Exciting New Customer to Epoch - Regional Transportation District - Denver, Colorado

Epoch Concepts is excited to announce that we have provided RTD with an excellent storage solution for it's need to store a sizable amount of video surveillance.  RTD Police is an industry leader in securing statewide transportation and we are proud to be associated with them in this way.  As a resident of Colorado, I personally appreciate the incredible job they do every day to keep us safe on our trains and buses.

Here's to a long and fruitful relationship with our friends at RTD!!!

Video Surveillance Camera Resolution - How Much is Too Much?

One of the most difficult challenges when designing a new security video surveillance system is the decision making process that goes into choosing the cameras. Anyone who has developed a camera system before is familiar with the myriad trade offs that make up the solution. High camera resolution leads to higher quality images, but larger storage and bandwidth needs. This can be offset by compression and frame rate adjustments, but leads to a lower image quality over all. Don’t forget about field of view and lens focal length. Now tie in light sensitivity and sources of illumination. All this makes for one pretty complicated set of variables.

Now add to the mix the common idea that ‘more is better.’ Some camera manufacturers will have you believe that more is always better, that you must have the newest technology with the largest megapixel camera available. Frankly this isn’t always true. Oh sure, technology has advanced to the point where you can do some absolutely amazing things with high megapixel cameras. And under the right circumstances, high megapixel cameras can save you plenty of money. But the key to finding the most value in your security solution is not to use the “best” technology, but to use the right technology.

A Word About Resolution
The term resolution refers to the number of the smallest picture elements or pixels that make up a video image. The more picture elements, the better the detail of the picture. Resolution for analog cameras is typically measured in Television Lines or TVL where resolution in digital cameras is typically measured in pixels and communicated by either the number of pixels both horizontally and vertical (such as 640 x 480) or as a total number of pixels in the image (such as 1.4 megapixels).

In a camera system, resolution is typically the balancing factor. Depending on the purpose of your system, you may need a large resolution in order to recognize faces or licenses plates. Under other circumstances, you don’t need a high resolution at all because your field of view is so large you only want a general idea of what is happening. Typically adjustments to a camera system are made to get the most resolution with the lowest storage and bandwidth requirements.

Pixels Per Foot (PPF)
To determine the needs of the surveillance solution and what types and numbers of cameras are necessary, system designers will often use the measurement “pixels per foot” or PPF. This measurement is similar to camera resolution, but refers to the resolution of the final video produced based on the size the area the video is recording. For instance, a rule of thumb is that the minimum resolution required for facial recognition is 40 PPF. So if you are using a camera to monitor an entrance that is 20 feet wide and you wish to provide facial recognition, you’re going to need a camera with a resolution at least 800 pixels wide.

Of course, distance from the area to be viewed matters when it comes to the final video resolution. The farther away the camera is from the subject, the larger the camera resolution needs to be to obtain a final video resolution of 40 PPF. This is where field of view and lenses come into play. If you moved your camera to cover the 20 foot opening and 10 feet of wall on either side, your total area of coverage has increased to 40 feet, meaning that you’ll need a camera resolution of at least 1600 pixels wide in order to keep the same 40 PPF video resolution. However, using a different lens or optical zoom to focus the camera’s field of view on the 20 foot area you want to view will allow you keep the same resolution requirement of 800 pixels.

More Cameras or More Megapixels?
So what if you need to record that entire 40 foot area? If you used a single 800 x 600 resolution camera to do so, you’d have a final video resolution of 20 PPF. Not good enough to reliably recognize a face. So your options are to either use a single 1.9 megapixel camera, or divide the viewing area between two smaller cameras focused in on a 20 foot area each. At first glance, the two standard IP cameras may seem the least expensive option because of the lower price of standard digital cameras over megapixel cameras, but depending on your system setup, it may be that using a single megapixel camera to replace multiple IP cameras is the most economical option.

This of course just scratches the surface of the calculations and tradeoffs that go into designing a video surveillance system. There are plenty more variables to consider. But the old adage “waste not, want not” can be very applicable when choosing which cameras to implement. Choosing the right camera for your needs will ensure your video surveillance system will function how you need it without demanding too many resources. Choosing a camera with a much larger resolution than you really need will only eat up additional resources without providing additional value.

In every solution there is a tipping point where you’ll find the most value for the lowest investment. Have you found that tipping point in your own solution? Leave your comments and let us know how you feel about your own camera choices. Did you choose a larger resolution than you really need? Or are you struggling with a system that fit your budget, but isn’t providing the quality you really want?

