringent compliance), each bid reflected an identical system.

While a competitive environment contributed to the wide range, in many cases we see integrators bidding jobs at or below cost just to get the work. They may feel they will make it up on change orders or they will make substitutions that will save them money — the end user can benefit if a low bidder such as this is monitored closely — but it can create delays in completing projects as there’s no money left in the job to send people back to clean up the loose ends. In our experience, the jobs that tend to drag on forever often do so because they weren’t profitable for the integrator.

If an integrator is taking on work for little or no profit, the obvious question is “Will they be around to support you in the future?” If this is a concern, the best an end user can do is ensure everything is documented properly. Transitioning to another integrator is a nightmare without proper drawings and installation “best practices.” This means that wiring should be identified and routed neatly and logically. If you have to pay another integrator to troubleshoot or clean up the mess later you are certain to lose more than the low-bidder savings you realized initially.

So what can you do to prevent this from happening? While everyone asks for financial information and references, few people check them. Add that to your checklist, and make sure someone on your procurement team has an ear to the ground and knows what is going on in the industry and in your market. But overall, the old adage has never applied more than it does now — “If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.”

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

Click Here to view the original article on the Security Sales & Integration website

The market is being whipped into a frenzy by buzz about IP, yet studies show that only 10-15 perent of systems sold include IP cameras. What’s the deal?

Our firm was recently retained by a new client to provide a strategic review on the electronic security industry. This client was focused on CCTV, and inevitably the topic of IP-based CCTV systems was high on their list. They had studied all of the market data they could find and were disappointed to discover that — depending on the estimates — only 10-15 percent of the systems being sold today are considered IP systems. “How can this be?” they asked. “Aren’t all systems today essentially IP based systems?”

They were right. Unless you are using a videocassette-based system or an extremely low-end DVR, all systems are IP based. Why? Because the recording is handled by a DVR, and that DVR virtually always includes client software that allows you to remotely access live or recorded video. So, if all systems are IP eventually, why is there so much discussion as to the pros and cons of IP based systems?

Close to the Edge

The real question is how far out to the edge do you go with IP. An IP system converts an analog video signal to a digital stream that can be transmitted over a conventional Ethernet network. But it can do this in a number of places.

If an IP camera is used, the signal is converted at the camera itself — this is what is commonly referred to as an IP-based system. An analog camera can also be used, and the signal can be fed into an IP encoder that converts the signal to a digital stream. The IP encoder can be located in a more convenient location, and multi-channel encoders are available to convert multiple cameras from one box. Or the camera can remain analog all the way to the recording device, which then converts the signal to store it. In that case, the recorder is also serving as an encoder, and the signal is generally available as an IP signal streaming from the recorder.

So, which system should you use? In general, we recommend that analog cameras be fed to IP encoders unless megapixel resolution is required. We base this on a number of factors, including cost, ease of installation and appearance.

1. Cost — In general, the cost of an analog camera plus an encoder is generally the same price or less than the cost of an IP camera, and technically the signal quality is identical. In fact, if multi-channel encoders are used the cost of the analog/encoder pairing drops significantly below the IP camera cost.

   The true savings come in when you look at replacement cost. Edge devices fail or get damaged from time to time. One of our clients had a faulty camera installation and the outdoor IP camera filled up with water during a storm. Replacement cost was $900, but it would only have been $300 if an analog camera had been used and connected to an encoder that was safely installed in a closet or other weatherproof space.

2. Ease of Installation — An IP camera has some installation limitations that can drive costs up significantly. Primarily is cable distance — IP cameras are limited to 100 meters (328 feet) unless special converters, repeaters, or fiber optic cable is used. Analog cameras can run for great distances before being converted to IP — over a mile if the proper UTP (unshielded twisted pair) baluns are used. The same cabling can be used, so cable cost isn’t an issue, and the convenience of locating equipment where conditioned space is available often outweighs other concerns.

   Other installation factors include the sensitivity of IP cameras to power fluctuations, the difficulty in getting environmentally hardened IP equipment, and the limitations in size and form factor for IP base products.

   Finally, analog cameras can be plugged into a portable monitor for setup, focusing, and field of view adjustments. While some IP cameras also include analog outputs to allow this, many do not. This makes installation far more difficult, involving a computer, extra network port (if power-over-Ethernet is used) and added time and complexity when installing.

3. Appearance — We are currently in the golden age of analog cameras in that the variety of sizes, shapes, features and performance levels available at low price points has never been better. This gives the designer or installer tremendous flexibility in matching cameras, housings, lens types, and other specification features to capture exactly the image that is needed. Too often, IP cameras require aesthetic or performance compromises that do not go over well with end users.

   While these and other advantages make us lean in this direction, nothing trumps technical requirements. If your application makes IP cameras advantageous, feel free to mix and match or use whichever makes the most sense. As far as which type of device to use, keep both in your toolbox and remember the old adage; if the only tool you have is a hammer, pretty soon everything looks like a nail.

DVR Versus NVR

To convert a camera to a digital signal it must be encoded. There are three ways of doing this. First, you can buy an “IP” camera which has an encoder built into it. We don’t usually recommend this, as when the camera breaks you have to replace the camera and the encoder at the same time, since they are one unit. Second, you can buy a separate camera and encoder. This allows you to just replace the device that fails which, over time, will save money. Third, you can buy a digital recorder with an encoder built in, and just plug the analog camera into the recorder.

A device that records signals that have already been encoded (options No. 1 and 2 listed above) is called a network video recorder, or NVR. A device that has the encoders built in (option No. 3, above) is called a digital video recorder, or DVR. It gets a little more complicated as there are units that have some encoders built in and also record encoded signals. They are usually called DVR’s as well, although they’re really both.

Functionally, there’s not a lot of difference. In fact, many manufacturers make both types and a system could use both. For example, a shopping mall might put a DVR in their command center to record the cameras that were run directly back to that room, and put encoders in data closets that would stream back to NVR’s, also located in the command center. When viewing cameras, they wouldn’t be able to tell if they were plugged into an NVR or a DVR, and they could view both types side by side on the same monitor. In most cases, the primary concern is cabling, infrastructure, and ease of installation since the recorded and live images are identical with each type of technology.

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

Since Chicago’s archetype Market Square opened in 1916, shopping malls have been synonymous with safety. Their predictability has been a source of security and, for many, a way of life. People exercise at gyms in the morning, attend movies at night; parents use the mall to baby-sit their teenagers; and children visit with Santa and the Easter Bunny, and cavort in play areas.

That feeling of well being doesn’t come without a cost, however, particularly in a post-9/11 world. Malls have repeatedly been identified as potential terrorist targets and make national headlines when troubled individuals decide to take out their rage in such a public place.

So how do you go about securing a facility that at its heart relies on open access and the unimpeded flow of traffic to accommodate shoppers and tenants?

Mall security provides sort of an “umbrella” of protection. The mall is responsible for securing the common, public space, while individual tenants handle their own security. Anchor stores (larger retailers that draw shoppers to the mall) often have elaborate security systems that conform to corporate loss prevention guidelines, with smaller stores running the gamut from locking gates to sophisticated systems of their own.

Defining this umbrella can be tricky. By nature, shopping malls encompass a lot of physical space and there are lots of entry points, some used considerably less frequently than others. There is essentially a back of house labyrinth of corridors that allow retail goods to be transported from the loading dock to each store without being seen by the public.

At any given time there are one or more stores undergoing renovation that necessitate access by workers after hours. And there are a number of electrical and mechanical rooms that must be secured and protected from vandalism, or worse.

Hamilton Mall, a 1 million-square-foot complex in Mays Landing, N.J., 12 miles outside Atlantic City, recently addressed these needs and challenges.

“Safety is the overriding concern,” explains Bill Schu, general manager for Hamilton Mall. “We had been planning on installing video surveillance and alarm point monitoring for some time, but wanted to do it right. It had to enhance the effectiveness of our security team without becoming intrusive to our guests.”

That basic premise would serve as the foundation for the design, planning and execution of a comprehensive video surveillance solution based on a blend of established and newer technology — and do so for less than originally projected.

Past Experience Pays Off

Hamilton Mall is a joint partnership with Simon Properties Group, the largest mall operator in the country, and Kravco Simon Co., a regional mall operator. Our firm had previously done work for King of Prussia Mall, in King of Prussia, Pa., another Kravco Simon property and one of the world’s largest malls (3 million square feet of retail space).

“We take our responsibility for the safety of our customers and the overall property at King of Prussia very seriously and we have invested in both the technology and the people to do that,” says Robert Hart, general manager of the King of Prussia Mall. “One of our primary roles is to protect unauthorized access to the mall after hours. Individual retailers within the mall then further secure their own space in ways that are appropriate to their own needs.”

So we were very familiar with the particular needs of retail shopping malls. At the same time, our experience with gaming-related projects had led us to some innovative features that we tried at King of Prussia and wanted to repeat at Hamilton.

“While our focus is on effective monitoring and protection for the benefit of our customers, tenants and employees, we also need to be mindful of expenditures,” says John Petruzzi, corporate vice president of security for Simon Property Group. “We’re not just buying technology — we’re buying long-term results.”

An Alternative Approach

Armed with an understanding of the unique requirements of shopping malls and a successful installation at a sister property, we sat down with Schu to capture his specific “wish list” of features and functionality. To our surprise, it turned out to be easier than we expected; the mall already had another consultant involved and liked the system that was originally proposed.

The problem: it was a completely IP-based solution that would break the bank.

“I was looking at having to scale back or defer purchasing, and we knew we needed to get this system installed,” says Schu. “We felt there were too many areas that could invite problems, and while we hadn’t had an incident we didn’t want to wait until something happened to act.”

Our goal was to match the image quality, camera count and feature set of the system that had been previously designed. It had to digitally record images for 30 days, allow for remote monitoring, and include an analog matrix switch for real-time (zero latency) command and control of pan/tilt/zoom (p/t/z) cameras. We were to do this by providing top-quality products from major manufacturers, installed by union labor and warranted for three years from system acceptance.

