|
The Top 10 Myths about Network Video The IP-Surveillance solution shatters misperceptions surrounding networked video By Fredrik Nilsson, General Manager, Axis Communications U.S. Inc. |
||||
|
Myth #5: Network cameras cost more than analog cameras, making IP-Surveillance too expensive Reality: It's true a network camera is more expensive than a comparable analog camera because it includes considerably more functionality, such as digitization, image compression and intelligence. If we analyze the total cost of the hardware (cameras, cables, and recording), an IP-Surveillance system will usually compare quite favorably to a DVR-based system. If we then add the installation cost component, the advantages with the IP-Surveillance system become obvious since the IP-based infrastructure is considerably less expensive than analog coax cabling. In addition, systems using PTZ controls require extra cabling, something not needed with IP. Power over Ethernet is another cost-saving feature that saves on power lines and connects to uninterrupted power supplies at the IT center. In 2002, Axis completed a high-end installation in which 300 network cameras were deployed in a mission-critical high security area, with a high frame rate recording requirement. The total cost for installing the complete IP video surveillance system was $800,000, or $2,700 per channel. If a similar functioning, DVR-based system had been deployed, the cost was estimated at $1.8 million, or $6,000 per channel—more than twice the cost of the IP-Surveillance system. Myth
#6: |
|
||||
To
download a PDF version of this article,  
Axis specializes in professional network video and printing solutions
|
Glossary | Contact | Sites | Privacy Statement
|