White House Steps Up Defense of Surveillance Programs

President Obama doesn’t think the privacy of American citizens has been violated by recently disclosed surveillance efforts carried out by the National Security Agency and other government entities and will make his case more directly on the subject in the coming days.

That’s the word from White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough who appeared on the CBS Sunday morning talk show “Meet the Press.”

Asked directly by host Bob Scheiffer if Obama feels the privacy of Americans has been violated, McDonough said, “He does not.”

Additionally, he said, Obama took a skeptical look at existing surveillance programs when he first took office in 2009 and made substantive changes to them. The White House, he said, took pains to get Congress involved in authorizing the programs. Every member of Congress, McDonough said, has been briefed on the programs, and they were approved after a vigorous debate.

If the president is going to make a stronger case about the operation, privacy protections and other aspects of Prism and other surveillance programs, it would be a logical follow-on to a deal struck between the government, Facebook and Microsoft late Friday, allowing those companies to disclose how many national security requests they’ve received.

Here’s a preview of at least some of that defense. The Associated Press is reporting this morning that terrorist plots in the U.S. and at least 20 other countries were broken up using data collected from the programs. The story cites unnamed intelligence officials who go on to say that fewer than 300 phone numbers were checked against a database of millions of phone records gathered by the NSA.

The disclosures were made to members of Congress on Saturday. Intelligence officials say they’d like to declassify more details about the plots themselves so that Americans can have a sense about the benefits of the surveillance programs, but they haven’t gotten that far yet. Problem is that doing so might reveal still-secret counter-terrorism tactics.

Facebook disclosed Friday that it had received requests for information on as many as 19,000 accounts during the last half of 2012. Microsoft made similar disclosures the next day. Google and Twitter are still arguing with the government over the terms of the disclosure they’d like to make.

Americans say they are pretty comfortable with expanded government surveillance

A Pew Research Center poll conducted from June 6 to 9, prompted by revelations of an extensive domestic surveillance program involving the National Security Agency found that a large number of US citizens are comfortable with trading privacy for security.

The poll found that 56 percent of Americans considered it "acceptable" for the NSA to get "secret court orders to track calls of millions of Americans to investigate terrorism," while 41 percent of those surveyed found this "not acceptable."

This was the first time Pew had asked that specific question. It has asked the question "should the government be able to monitor everyone's e-mail to prevent possible terrorism" for a number of years. For that proposition there is less support, perhaps because it doesn't include any judicial oversight. In 2002, 45 percent said they supported e-mail monitoring, while 47 percent said they didn't support that. In June 2013, 45 percent still indicated they supported e-mail monitoring, but the number of Americans opposed to it rose to 52 percent.

The overall picture is still one in which large numbers of Americans are deeply frightened by terrorism and want the government to devote significant resources to combat it, notwithstanding the fact that terrorism is not much of an actual threat. On balance, most people polled indicated security is more important to them than privacy, which is the reason that expanded surveillance powers and the use of secret courts have been so popular among lawmakers.

Pew writes:
Currently 62% say it is more important for the federal government to investigate possible terrorist threats, even if that intrudes on personal privacy. Just 34% say it is more important for the government not to intrude on personal privacy, even if that limits its ability to investigate possible terrorist threats. These opinions have changed little since anABC News/Washington Post survey in January 2006. Currently, there are only modest partisan differences in these opinions: 69% of Democrats say it is more important for the government to investigate terrorist threats, even at the expense of personal privacy, as do 62% of Republicans and 59% of independents.

The polling did find a meaningful gap between older and younger Americans on this issue, with older Americans being less concerned about privacy.

"While six-in-10 or more in older age groups say it is more important to investigate terrorism even if it intrudes on privacy, young people are divided: 51% say investigating terrorism is more important while 45% say it is more important for the government not to intrude on personal privacy, even if that limits its ability to investigate possible threats," Pew writes.

While the poll finds bipartisan support for surveillance, the way the attitudes of Democrats and Republicans have shifted on the issue since President Obama took office is once again evidence of the power of partisanship, rather than principle, in how voters see the world. For instance; the number of Democrats who say they think invading Iraq was the right choice has surged since Obama took office, and the number of Republican's who think it was a smart choice has plummeted.

The Pew poll found that in January 2006, 75 percent of Republicans found NSA surveillance programs "acceptable," while 61 percent of Democrats found them "unacceptable." In this June 2013 poll, Republican support dropped to 52 percent while Democrat support surged, to 64 percent now finding the surveillance programs acceptable.