The reduced price had to include our consulting fees as well and — here’s the challenge — had to cost roughly 30-percent less than the previously designed system to meet budgetary targets. To accomplish this, we knew we’d have to get away from the IP-based design provided by the previous consultant. While the price of IP-based video equipment continues to decline, unfortunately the infrastructure costs do not. For a facility as large as Hamilton Mall, IP-based video meant using fiber-optic cable, while a hybrid system meant copper.

We’d preserve future upgradeability by using Cat-5e instead of coaxial cable, locating data junction boxes in areas where they could be converted to an IP backbone and moving camera power supplies to the data junction areas, but we would have to rely on analog video.

The data junction areas would be run back to the central control area via 25-pair Cat-5 cable, a topology we used with great success on other projects. An added benefit: alarm contacts could be run back in the same manner, further reducing infrastructure costs. Analog cameras would also prove more cost effective than IP-based units as well, particularly p/t/z units. At the time the system was designed, the state-of-the-art optical zoom (35x with image stabilization) was only available in analog, and performance would be better; lower latency on analog camera control meant a more responsive joystick as far as the operator was concerned. Fixed cameras were smaller, less costly and more attractive, and all cameras would be viewable live at 30 images-per-second, with no dropped frames, delayed call-up or compression artifacts.

Key Features Prioritized

Once the decision was made to go hybrid, with analog cameras feeding networked DVRs, we started adding back features. Mindful of the budget, we created a specification that included a number of alternates. This would allow us to bid the system to a number of vendors and determine, using actual bid responses, the cost of each feature.

Option packages and enhancements included:

Master evidence server — With the advent of YouTube, an Internet-based repository for amateur videos, there is an ever-increasing need to control security video footage. A centralized, shared hard drive allows any operator to pull a video clip off the DVR and store it on the master evidence server. Without the proper password, the operator can not burn it to a CD or E-mail it to someone, preventing that funny incident in the parking lot from turning into a public relations nightmare.

Part-time p/t/z cameras — By day, when the mall is open, cameras over escalators, elevators and public stairways are fixed on their targets, documenting any “slip-and-fall” incidents for insurance reasons. By providing lower cost dome cameras with limited (8x) optical packages in these positions, we were able to allow the cameras to assist with virtual guard tours during off hours, supplementing the full-performance p/t/z cameras without a major cost impact.

Assignable public view monitors — Since this was a small system, designed for one or two operators, the matrix switch had 16 outputs — 11 more than were needed for control room and office call-up monitors. For the price of some additional monitors, we added outputs in select offices and at the mall information desk, allowing assignable views rather than static displays. A few analog quads (remember them) were fed from matrix outputs and returned through inputs, allowing the viewing of any four cameras at once. Sure, we could do that from the digital workstations, but this low-tech method was more reliable, less costly and tremendously flexible.

Lightning protection — Even though distances did not make it a necessity, all outdoor cameras were to be run using fiber-optic cabling. This optical isolation prevented a strike on an outdoor camera from knocking out any equipment downstream. The mall is on a crest and is the highest point in the area; lightning strikes are inevitable and we wanted to be prepared.

Plan Perfectly Executed

In order to ensure that this project met the cost targets we had imposed on ourselves, planning was critical.

“We’ve had too many projects go over budget because of add-ons and changes, and I didn’t want that to be the case here,” says Schu. “We wanted to know upfront what this would cost — no surprises.” The only way to do that was to carefully document every facet of the system design, allowing the integrator a crystal-clear picture of what it was getting into. We walked the facility several times with Security Director Nick Laiso and Regional Engineering Manager Bill Kirner, and logged every comment. While a few things are always missed, the cost impact on this project was minimal.

The installation went smoothly as well. We had worked before with the integrator selected for the job, Westville, N.J.-based Arose Inc. Project Manager Larry Shirley understood our passion for neat wiring and well-documented installations.

“We always try and get it right the first time,” he says, “but knowing what is expected of you certainly makes that easier to achieve. It was nice having a project that was well planned in advance, and working as a team to make the customer happy instead of doing ‘field engineering.’”

System Benefits Hit Home

Ultimately the system was delivered on budget, with all of the required features and then some. The digital back-end provided by the DVRs will allow a host of additional features, including remote viewing and control, and the ability for an Internet-based “Santa Cam” next holiday season. Camera coverage of the parking lots is better than expected, and the security guards will have to go to the gym more as they tour the mall more with their fingers and less with their feet.

This system’s real benefit, however, hit this author personally. As a consultant used to working on projects around the country, the impact of the system design is rarely personal. But Hamilton Mall is my local mall and, with two teenage children, I appreciate the added sense of safety that this system provides.

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

Few organizations are as sensitive to mood swings as the police agencies and security departments of colleges, universities and hospitals. Every time there is a well publicized security incident, the need to address areas of vulnerability is first and foremost on everyone’s mind. However, once the crisis blows over, it’s back to full justification for every expenditure.An important part of upgrading or expanding a system is establishing a baseline. The foundation is critical when building anything, and electronic security systems are no exception. For those trying to be proactive and upgrade their systems in a logical, well-planned fashion, the question of upgrading or replacing equipment is usually a key one. Should you maintain the status quo by performing maintenance and repairs, upgrade a system (or portions thereof), or just chuck it all and replace it?

This is not simply a technical question for many; it encompasses all areas of a security operation and requires consideration of a number of factors. This article is not about building or adding on to a system. These are decisions based on very tangible needs. Instead, a campus should grade its systems in three ways:

Functionality: Is everything working as required?

Future: Do the systems have the capacity to grow to accommodate near- to mid-term future needs?

Features: Are there specific features needed for your operation?

If your system gets one or more “F” grades in this report card, it may be time for a parent-teacher conference.

Functionality Depends on Application, Hardware, Installation
Systems that are not functioning properly may be unreliable or of insufficient quality for the application. This includes CCTV systems with poor image quality, access control systems that fail to permit access as needed (or grant it too freely), or alarm point monitoring that false alarms too often or doesn’t alarm when needed. In all of these cases, the next question that should be asked is, “Can it be repaired cost effectively?”

Surprisingly, that question isn’t always as simple as it sounds. A system can be unreliable because of the application, hardware or installation. If it is one of the first two, you’re often better off replacing it. If the equipment isn’t right for your application, it will never be reliable. If the equipment isn’t up to the task, same answer.

If the installation is faulty, you need to do some more investigating before making a decision. If the wrong type of wire was pulled, the equipment was not terminated properly, there are power or thermal problems, or one of a host of installation related gremlins are present, you’re better off remedying those problems before you rip out a system and replace it with one that performs equally poorly. Very few careers can withstand that kind of mistake.

Another question that should be asked is whether or not the equipment is approaching the end of its serviceable life. We usually think of this as being age related. Monitors, for example, have a very finite operating life, which is often exceeded. But there are two other reasons that come to mind.

The first is whether the product still exists or is supported by the manufacturer. A campus might have an analog matrix switch that is about six years old. Ordinarily, this would not be an issue as matrix switching systems tend to be extremely reliable with 20-year operating lives not uncommon. In some cases, however, the switch manufacturer is no longer in existence, having long ago been acquired and shut down by the new parent company. Since parts are no longer available and the failure of this system would be catastrophic, a campus with this type of equipment has no choice but to replace it.

The other end-of-life issue occurs when a technology is rendered obsolete and will shortly lack even basic market support. The best example of this is the multiplexer/VCR combination, which provides poor quality, low frame rate images and is subject to a host of problems that go unnoticed until there is a problem.

The worst time to find out there is a problem — the heads are worn on the VCRs, the tapes have not been changed, or a power glitch has stopped the VCR — is when there’s an incident at your facility. The alternatives are so far superior to tape that this has pulled out of the realm of “nice to have” and into a necessity item.

Other examples include DVRs and access control equipment using operating systems that are no longer supported by the manufacturer or technologies that consume more space, power and cooling than their more modern counterparts (CRT monitors, for example). If your facility is still hanging on to a type of technology like this, there had better be a plan in place to ensure replacement, with a strongly written letter in a file to cover yourself when the inevitable problems arise.

Determine If the Current System Meets Future Expansion Needs
The second reason for performing the upgrade-or-replace analysis is to determine whether your systems can be expanded to the capacity that you will need, and whether or not it will be cost effective to do so. Both sides of this question are equally important.

Often systems can be expanded, but if this pushes you up against the system maximums, the next round might not be possible. If that is the case, you may want to skip this expansion and replace the head-end with one that has more head room.

In other cases, the expansion of older systems is not cost effective. The older architecture may be expensive to incrementally scale, while a new system can offer greater capacity for less than expanding the old one. This is particularly true with older analog video matrix switches and some access control systems.

Look to preserve as much of the existing infrastructure as possible when making this decision. While the cost of the head-end may not be prohibitive, if all new cabling or other accessory devices are required as well, that may negate any savings. Manufacturers are moving more and more toward platform interoperability, and you should be able to reuse a portion of your existing system or replace it in a later budget cycle.

For example, one CCTV system may require a complete replacement. While campus officials would like this to incorporate everything, including eliminating oversized fixed camera housings and mounts in favor of sleek, miniaturized fixed domes, the image quality is remarkably good, particularly the black-and-white cameras. Because of this, campus officials decide to defer that portion of the system replacement for another year, focusing on upgrading system control and adding digital recording.

New Equipment Features Can Make Your Life Easier
While your system may be working well and have sufficient capability for expansion, it may be lacking features that are needed to effectively run your department. This can range from remote access to video files and system control, to fault tolerance for recorded images and data.

For example, one facility that was migrating from analog to digital recording reported that incident searches were shortened dramatically. This allowed the department to be far more proactive.

Other facilities are looking to do things with their systems that current products simply don’t allow. A university is looking to allow limited access to certain CCTV cameras so prospective students can take virtual tours of their campus while letting parents know they are serious about security. Another organization in a highly regulated environment is looking to improve fail-over provisions to ensure full compliance with all government regulations, including some that are only on the drawing board. In these cases, expansion or repair is usually not an option; replacement of the system, or at least a portion of the system, is required to achieve the desired results.

One caution comes to mind. Security systems are very much like utility type products. They were purchased to perform a specific task, and in many cases they are still doing so reliably and effectively. If the needs haven’t changed, and reliability is not an issue, don’t rush to upgrade software or firmware simply because the manufacturer now offers a newer version.

The old saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” comes to mind, and the problem the manufacturer is solving may not apply in your application. They may have released a new version to solve one bug, but do you really want to be the one to discover the new bugs that this “fix” may have created?

Changing Systems May Be Worth the Trouble

One reason to expand or upgrade rather than replace is the pain associated with a system replacement. The concerns (often well-justified) about disruptions to service and the length of time required to perform the change-out often causes public safety directors and other security professionals to defer replacement and nurse the old system along. While there are many reasons (as outlined in this article) to stick with existing systems, applying “band-aids” is not a viable mid- to long-term strategy for several reasons.

First, contrary to popular belief, the conversion to a new system does not have to be a painful process. As part of the RFP process, you can ensure that the integrator you select has done this exact type of work before. If the project management aspect is beyond the skills of your in-house staff, there are consultants and project managers who routinely guide their clients in this direction.

Second, a phased and planned system replacement can be far more cost effective if properly planned. A campus hospital that intends to ultimately move to a fully IP-based CCTV system can start pulling CAT-5e or CAT-6 cable for analog camera additions to its existing system, using UTP to coax converters to allow analog cameras to run over that type of cable. Once the change out is underway, cabling will not be an issue in these locations.

Similarly, the added cooling and UPS power requirements can be factored into data closet and rack room upgrades before the actual equipment is purchased.

Finally, you want to choose the timing. If there’s a danger that your old system will fail — either suddenly or gradually — it is far more cost effective to do a planned replacement than an emergency overhaul. The former involves careful choices and a trade-off of features, staged phasing and budgetary approvals. The latter will cost exponentially more and may not be the appropriate technology or products, instead leaning more toward what was available on short notice.

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

At the center of this upgrade lies another debate. While it is clear that VHS tape is going away and DVRs are its replacement, many manufacturers (often without analog product lines) see the industry as a digital-only solution. “Virtual matrix switch” is a frequently used phrase, and their prospective customers are urged to go 100-percent digital.

Casino surveillance directors, however, are pushing back. They like the idea of digital and are buying into all of the advantages. They are frequently heavily invested in, or are in the process of, converting their recording side to digital, but most are not sold on replacing their analog cameras. This article will explore whether the replacement of analog makes sense, where analog can clearly outshine digital with today’s available technology and how “hybrid” systems are frequently the appropriate choice for gaming venues.

Necessary Building Blocks for Any Video System
In order to better compare the various options, it’s important to understand the building blocks of a digital video system — whether it be analog, digital or somewhere in between. This is easier than ever, since the various types of systems have more in common than they have differences. In fact, the basic system architecture is identical regardless of the type of system you select — once you’ve made the decision to eliminate VHS and incorporate digital recording as part of your system. (If you’re still considering VHS as an alternative, see the sidebar “5 Myths of VHS Debunked” below.)

There are five functional areas to any video system. For the purpose of illustration, we’ll compare these five areas to Lego® building blocks. You first must acquire a video image, usually with a camera. The image must then be encoded into a digital format and stored on a hard drive. There must be a means to retrieve the video image for playback or live viewing, and finally a means to display, or view, the image on a monitor. These functions are universal regardless of the type of system used; the only difference, believe it or not, is in the packaging.

Systems that incorporate IP-based cameras package the first two Legos in the camera, using it to acquire and encode the image. A server connected to the camera via an Ethernet network provides the storage, while a client computer allows retrieval and viewing of a video image. These systems often incorporate an additional “black box” that can be sent a video stream through a controller and display it on a monitor, completing the picture.

When all of the pieces are assembled, this type of system is a complete recording solution that is also called a “virtual matrix.” It is called this because it incorporates the functionality of an analog matrix switch but does not require the cabling or hardware that is usually associated with such systems.

While this type of system generates the most “buzz” on the market, most gaming professionals who have carefully examined such systems agree they are totally inappropriate for gaming. The video switching from camera to camera is slow, often as long as a second or two, while analog systems switch between cameras in a few thousandths of a second. Likewise, the control of cameras is difficult because there is a lag, called latency, between when the operator moves the joystick and when the camera moves. All systems have some latency — it takes time for a signal to get from your joystick to a camera that can be thousands of feet away — but, again, it is much greater with IP-based systems.

It is unlikely to find an analog system with more than 40 milliseconds (thousandths of a second) of latency, while the best IP-based system is around 150 milliseconds. This translates to overshooting your target when panning a camera around the casino or across a gaming table, and a surveillance operator is unlikely to be comfortable with that amount of lag time.

This is, for the most part, a casino industry-specific problem. Clients in other industries are perfectly happy with IP-based systems and virtual matrixes. The delay is a function of the processing required to convert digital data into “packets,” transport it across an Ethernet network and reassemble it at the other end.

Other side effects can include dropped frames, stuttering image and an inexplicable loss of quality because of network traffic. Virtual matrixes may have the functionality of real analog matrix switches, but they do not currently enjoy the level of performance inherent in their real-world counterparts.

The Hybrid Solution: Splitting Video Between 2 Systems
Many gaming clients are finding the answer to the performance issues inherent with pure IP-based systems by utilizing a mix of analog and digital technologies, in essence creating a hybrid system. While this essentially involves splitting the video signal between two systems, there are inherent advantages to doing this and few (if any) disadvantages.

First, let’s look at the signal flow. We’ll still use the same Lego blocks, only now the camera will be a standalone unit that outputs analog video. That signal can be run back to a central point or sent to several “nodes” around a facility, but it will remain analog until it reaches its destination. Before we move to the next link in the signal chain, let’s look at the advantages to doing this.

An IP camera with a built-in encoder outputs an Ethernet signal that can only be run 100 meters, or about 340 feet. Distances greater than this require a network switch or other means of regenerating the signal, or a fiber-optic connection. Coupled with the higher cost of IP cameras (they cost more because of the built-in encoder), you are starting out with a tremendous cost disadvantage. There must be closets or junction points throughout a facility, and there is a lot more equipment to break, degrade the signal, or add noise or latency between the camera and the control room.

An analog camera is less expensive, smaller and available in a wider variety of configurations. You can mix and match brands without worrying about software problems, and you can still use inexpensive and ubiquitous Cat-5e cable to connect the camera to the control room. With analog cameras and unshielded twisted-pair (UTP) adaptors, you can run the signal as far as 6,000 feet, or roughly 20 times the distance of an IP camera, without passing it through any additional boxes.

Once the camera reaches its destination, it is fed to both an encoder and an analog matrix switch. While the signal may go to one system and loop out to the second system, an appealing design option, for reasons described a little later, is to split it using a video distribution amplifier. This distribution amplifier can be either a standalone unit or a part of the UTP hub that converts the signal back from twisted pair to coaxial cable.

Each camera now feeds two systems, one for high performance viewing and the other that provides recording and lower performance viewing, due to the latency described earlier. Since the high performance viewing is only required on a small number of monitors, it is relatively inexpensive. Those familiar with analog matrix switches know that inputs are relatively inexpensive, while outputs are costly in terms of price and physical rack space.

A large casino with a half-dozen operators can often get by with a 16-output matrix switch, while the largest casinos may only require 32 outputs — more if some of the fail-safe redundancies that are described in the next section are required. Either way, this less expensive matrix is not significant in overall system cost, and the savings promised by a virtual matrix simply aren’t there unless you are talking about eliminating a giant matrix switch used to control banks of monitors in a video wall.

What about those banks of monitors? We’ve all seen casino control rooms and we know that keeping an eye on a number of areas is critical. Here’s where the system truly becomes a hybrid.

That digital virtual matrix system we just finished tearing apart is perfect for video walls, offices and other areas that do not perform critical, time-intensive camera control or switching. Workstations or decoders can be used to drive projection screens, LCD displays or other video walls, and can do so far more cost effectively than a matrix switch. This design is appropriate for projects other than casinos. Hybrid Systems Provide Inherent Fail-Safe Redundancies
The two separate systems also provide several fail-safe redundancies that can make the difference between closing a casino during an equipment failure and keeping the money flowing. First and foremost, they can back each other up. If the analog matrix fails, the virtual matrix will be good enough to get by until things can be repaired.

Likewise, a failure of the digital system, resulting in even downtime for maintenance, will not affect live viewing of images. In fact, one system design incorporates additional matrix outputs that can shunt video signals to a backup encoder/server/storage combination automatically in the event of a server failure. Monitor outputs can also be recorded, ensuring that anything important enough to be viewed live is recorded in two separate places.

While these are two separate and distinct systems, they don’t have to act that way. Manufacturers such as Honeywell and Pelco offer systems that incorporate keyboards capable of seamlessly controlling both systems, making the analog/digital divide seamless. Other manufacturers offer this functionality as well, and the combination of both technologies is truly greater than the sum of their parts.

A Balanced System Is the Best Alternative
When looking at all of the advantages of hybrid systems for gaming specific applications, it is difficult to envision why a casino would opt to select a pure IP-based solution. While that technology is perfect for some applications, gaming surveillance has unique performance requirements.

Manufacturers or integrators that push or recommend inappropriate technologies for the gaming market do so at their own peril. And casinos that fall victim to these sales pitches can easily pay a lot more for lower performance. This is a case where the right system design costs less and works better than the alternative — a “win-win” situation on or off the gaming floor.

5 Myths of VHS Debunked

Here are the top five reasons an end user may want to keep VHS, and the responses you will need to explode these myths.

1) There are too many incompatible digital standards. VHS is universal. DVD is the universal digital standard. Get an inexpensive DVD burner or authoring software and burn your video clips to the consumer DVD playback format. They’ll look great and will play back on a DVD player that can now be purchased at your local supermarket for under $30.

2) Digital costs too much. True, the digital return on investment (ROI) is tough to justify. Timesavings can be a factor and searches that take days on VHS can take seconds on digital. Tape changes are a thing of the past. There are no recurring tape costs — you did replenish your VHS tape stock periodically, didn’t you? In addition, there are features available on digital systems (random access, integration with other systems and ease of copying) that simply are not available on VHS. If you’re looking strictly at acquisition cost, tape may be cheaper, but sooner or later you’ll be forced to go digital. VHS is going away.

3) Tape is more reliable. This may have been true at one time, but digital systems have come a long way. RAID-5s (random array of independent drives) are commonplace, preventing data loss and providing a means for swapping out hard drives while the system continues to run. A jammed or overused VHS tape is often unrecoverable, while digital data can often be revived in even the worst scenarios.

4) Tape looks better. Again, this may have been true at one time, but not today. While it is true that you can degrade the performance of a digital system to make it look worse than tape — high compression, low resolution, low frame rate — it can also look crystal-clear and is no longer the weakest link in the signal chain. If you have not seen terrific digital image quality, you have not looked at enough systems.

5) Courts don’t accept digital recordings as evidence. Again, not true. While we’re not lawyers, talk to one before reciting this opinion. They’ll likely tell you that it is chain of custody that matters when considering evidence, not the type of media. Defense lawyers can argue otherwise, but that is what they are hired to do.

How Evolution of Video Has Affected the Gaming Industry

The gaming industry has really gone full circle when it comes to adding cameras. When many of you first started working with CCTV, cameras were very pricey. Some of you go back as far as $1,000 fixed cameras, but many more probably remember $3,000 pan/tilt/zoom (p/t/z) cameras and expensive lenses, mounting hardware and the cost of maintaining the equipment. Coverage was costly, and a good VCR was an investment to be weighed carefully. Each camera required its own VCR — a quad could be used to allow four cameras to be connected to a VCR, but that was a poor second choice for gaming applications that were reserved for back-of-house or other nongaming areas.

With the passage of time, costs have come down dramatically. A good midrange p/t/z can be purchased for less than $1,000 — sometimes much less — and while there are different varieties of fixed cameras, there are a lot to choose from starting below $100. During the VHS heyday, recording was relatively inexpensive as well. Add a multiplexer to allow up to 16 nongaming cameras to a VCR, or go with a VCR per camera if you’d like.

Consumer units worked well for many casinos and the cost per VCR dropped below $300, making the hardware cost for a gaming p/t/z camera less than $2,000 in many cases, often including installation (half of what many were paying several years earlier).

Unfortunately, digital has changed that for the worse. While camera costs remain low, the cost for recording each camera has skyrocketed. In gaming applications, the cost to record a camera has grown from less than $300 in the VCR days to more than $3,000 per camera in many cases. While cheaper alternatives exist, casinos that are using encoders, servers, RAIDs (random array of independent disks) and the associated cooling and UPS (uninterrupted power supply) subsystems are paying dearly for the coverage.

Moreover, while hard drive prices continue to decline, customers are not really pocketing the savings. Instead, they are opting for higher resolution — 4CIF in gaming applications — longer storage time and improving system performance.

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

Most consultants, integrators and other professionals involvedwithlarge-scale security projects tend to develop a sixth sense. We learnto pinpoint problems in the early going and then formulate thenecessary adjustments to be successful.

This added sensitivity is important to us, as it occasionallyhelpsus identify those projects that are doomed from the start. Since thesurvival of your business is often dependent on the success of yourprojects, it is important to recognize and embrace your “gutinstinct.”

Far more uncommon is the project that incites a gut feelingfrom theget-go that success is inevitable. Indeed, it is rare to find a jobthat has the necessary backing from upper management, openness to newtechnology, and a well-defined process for project planning,procurement and rapid problem resolution.

The video surveillance installation at Odawa Casino, locatednearthe waters of Lake Michigan in Petoskey, Mich., was such a project. Thedesign included two control rooms and auxiliary monitoring locations,encompassing a new casino, parking structure, special events area and aremote waste water treatment plant. All of it secured with fullintegration between video, access control and other gaming systems.While I’d like to say I was pleasantly surprised, all of usinvolved with this project genuinely knew it would succeed from thestart.

Success Begins With Adoption of ‘QualificationsSelection’ Process
In large part, the project’s expected triumphwas due tothe tribe’s embracement of the Qualifications-Based Selection(QBS) process, according to Kevin Kane, an owner’srepresentativefor the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians (LTBB), whichoperates the gaming resort.

“This is a nationwide program that is based onprequalifyingvendors, interviewing where necessary and then negotiatingfees,”Kane says. “This allowed us to select vendors with a proventrackrecord and the skills needed for us to succeed, while still meeting ourcost and budgetary objectives. In fact, the entire project finished notonly on time, which is not uncommon for casino projects, but underbudget, which is certainly the exception.”

Prior to designing the solution, and even before the projectgot offthe ground, the surveillance focus group was tasked with craftingsystem requirements to a rough order of magnitude and setting thebudget. This group — consisting of the tribe’s CFO,generalmanager, regulatory director, surveillance manager, surveillance leadtechnician and owners’ representatives — had ageneral ideaof what they needed the system to perform. They desired a wall of videomonitors that would display numerous cameras simultaneously, plusoperator stations free of distractions and enough room to workeffectively and comfortably.

“We are thankful to be working for a tribe that hasvision andwanted to make sure that our part of the puzzle fit into theirpicture,” says Vince Cook, regulatory director for LTBB.

Tribe Prepares for GamingFuture Informed by Past Experiences
The members of LTBB were no strangers to analog anddigitalvideo. Prior to the Odawa Casino project they owned and operated thenearby Victories Casino with its 16 gaming tables and 1,100 slotmachines, plus restaurants, a bar and other amenities. The tribe hadalready upgraded its analog recording solution to a NiceVision Pro 200Series DVR system. The old facility also had a Pelco matrix switch andmore than 300 cameras from various manufacturers, both fixed andpan/tilt/zoom (p/t/z) models.

“Our system had grown through evolution,” explainsLTBB’s surveillance manager Tom Gould. “We knewthat thenew facility would allow us to make a fresh start, both from atechnical and an operational perspective, and we were looking forwardto applying what we have learned over the years.”

One of the things they had learned was they did not want to goitalone; a consultant would be essential to the new project. The newfacility — with about 50,000–square feet of gamingfloorspace — would be much bigger, including 1,500 slots, 30tables, aspecial events area, more amenities and considerable room for growth.The camera coverage would also be greatly enhanced, with roughly 800cameras, more operators and a great deal more technology to manage theoperation. As part of the product and vendor selection process, thetribe first needed to find the right consultant to guide them.

“We wanted someone who could look at our needs andexpectations and guide us in making choices,” explains Kane.Oneexample: the existing system had a video wall, consisting of a bank ofmonitors, all individually controlled through the matrix switchingsystem. While this allowed for real-time video refresh on each screen,it would not provide much operational flexibility, was expensive toimplement (a much larger matrix switch would have been required), andwould have consumed substantial space in the room.

The final design included front projection of video images fedthrough the digital side of the system, thereby reducing cost andadding the ability to dynamically resize images as needed, depending onwhat transpired in the facility at the time. “The decision toputvideo quality on the desk rather than on the wall was the right one forour application, but we probably wouldn’t have come up withthaton our own,” Kane says.

Potential Consultants Solicited by ‘Request forQualifications’
Once the project had received all of the necessaryapprovals, a”Request for Qualifications” document was sent outto anumber of prospective vendors. To save time and maximize participation,the document was sent to consultants, manufacturers and integrators. Itclearly stated the needed qualifications for each group. As aconsulting firm, for example, we had to certify we did not”manufacture, furnish or install such systems and‘our firmdoes not’ have any affiliation with any surveillanceequipmentmanufacturers or surveillance integrators.”

Similar restrictions were placed on other trades, whilequestionswere designed to reveal as much as possible without requiringrespondents to jump through hoops, as can often be the case (see side bar).

I was impressed with the initial interview, as were many oftheother consultants and vendors selected for different areas of theproject. The focus was on building a team based on capabilities andexperience, not the strength of a PowerPoint^™ presentation.Kaneinstructed me (and other vendors) to keep it short and to the point,and to “leave the marketing folks at home.”

Installation Begins toTake Shape; Integration Capability an Emphasis
Once I was on board, we reviewed the design process todate. Inthe head-end area, we left raised computer flooring in the rack roomand extended it to the adjacent technician’s shop. This wouldallow us to move the technician to another location in the future, ifneeded, and expand the rack room. We eliminated the raised floor in thesurveillance room, and instead opted for two-foot-wide trenches runningfrom the rack room to the operator and supervisor consoles. The Winstedconsole we selected features an integral cable management system thatwe used for console wiring, which also offered some costsavings.

Expansion was a critical factor as well. It is not uncommonforcasinos to grow and expand far beyond their initial footprint and wewanted to be prepared. The initial system design called for roughly 800inputs, so we sized the racking and infrastructure to support more thanthree times that number, or 2,500 cameras.

Our firm calculates HVAC and power requirements as part ofthedesign process, so we provided this in two phases — initialsystem size and expanded size. It was decided to size the UPS systemfor the expanded capacity, but only purchase batteries for the firstphase. This eliminated the high cost of purchasing more batterycapacity than was initially required, since batteries are aconsumable.

We also provided two areas for video review outside of thecommandcenter. Access to the monitor room was to be extremely restricted, sofunctions that would normally be done in the room at a supervisorconsole were moved to remote monitoring consoles. One was located in acommon area of the surveillance suite, while the second was placed in aconference room. This allowed both semi-private and private viewing, asaccess to the surveillance suite is limited as well.

Most casinos divide video monitoring into two areas: theheavilyregulated surveillance department tasked with monitoring the gamingfloor and any money handling areas (including the passage of money intoand out of the facility). The security department monitors all otherareas including roadways and parking lots. A second command center wasdesigned for security, but it was considerably different from thesurveillance console in that it could accommodate more rack mountedsecurity equipment as needed for future growth.

The two monitoring consoles and third security console serveda dualrole. If there was ever a system failure or condition that made thesurveillance room uninhabitable, the operators could simply move to oneof the other consoles to resume their duties.

To accomplish this, we designed the system as a single largesystemthat was partitioned in such a way to limit access based on passwordsand job functionality. In this manner, the security operator would nothave access to call-up or control a gaming camera, but a surveillanceoperator, with access to all cameras, could send a gaming camera to amonitor in security. This allows a person with more restrictive systemaccess to view an important image they wouldn’t normally beableto see.

On the software side, we focused on integration capabilities.Weprovided for full integration between access control and CCTV (fairlystandard in high-end installations), but also provided forcommunication between a variety of subsystems such as slot datasystems, cash registers, casino marketing cards and slot cash vouchersystems. Also included was audio recording from a variety of sourcesand in selected areas as required by tribal and National Indian GamingCommission (NIGC) regulations.

“Working with a consultant [throughout the designprocess]really opened our eyes to the different technologies available tous,” says Cook. “We had previously focusedprimarily oncoverage and video quality, and there were things like automatic cameracall up on alarms that we just hadn’t thought of. Addingthesefeatures and capabilities has put us light years ahead of where we werebefore, and our being a part of the design process, from start tofinish, has been a huge help.”
Video, Access ControlVendors Ease Expansion, Offer Flexibility
Once the design parameters were fleshed out, it becameimportantto select a manufacturer. Doing so would simplify the bidding processby allowing us to work with a manufacturer to fine-tune the systemdesign, and make it easier to compare bids since all integrators wouldbe bidding the same functionality and essentially the same equipment.LTBB chose to go with a single manufacturer for as much of the CCTVsystem as possible. This would allow the tribe to focus on integrationwith other systems without worrying about integration between thevarious CCTV sub-systems.

After careful consideration of a number of full-linesuppliers,Clovis-Calif.-based Pelco was awarded the contract. Thetribe’sexperiences with Pelco equipment had been extremely positive. Thedecision offered the advantage to reuse some of the Pelco equipment(such as matrix switch cages, keyboards and p/t/z domes) for expansionof the system at Odawa when the Victories Casino closed. Otherequipment, including fixed cameras and the NiceVision recording system,was broken up into a series of smaller systems and utilized in othertribal properties where compatibility with the Odawa Casino systemwould not be a requirement.

The selection of an access control system was given carefulconsideration as well. That it had to integrate well with the Pelcosystem was a given, but there were other opportunities for blendedoperation. Access to other databases such as time and attendance, andeven cafeteria meal purchases, were added to the specification wishlist, as were hybrid cards with both proximity functionality andprinted bar codes to support legacy systems. Ultimately, Rochester,N.Y.-based Lenel was chosen as the access control manufacturer becauseof its flexibility and willingness to support all levels ofintegration.

Integrators Selected onFamiliarity With Equipment, Customer Service
Two separate integrators were selected for the project, inpartbecause of the timing of the system purchases. First up was the CCTVintegrator, American Video and Security (AVS). Based in Black Creek,Wis., AVS focuses on gaming and has done a lot of work with otherNative American casinos. The company is very familiar with Pelcosystems and had recently finished a gaming project for the NorthernLights Casino in Carter, Wis.

One aspect that impressed LTBB about AVS was its long-termplan forcustomer satisfaction. As part of its proposal, AVS agreed to hire andtrain a local technician who would work on the project through theinstallation and remain on duty at AVS expense for a full year.”We’re a small company with big customers, and wefeel thatgoing the extra mile on service and support makes us stand out in acompetitive bid situation,” comments Rick Verbsky, presidentofAVS.

Access control was to be handled by Grand Rapids, Mich.-basedSecurAlarm Systems Inc. Gloria Lubben, executive vice president ofSecurAlarm, worked closely with us through the design process andprovided many enhancements to the system design based on their pastexperiences. “We are used to customers who require a greatdealof flexibility,” Lubben says. “This project allowedus topresent a variety of different options and truly customize the systemaround the specific project requirements.”

Point-to-Point SystemRequires More Cable, But Advantages Rule
One requirement of the system design was the recognitionof thefact that expansion was a given. While the head-end was appropriatelysized for growth, we felt it important to allow for the addition ofmore field devices without the need to constantly pull more cable.Casinos typically use analog video for live camera call-up to avoidlatency, with an integrated encoder/server-based digital recordingsystem for storage and retrieval of events. Since this requiredpoint-to-point wiring of cameras (instead of a networkedconfiguration), we designed a UTP-based system utilizing equipmentprovided by Nitek of Rolling Meadows, Ill.

This was one of a few exceptions to the “onemanufacturer” rule, and was largely due to the DIPswitch-baseddistance compensation design used on the Nitek hubs. With DIP switches,a failed hub or module can be quickly swapped out for another one bysimply matching up the switches. Units that use potentiometers tend torequire more extensive setup and drift over time, whileself-calibrating units never stop calibrating and can degrade the imageas they compensate for changes in the image that fool them intothinking the cable distance has changed. We also selected hubs withdual outputs, allowing us to route the video signal to both the matrixswitch and the digital video encoder without the use of a separatedistribution amplifier.

While a point-to-point system requires more cable than anetworkedsystem, it has other advantages that, in some applications, make itmore cost-effective and flexible. For one, we did not have to worryabout the cable distance limits inherent in Internet protocol(IP)-based video systems, and the use of 4-pair Cat-5e cable to eachcamera location allows three additional cameras to be added per cable(two if the camera is a p/t/z model, which use a pair of wire fordata).

Cameras were routed to one of two rack rooms on the casinolevel ordirectly back to the rack room, whichever was closer. An extensivepatching system based on “66 block” styleinterconnectionterminals and 25-pair Cat-5 cables allows for reconfiguration ofcameras in much the same manner a telephone system uses.

Separate power cables were used instead of conductors on theCat-5ecables to preserve the spare pairs for video expansion and allow thepossibility that future cameras might draw more current than the Cat-5ecable could support. While this flies in the face of convention—electronics equipment tends to get more efficient, not less —wehad some concerns that future cameras might incorporate features suchas higher resolution imagers, internal hard drives and video analytics.Therefore, we wanted to be prepared.

Camera selection is also a challenge in casinos. We werehelpedsomewhat by the fact that Pelco carries essentially two different linesof p/t/z dome cameras. The Spectra IV Series is well suited to lowerlight areas of the casino floor, where the wide dynamic range featurecompensates for huge differences in lighting, be it flashing slotmachine to shadows around the base of each machine. The wide range ofoptical magnification (35x) allows cameras to track people throughoutthe casino and image stabilization is a big help in certain areas aswell.

At the other end of the spectrum was the Spectra Mini. Thesecameras are not much bigger than fixed domes and feature 10x zoomlenses. Our firm had used them successfully in the close quarters of acruise ship casino and we specified them here in areas with lowerceilings where high magnification and low light response were not afactor. This allowed us to minimize the aesthetic impact of the domesin certain areas without compromising performance.

Changing Nature ofIndustry Evidenced During Installation
Throughout the installation process, the challenge of adjusting, movingand modifying cameras to accommodate varying lighting issues and otherdécor concerns was ongoing. While Dave Lucas of AVSexperimentedwith different positions, angles and lenses, his brother, Jim, handledthe software configuration and adjustments to the Pelco Endura digitalvideo system and 9780 matrix switch.

As cameras were brought online, each was titled on the matrixandadjusted for frame rate, resolution and storage time on the digitalsystem. Operators training on the system prior to opening saw thecamera count grow and were amazed at how good the video quality was,compared to what had been state-of-the-art just a few years ago.

As the casino construction progressed, no tradesman orconstructionworker could so much as adjust their clothing without the watchful eyeof surveillance upon them. While this was supplemented by formaltraining sessions, the real-time experience gained during constructionwas a tremendous help in acclimating people to the system.

One unforeseen problem with the cameras speaks to thechanging nature of our industry.

At one time, cameras were all synchronized to the 60Hz powerlinefrequency. By utilizing a camera’s vertical phasing (or”V-Phase”) feature, integrators were able to matchup allcameras in the system, eliminating the picture”roll” whenswitching from camera to camera. In practice, cameras were rarelyV-Phased, and customers rarely noticed a roll, but there was no harm incontinuing this proud tradition. However, projects that fully utilizeonline UPS power systems sometimes have slight timing problems and donot deliver precisely 60Hz power. This causes the video images oncertain cameras to orbit the screen, moving in a barely noticeableclockwise rotation.

The operators at Odawa noticed it immediately, however,proving thatthe quality of the tools we were providing for them was well deserved.While we were able to have the UPS calibrated to eliminate the problem,we went to internal sync on all the cameras to prevent this problemfrom recurring if the UPS ever drifts. Based on our experiences, wewill be calling for internal sync on future projects as a precautionand have recommended to manufacturers that they reconsider theirdefault setting.

Team Approach and a KeenEye for Problem-Solving Ensure Success
As the casino progressed through construction and aflawlessopening, there were the usual number of challenges, but none jumped outas opportunities for “lessons learned.” With adecisionprocess in place that allows for rapid, informed decisions, amanufacturer that is ready to jump in and help as needed, and twoexperienced integrators on the job, this project was a testament to thesuccess of the team approach.

But the final measure of performance is ultimately customersatisfaction. “In this case,” explains Kane,”we hada client who had suffered from unfulfilled expectations on previousprojects. Through our planning, processes, and attention to detail, wewere able to exceed their expectations. We created a showcase andraised the bar for future projects.”

I’m sure I speak for the entire team when I say I’mlooking forward to the next one.

Redundancy Relied on for Fail-Safe Protection

The critical nature of the video surveillance solution at theOdawaCasino in Petoskey, Mich., made safeguards essential. As muchredundancy as possible was built into the system. In addition to theitems mentioned in the case study article beginning on page 70, such asdual output UTP hubs that feed digital and analog systems separately,there were many areas where redundancy ruled. These include:

Camera powersupplies— No two adjacent cameras are fed from the same multidroppowersupply. This ensures that a power supply failure, however unlikely,will not shut down an entire area, and is a design requirement weadopted for all of our projects based on work we do for the USPS.

Digital data redundancy— In addition to the server-based redundancy offered byredundantarrays of independent disks (RAID)-5 hard drive configuration, weprovided a spare set of Pelco Endura encoders and servers. If a serveror encoder fails, the analog matrix switch will automatically switchthe cameras to a spare encoder, server and RAID. This also allows forserver maintenance without the loss of data.

Hardwareredundancy —All servers have dual redundant power supplies, and each power supplyis fed from a different circuit breaker. A spare CPU is included withthe Pelco 9780 matrix switch to take over in case of failure.

Master evidenceserver— All video clips that are pulled out of the overwriterotationare saved on a master evidence server located in the rack room. Asecond master evidence server, also featuring RAID-5 redundancy, islocated in a separate building and backs up clips stored on the masterevidence server every 15 minutes.

Dual response to alarm events— Door alarms are handled by the access control panelsthroughthe access control server, which is connected to the matrix switchthrough a high level data interface. A second alarm path is providedthrough alarm contact closures that are fed through an alarm interfaceon the matrix. In this manner, if communications ever fail between theaccess control panels and the central CPU, alarms will still go through.

Detailed Program Used to Select Vendors for CasinoProject

An integral component to selecting vendors for the OdawaCasinoproject was the submitting of prequalification data in compliance withthe nationwide Qualifications-Based Selection (QBS) program.

Some of the questions were generic in nature, while othersdrilleddown into design philosophies and experience with other gaming andNative American projects. Questions included:

• Type of firm (surveillance equipment manufacturer,surveillance consultant or surveillance integrator)
• Background information about your firm and any otherpartners that would be involved
• Biographical information on the principals of the firm andthoseindividuals with your firm with whom we would be working with directly
• List the gaming licenses currently or previously held byyour firm and the reason, if any, of those licenses are not current
• Verify if your firm is a Little Traverse Bay Bands of OdawaIndians (LTBB) licensed contractor or if there is any issue in being aLTBB licensed contractor
• State the level of experience your firm has in working withalltribes and the current and past relationships with any Michigan tribe
• References of tribal organizations that you have providedservices; include the contact information for the appropriateindividuals
• List the digital surveillance systems your firm has inplace, including the size, location and contact information
• Address your firm’s approach and schedule byanswering howyou: develop cutting-edge technologies and virtual matrix systems;integrate existing digital surveillance systems to your digitalsurveillance systems; offer service and support during installation,startup and over the life of the system
• Other information you feel is pertinent to our selectionprocess

A confidentiality agreement was also required for the Odawaproject,and the format to be used in the response was not specified. Thisallowed LTBB to evaluate the care each prospective vendor took inpreparing its answers, proving that no matter how old you get, spellingstill counts!

Copyright © 2009 Security Sales & Integration. All rights reserved. All material on this site including but not limited to images and text may not be duplicated, reproduced, redistributed or re-transmitted in any form without the express written permission of Security Sales & Integration.

Click Here to download this article in PDF Format

As a consulting company that often works with hospitals, schools and universities, our goal is to get as many qualified integrators so the process of bidding on a safety and security project is competitive and the quality level will be roughly comparable, regardless of the vendor selected.
On some projects this may be out of a campus’ or our hands. Projects that involve government dollars typically advertise, wait for responses, and evaluate them according to fairly rigid criteria. While hospital, school and university officials as well as their consultants can make some phone calls to ensure selected integrators know a project is advertised so they can respond on their own, the quantity and quality of responses is often left to chance.
Other projects task the consultant or campus official with filling a bid list, ensuring there is sufficient participation. When consultants do this, we’re representing to our campus clients that we will be able to provide them with a minimum of three thorough, competitive bids on the specified project and we’ll be able to make a recommendation from those choices.
Further, our recommended bidder will be able to complete the project as a bid, make everyone happy, and earn a reasonable profit. That last item is critical; if the integrator doesn’t make a profit on its jobs, it may not be able to stay in business long enough to support the project through the warranty period.
As a result, this bid list is a fairly serious undertaking, and as consultants we spend a lot of time working with integrators to ensure we’ll get participation on projects. Since we’re asked about this topic so frequently, I thought we’d share some of the steps we take to qualify integrators and ensure competitive bids.

Be Selective With Those You Put on Your Bid List
Keeping in mind that any integrator placed on a bid list has a chance of winning the job, we don’t want to just throw any name in the ring. If an integrator is selected for the job, you are stuck with them, so give as much thought to the bid list as you do to the final selection (see sidebar).
If you are unable to come up with enough prospective bidders to fill your list, asking for recommendations from manufacturers is often an excellent alternative. This works best when you have already selected a manufacturer, but if you haven’t settled on one, be sure to compare notes. An integrator that is on top of two manufacturers’ lists is generally a good candidate, although it would be rare to find the same company on three lists.
It’s important to get manufacturer recommendations in writing, as they can also be referred to as a “get-out-of-jail-free card.” If the integrator fails in the execution of your project, the manufacturer will generally step up to the plate and see the job through if your selection of the integrator was based in part on its referral.

Many Security Contractors Should Participate
Once you’ve filled your bid list, you need to ensure that as many integrators participate as possible. You do this first by providing a brief description of the project, including your best estimate of the time frame involved, and asking them if they’d be willing to bid on the job.

Bidding on a project is very time consuming and costly if done right, and your project may not interest everyone. Don’t take this personally; there are lots of legitimate reasons why an integrator might turn down a bid request, including workload, unfamiliarity with the specified product, or projects that fall outside its comfort zone. Integrators want to bid on jobs they feel they have a good chance of winning. If they don’t feel they have the right experience for a project and have a lot of other proposals on which they are working, they will likely pass.

Above all, integrators want a level playing field. If you have written a specification or had a consultant write it for you, you are generally in the clear. This is not the case if you’ve had help from another integrator. Many claim to have independent consulting divisions, and if that’s the case, have them put their money where their mouth is; tell them if they design the system, they are not eligible to bid on it. Even with that safeguard, other potential bidders may shy away — no one wants their competitor looking at how they bid and price projects. If the project is a design-build, let each integrator come up with its own design; don’t play favorites.

Registering All Bidders Ensures Clarity
When a campus’ bid has been issued, it is important bidders are asked to register. We’ve found we have had to turn this from an optional to a mandatory process. We tell them that if they don’t register, their bid will not be considered. This is critical because you want to be certain all bidders get the same information. If they don’t register, we’re not sure the answers are getting to the right people. If a bidder does not register, ask for your package back; you don’t want details of your security project circulating any more than necessary.

Once registered, bidders may submit questions in writing. Answers to these questions are sent to all registered bidders throughout the bidding process, as are any changes, clarifications or other pertinent documents. As consultants, we answer questions as quickly as we can.

We understand that the integrator is putting a lot of time and effort into preparing the bid package, and we want to make the process as painless as possible. By delaying a response, we’re concerned the integrator will be up against a deadline and will either throw a high dollar number at the item in question, or decide not to bid because of the uncertainties.

As a side note, some folks lose sight of the goal in the competitive bid process. We feel that if there’s one clear winner, we haven’t done our job as a consultant. A campus’ goal should be to obtain a good number of competitive bids, where all bidders understand the project, provide pricing that is in the same ballpark, and fill you with confidence that they can get the job done. This allows you to look at other factors — experience with similar projects, service and support capabilities, reputation, and understanding of the products, rather than just price.

Many projects benefit from a prebid meeting where all prospective bidders gather for a project review. This is an opportunity to go over any areas of the specification that might cause confusion, answer any questions, and walk through the jobsite to get a feeling as to the physical conditions and work environment. Attendance at the prebid meeting is often mandatory, but this depends on the complexity of the project and the proximity of the bidders. Make sure a published record of items discussed is sent to all attendees.

Pay particular attention to the questions you get at the meeting and through the RFI process. You’ll quickly learn who has read the spec, who understands the requirement, and who is just going through the motions. These are good indicators of the competence of the prospective integrators, but keep from making snap judgments. Remember, the person preparing the bid is rarely the one who installs the system.

At the end of the Q&A, send out a composite list of all questions and answers. This ensures any late registrants are brought up to speed and provides a reminder of the issues that may be tricky or vague in the specification. Ask that all recipients acknowledge they have read, understood and responded to these questions as part of their bid package. The simple act of doing this can dramatically reduce the number (and cost) of change orders if you pick a low bidder that is low because someone in the firm doesn’t remember getting your clarifications.

Properly Evaluate All Prospective Integrators
On opening day, we tell our clients to rip open the packages, ignore all of the carefully prepared material, and go right to the bottom line price. Why? Because everyone does it anyway. Once that is out of the way, we can focus on a proper bid evaluation. There are a few ways to do this, and the method you use might depend on your internal policies or purchasing requirements.

Hopefully this process will lead you to a clear choice or at least a rich field from which to choose. If not, take a close look at the specification, including any onerous terms you may have proposed, and consider rebidding the package with some of these restrictions modified. If time is an element, a negotiated price is another good option. Whatever you choose, keep in mind that ethics play a greater part in today’s society than ever before. If you’re the one tasked with selecting the winning bidder, hold off on buying that new sports car until well after the selection process — better safe than sorry!

Click Here to Download this Article in PDF Format

Now more affordable than ever, UPS units have become an essential piece of equipment in myriad settings, from large data centers to home entertainment systems. But nowhere is a UPS application more essential than for security. In a day and age when most products incorporate microprocessors and, therefore, require boot-up time, UPS units have become even more critical. Consider a half-second loss of power to a system could easily result in a reset time of several minutes or longer – an unacceptable episode for equipment that requires 100-percent uptime, such as surveillance cameras and access control systems.

While UPS systems are designed and specified differently depending on the manufacturer, there are some commonly accepted guidelines that, for the most part, apply to all. I’ll do my best to address the most common questions here in a question-and-answer format.

Q. What equipment should use a UPS?
A. In the event of a power sag or outage, a UPS functions to reduce the chance of equipment damage or time delay for rebooting. Any equipment that fits into this category clearly needs to be protected.

A secondary category is equipment that requires 100-percent uptime, such as surveillance cameras, access control systems and other electrical devices that cannot be manually operated during an extended power failure.

The third equipment category often receives less consideration, but can be no less vital: ensure that you have a UPS on accessory devices that will be needed during a power outage. These include rack service lights, keyboard-video-mouse (KVM) switches, cordless telephones and similar devices.

Q. How are UPS sizes determined?
A. A UPS system is sized by two determining factors: runtime and load rating. The latter figure often receives the most attention because it represents the amount of power the UPS is designed to supply. A good rule of thumb here: the UPS should provide an amount 25-percent greater than the cumulative power requirements of the attached equipment.

The significance of the runtime figure must not be misjudged. This rating determines how many minutes the UPS will continue to provide power at full load to the connected equipment. If an 800 volt-amps (VA) UPS has a runtime of 15 minutes, and a longer runtime is required, operate it at half load to almost double the runtime.

Q. How much runtime is required?
A. Most power brownouts last a few seconds or less, so a UPS with limited runtime is perfectly suitable for applications in similar periods of reduced voltage. However, the runtime on a UPS should be specified either to exceed the worst-case downtime or to allow the orderly shutdown of attached equipment.

If your facility has a generator, the UPS need only bridge the gap between the loss of utility power and the availability of generator power. In event of power loss, modern generators are able to come online in a matter of a few seconds. Older equipment can take up to 10 minutes or longer to kick in if the generator isn’t well maintained.

To be most prudent, figure 20 minutes of runtime at a minimum – no matter how modern the generator. Thirty minutes is good for older generators. And if the unit can’t be brought online in half an hour, chances are your system will be shutting down.

Note that too much runtime isn’t practical. It will increase the cost of the UPS system exponentially, add size and heat, and won’t likely give you a tangible benefit. Why? Because most power drops are extremely short in duration. There will be more batteries to test and maintain, and the maintenance expense will be significantly higher than a UPS that has been sized correctly.

Q. My equipment says watts, but my UPS says VA. Are they the same?
A. No, and this is a major issue when deploying a UPS. To calculate the wattage (W) rating of a UPS, manufacturers multiply the VA rating with a “power factor” or the actual amount of power drawn by the equipment. So, a 1,000VA UPS specified with a factor of .8 will deliver 800W, while a similarly specified UPS with a power factor of 1 will deliver 1,000W, both at the rated runtime.

Since UPS factors can range from .66 to 1 (modern computers can be as high as 0.97), disregard the VA rating and focus on watts. If you can’t find the wattage rating, contact the manufacturer or move on to another unit.

For the complete version of this story, see the November issue of Security Sales & Integration magazine.

Copyright © 2009 Security Sales & Integration. All rights reserved. All material on this site including but not limited to images and text may not be duplicated, reproduced, redistributed or re-transmitted in any form without the express written permission of Security Sales & Integration.

Click Here to Download this Article in PDF Format

With this story, we had the unique opportunity to involve the reader in the project — not just as an observer, but also as a participant. The author was truly an “insider,” with more than 14 years of experience working with Mystic Lake Casino Hotel and the adjacent Little Six Casino, in Prior Lake, Minn., as a trusted advisor, team member, and friend. He is describing events that he helped shape, and the only way to effectively do that is by telling the story in the first person.

When it became a federally recognized tribe, the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (SMSC) gained the right of self-determination and self-sufficiency. Most importantly, it gained the right to the dignity that comes with sovereignty.

For that reason, SMSC bears a burden of responsibility when it comes to protecting the patrons at its casinos and the assets those gaming facilities bring to the tribe. That was the thinking behind SMSC’s recent renovation of the video surveillance and access control system serving its Mystic Lake Casino Hotel and Little Six Casino facilities in Prior Lake, Minn.

“Integrity is the lifeblood of a gaming facility such as ours,” says Scott Scepaniak, corporate compliance officer for the SMSC Gaming Enterprise, which oversees gaming operations at the two facilities. “If we expect our patrons to maintain confidence in our games, we need to maintain the highest possible standards. By protecting our customers and our owners — the tribal community — we protect our reputation and our future.”

Sovereignty Puts More Responsibility on Security

When the federal government formally recognized SMSC as an Indian tribe under federal reservation status in 1969, it marked the beginning of a new era. The Minnesota and Mississippi River Valleys had been home to the Dakota Indians for centuries, but it had been a history filled with conflicts and broken treaties.

In 1982, Tribal Chairman Norman Crooks brought Indian gaming to Minnesota with the opening of the Little Six High Stakes bingo parlor. After the passage of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), Little Six expanded in 1988 with slot machines and blackjack, becoming Little Six Casino.

Four years later, a second casino complex was opened roughly a mile down the road named Mystic Lake. The “Mdewakanton” portion of the tribal name translates to “Dwellers of Spirit Lake” or “Mystic Lake.” The facility has grown to include 4,250 slot machines, 100 blackjack tables, 600 hotel rooms, five restaurants, a star-caliber showroom and the high-stakes bingo that gave the place its start.

Self-sufficiency was not easy and the tribe takes its sovereignty, and its security, seriously.

What had started out as a state-of-the-art video security system when the facility was built was starting to show its age.

Richard Thake, director of surveillance, and James Arsenault, surveillance technical supervisor, had long been tasked with running the day-to-day video surveillance operations. The two had been evaluating digital video systems since 1999 and saw first-hand the tremendous increases in video quality, reliability and operational features.

At the same time, they were well aware of the downward trend in pricing — as hard drives and computer equipment became less costly — and the penalties sometimes paid by companies that adopted technologies too early. While they were anxious to incorporate the features that a digital recording system could bring, timing was everything.

Tribal Community Weighs Cost of Digital CCTV System

While the upper management team and the SMSC Board of Directors had always been very proactive when it came to surveillance and security, the dollar amount gave cause for concern for Scepaniak, who is responsible for surveillance, security and internal audits of SMSC’s gaming facilities.

“We were looking at a $10 million budget, including the system and associated costs such as room construction, power, HVAC, and all the other incidentals,” Scepaniak says.

Instead of shooting the idea down, however, he found an audience that was very receptive and not afraid to make the investment.

In fact, SMSC management tasked Scepaniak and his team to expand the design to include future growth, as well as video monitoring of other community operations.

The determination to invest the resources for a state-of-the-art digital system is consistent with the commitment and emphasis on regulatory compliance by the community and Gaming Enterprise.

Scope of Project Included Consolidation, Expansion

The expanded scope of the work began to take shape.

There would be two command centers — one for security and one for surveillance — but these would now function more like operation centers, tying in cameras from around the community. These included cameras from the three parking garages, the Little Six Casino, a new water treatment facility and various other buildings.

A third “muster room” would serve as an emergency gathering point in the event of a natural or manmade disaster. An unprecedented level of integration would be required, interconnecting video surveillance and recording into a host of other systems that included fire, intercom, building controls, access control, and various proprietary gaming systems.

All of this would be manned continuously by a staff of more than 40 security dispatchers, surveillance specialists, managers and supervisors — even a full-time departmental trainer to keep the team up to speed on the new technologies they would be using.

The natural assumption would have been for Mystic Lake staff to begin the process of planning and designing their system, issuing the request for proposal (RFP), selecting a vendor, and moving the project along. With very few exceptions, this was how projects were handled at Mystic Lake. After all, they had a five-person technical crew led by Arsenault.

Thake and the surveillance team knew exactly what they wanted to accomplish and they had the full support of upper management. What was holding them back.

For the first time since the property was built, Mystic Lake wanted to use the services of an electronic security consultant.

Another factor was the time involved. To plan and manage a project of this size would have taken their focus away from their primary operational responsibilities, and they were not willing to cut corners in either area.

So, a full two years before the project was substantially completed, I spoke with Thake about the project. I had recently started an independent design, project management and consulting company, and was already working on a project similar to Mystic Lake for the Foxwoods Casino Resort in Connecticut (profiled in the September 2004 issue of Security Sales & Integration).

Many of the items that were on the initial wish list never made it to the final system — the rear projection video wall, for example, exceeded our budget and space requirements — but all were carefully documented and considered.

(Check out my “Enterprising Solutions” column on page 24 of Security Sales & Integration magazine for more on the process of narrowing down the manufacturers and installers needed on the project.)

Mystic Lake Technicians Lay Groundwork for the Installation

Before we had officially signed a contract with the integrator, Mystic Lake’s technicians began closing in on the work that would be required for the transition.

The system requirement had grown somewhat since we started planning it, and the open inputs we had left on the new switch were rapidly being spoken for. Cable pathways had been run between the existing rack room and the new room, and video tie lines were put in place that would support the transition.

We were going to use as little coaxial cable as possible, since we were all believers in unshielded twisted-pair (UTP) technology, so 25-pair trunk lines were pulled for the 1,200 feet between the two rack rooms.

Nitek hubs and transmitters were used partly because of positive reports from other casinos such as Foxwoods, in addition to the stringent performance requirements that we had specified.

Nitek also allowed us to slightly customize its equipment without voiding the warranty. This permitted us to power an entire rack of 32-channel active hubs using a single Altronix rack-mounted power supply, instead of a pile of “wall-wart” type individual transformers.

Our transition plan called for us to move some equipment — primarily analog VCRs and multiplexers — from the existing racks into a temporary rack room. We would use those emptied racks for a portion of the new matrix switch and the video encoders for the new digital recording system. This equipment would be linked to the new room via UTP for video and fiber-optic cable for control data and TCP/IP video streams.

The new room would house the main portion of the new matrix switch, which would handle any new cameras added to the system, as well as the servers and storage arrays for the digital video streams. Once the new matrix was fully operational and debugged, the existing matrix would be removed and that rack space would be used for the remainder of the digital video encoders that would be required.

In order for this to happen, Mystic Lake’s technicians had to clear out the racks in the existing room to accommodate the new equipment. This wasn’t the kind of work that the technicians wanted to leave to someone else.

Advanced Planning Eased Ability to Deal With Changes

While the technicians were preparing for the installation, we headed out to Las Vegas in mid-September for a project review at Southwest Surveillance Systems’ headquarters.

In attendance were key people from Southwest, Honeywell, Mystic Lake’s Scepaniak and myself.

Three weeks later, construction began under the capable watch of Ron Woods, the on-site foreman, and Rick Schoenfeld, Southwest’s project manager. Vertical racks went into the new rack room almost immediately, with the console following a few weeks later.

The extensive planning paid off — all of the difficult decisions had already been made and we now had the luxury of customizing and improving things where it made sense.

The initial plan was for that facility to have its own matrix switch that would be a satellite system. It would be fully controlled from Mystic Lake, but would serve as a standalone system if the fiber-optic link between the two casinos were ever broken. There would also be encoders, servers and storage at Little Six, allowing independent operation in case of a problem.

As the project progressed, we realized that locating servers and storage at Little Six wasn’t necessary.

As soon as we realized this, we slipstreamed in a minor change: the servers and storage for Little Six would be moved to the new rack room at Mystic Lake. We would leave only encoders, the satellite matrix switch, a small control station for emergency use and some backup analog VCRs behind in case the link was ever cut.

Completed Control Room Had to Wait for Last Touches

Since December, the new control room had been largely completed, but could not yet be used.

Several tours had already been given and various executives had already sat in the operators’ chairs, but the system components were so interdependent that monitoring duties could not be cut over to the new room until the digital system was fully functional.

The new control room incorporated a video wall into each one of the 10 operator positions. Each operator would have control of a 10-foot diagonal screen with up to 16 individually switched images.

While we had avoided the fully digital system — opting for an analog portion for critical monitoring and camera control — the 160 switched outputs that would have been required to drive these screens from the matrix switch would have been cost, and space, prohibitive. Instead, each operator would have two analog call-up monitors in front of

them, with a digital workstation

controlling a third monitor and the video wall.

Since these images were coming from the digital side of the system, all of the encoders had to be installed for the video walls to work, and the room could not be used without them.

Removal of the Old Begins Start of New Security Era

In January, the final kinks were worked out of the new matrix switch. The old American Dynamics matrix that had served Mystic Lake so faithfully was removed, allowing the remaining encoders to be put into place.

This was the missing piece of the puzzle that would allow us to move the project to completion. The operators would now be moved into the new room and their existing control room would be disassembled and relocated to the new security command center. That, in turn, would allow security to move from their old control room to the new room, completing the control room portion of the project.

In the meantime, retention testing would begin in early February. Thirty days of perfect operation are required of the digital recording system before the analog (VHS) system can be demolished. At that point — likely by the time you’re reading this — the temporary rack room built to hold VCRs during the transition will be turned over to the construction department, as well as portions of the old rack room and the old control room.

Walls will be knocked down, floors tiled, and the new, expanded employee cafeteria will be born without a trace of the room’s previous incarnation.

The new control room is exciting in the possibilities that it brings. The digital era will allow surveillance specialists to conduct investigative reviews in minutes that previously took days or even weeks.

Hundreds of possible “scams” will be automatically brought to the specialist’s attention. Want to earn extra Players Club points by inserting “lost” cards into slot machines and waiting for an unsuspecting person to play them? No longer possible. Want to steal a pocketbook, or take a cup of coins that isn’t being watched closely enough? It can’t be done.

The most sophisticated surveillance system in the world is now the property of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community and $10 million says it will be doing its job until the next technological advance renders it obsolete.
Copyright © 2009 Security Sales & Integration. All rights reserved. All material on this site including but not limited to images and text may not be duplicated, reproduced, redistributed or re-transmitted in any form without the express written permission of Security Sales & Integration.

Click Here to Download this Article in PDF Format

One fear shared by many campus security professionals is that their electronic security system won’t work when they really need it. Recent headlines have shown the effectiveness of CCTV systems in catching terrorists, thieves and other criminals, but what about the fine print in so many other stories where the villain was simply “unrecognizable by the camera?”

Fortunately, this situation is preventable. Unfortunately, you’re probably not doing all you can to prevent it. Many organizations rely on audits to verify proper controls and procedures in their facilities. An inventory is a form of an audit, as is an accounting or compliance audit.

Many campuses now consider their CCTV system to be a critical part of their operation, so why not perform a regular review of that system as well? Given the advantages of such an audit, it’s surprising that this is not a more widespread — or even mandated — activity.

CCTV System Testing Is Subjective
It may be tempting to extend this concept to all electronic security systems in a facility. Certainly, the regular testing, adjustment and calibration of all of your systems is important. But it’s not likely these other systems will require a regular third-party audit for one simple reason — an alarm, intercom, access control or other related system does not have a subjective component. It is easy to define the perfect operation of these systems and ensure they live up to expectations.

CCTV, however, lends itself to more grey areas that benefit from another set of eyes and expertise to verify proper operation. Any audit worth its salt looks at two elements: 1) If the system is performing as mandated and 2) If improvement is needed, what can be done to improve performance.

Applying these concepts to our CCTV system audit, the System Audit Checklist table on this page shows a few examples of what should be examined, as well as typical opportunities for improvement in those areas.

What an Auditor Should Review
To sum it up, a campus needs to know three things:

System Functionality: This area can be broken down into the various subsystems, but the overall question is simple: Is everything working the way it should? Are images from cameras free of distortion and interference and sharply focused? Do pan/tilt/zoom (p/t/z) cameras move when told and, more importantly, stop moving on command as well? Are images recorded as needed, and can you play them back on demand (subject to the limitations of your system)?

While these may seem like common-sense questions, it is surprising how many operators learn to compensate for systems that have deteriorated through time. Sometimes an alternate camera is used, or an operator will wait until the subject gets closer to see if a suspect can be recognized.

Even common (and often easily fixed) electrical problems such as unstable images caused by poor equipment grounding can be ignored in much the same way a 12-year-old boy ignores the dirt on his eyeglasses. We tend to look through these problems, and a third-party audit will likely uncover issues that were well-known but long ignored.

System Performance: While system functionality evaluation determines whether or not the equipment is working, a system performance evaluation seeks to identify how well it is working, particularly for your specific application.

This type of evaluation will look beyond the quality of a camera image to determine the effectiveness of a camera in each particular location. Will adjustments, such as lens or equipment changes — or even repositioning — help increase usability and overall effectiveness?

Similarly, recording duration, frame rates and compression quality should be evaluated on digital video systems to see if you’re using the products effectively.

Preventative Maintenance: Along the way, an audit should identify elements of the system that may be prone to premature failure and make specific recommendations as to how they may be corrected.

Cable strain on connectors is very common, and a few well-placed cable ties or supporting bracketry can often be an inexpensive fix. If there were problems with the initial installation, or subsequent changes and modifications, recommendations here will give you the ammunition to ensure things are properly corrected.

Select an Independent Auditor

Perhaps the most difficult task in having a system audit performed is selecting the person to conduct the audit. There are a few criteria that must be observed to keep the process objective.

First and foremost, the auditor should have the skills and experience to perform the work. The systems we are talking about can be fairly complex, and you will need the person reviewing your system to know more about it than you do.

They should be in a position to recommend effective solutions and improvements and have experience with similar systems to bring to your application. Look for someone who is genuinely interested in improving your system, not just the paycheck, and insist they not be afraid to speak their mind.

Second, the auditor should have absolutely no financial stake in the outcome of the review. If they’re going to recommend a change, you want to be sure the change is needed and not a revenue-generating opportunity for their firm.

This is important even if you’re working with an excellent integrator who has a long history of collaboration and is looking out for your interests. If you are to use the results of this audit to justify investing in added equipment, you’ll be far better served bringing an independent evaluator’s opinion to the budget meeting rather than a quote from your integrator.

Unfortunately, the second criteria described above rules out most of the obvious choices, including integrators, your own employees and manufacturers. While there may be other options, the two that immediately come to mind are independent consultants and colleagues.

Using a colleague is an excellent choice, if you can find the right person, since the costs involved are minimal in most cases. This can be a trade-off relationship in which you’ll audit each other’s systems on a regular basis and, thus, derive equal benefit.

The challenge might be to find someone with sufficient expertise to perform a meaningful audit on your system and ensure that you know enough about their application to provide them with meaningful help as well. Still, when you consider the generic nature of video surveillance equipment and the number of systems that are likely within driving distance of your facility, with such a large pool to select from you should be able to find a few good candidates.

On the other hand, the right independent consultant fits all of the above criteria and can’t be accused of declaring a problem to generate more work or looking the other way to avoid hurting someone’s feelings. Their insurance will serve to provide some protection from liability, and they can be retained to perform the work on a recurring basis without you having to show up at their place to look at their system as well. They’re accustomed to writing effective reports on their findings and can check on any changes that you make as a result of their findings.

A CCTV Audit Can Be a Double-Edged Sword
The idea of a system audit may prove to be politically unpopular, and the louder the objections, the more likely it is needed. It will almost always uncover deficiencies in your system and will raise questions as to how things have been allowed to get this far.

If you’re confident in your operation and are prepared to implement reasonable changes that make business sense, it will be a welcome opportunity for improvement. However, if you believe the findings will be ignored and improvements will not be made, you may be better off skipping the process unless you’re prepared for the consequences.

For the complete version of this article, please refer to the January/February 2006 issue of Campus Safety Magazine.

Click Here to Download this Article in PDF Format