While it's natural that Republicans would trust a Republican president more (and vice versa), expanded powers for the federal government don't expire at the end of each president's term. Still, even when it comes to fundamental questions about the trade-offs between privacy and security, a large portion of the electorate, like the politicians that lead them, don't look beyond the election cycle.

iPhone, iPad or iPod: New App Turns Device into Video Surveillance.

Have a spare or old iPhone, iPad or iPod touch laying around being unused? 

Well now you can turn it into wireless video surveillance with the new app,
Presence By People Power.  

You install the app on a IOS device with Wi-Fi connectivity and place the rear-facing
camera anywhere in your home. You could use it as a nanny cam, a baby monitor or
to watch your pets while at work. 

So you can now see what is going on in real-time at your house from wherever you are at. 

You can also set up Presence to send video alerts whenever it senses movement in an
area, which will then activate the camera and alert you. 

There is also the capability to have face-to-face 2-way video or audio conversations with
whoever is at your house. 

You could you it for any host of reasons like for a parent at work to be notified when their
kids come home from school. Maybe your roommate is eating your food or your neighbor's
dog keeps "leaving marks" in your yard. 

For long periods of time, it is obviously best to plug in your device so that it will keep running.
The app is free to download and there are no monthly fees. 

It sounds like a cool app, however if it is very effective, you can already see people setting
these devices up in places that they shouldn't, which would open up a whole new can of
worms. 

However, focusing on the positives of the device, this could be a affordable way to keep an
eye on your home.  

IFSEC: The Role of the Security Systems Integrator Evolves

Hailey Lynne McKeefry, US Correspondent

15/05/2013

The security system landscape is shifting dramatically, and security systems integrators need to evolve with it.
That was the premise of a talk given yesterday at the IFSEC International show by Paul Bremner, security market analyst at IHS (previously IMS Research), and Phil Stockham, project manager at VidSys.
A quick glance at market figures bears out the premise. First, there's plenty of business to be had in the physical security market. In fact, the world market for physical security equipment sold through integrators and installers is forecast to be worth over $38 billion in 2016, according to a November 2012 report from IHS.
However, there is a dramatic shift in where money is being spent. Between 2008 and 2010, the analog market grew 2.2 percent, compared to the IP market that has grown 126.8 percent in just the past two years, according to Bremmer. "The IP market has more than doubled in size, while the analog market hasn't done much in the past few years," he noted. Going forward, this trend will continue. From 2012 to 2016, the researcher expects the growth of network products to reach 48.2 percent compared to 16.1 percent for analog products.
Further, the competitive landscape is heating up. Large aerospace and defense contractors are entering the fray, and vendors are also providing services, Bremmer said. "IT integrators are now participating in the security systems marketplace. They are seeing increased margins, so for them it is a good place to be."
For aerospace organizations, the margins are not as compelling, but the large amount of opportunity is a draw. "It leads to increased competition for security defense and changed the business model," Bremmer said. "Product margins have declined across the board for the last few years, so integrators have been shifting focus to service revenues." According to research by IHS, service revenues will rise 38.7 percent between 2012 and 2016.
Further, client expectations are on the rise, and these customers are looking for full integration from security systems, said Stockham. He listed a handful of challenges that integrators need to address with new business models:

• Security integration increasing in both scale and complexity
• End clients seeking full integration across a myriad of subsystems
• Demand for understanding of value of money and a clear ROI as critical in the face of constrained budgets

"Clients no longer want a network operating center with seven or eight pieces of equipment in front of the operator," Stockham added. "They want full integration, and they want to move the operator away from the technology and be able to track what those operators are doing and how they are interacting with the technology."
The increased growth of IP-based security systems provides both challenges and opportunities.

What's Next In Video Surveillance?

Driven by the consumer market, video surveillance is the next big data challenge.

John Foley | May 20, 2013 08:00 AM

In the aftermath of last month's Boston Marathon bombings, government IT and security pros must reassess their video surveillance infrastructures. The video technologies used for homeland security are advancing well beyond closed-circuit TV cams on street corners.

As I reported shortly after the attack, video captured at the scene was instrumental in identifying the two brothers who allegedly did it. On April 18, the FBI posted a 30-second video clip and still images taken from video of the suspects. Within hours, one of the men, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, died in a shootout with police, and the other, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was captured shortly thereafter.

Video surveillance is among the myriad technologies being driven by the consumer market. Amazon, Costco, Home Depot and other retailers sell full-blown systems that combine cameras, networking and monitoring capabilities. Earlier this year, I was checking in at Tampa International Airport for a flight to New York, where it was snowing. The airline check-in agent, who was from New York, pulled out a smartphone to show me, via a live video feed, the snow piling up in his driveway.The FBI has been criticized for failing to share critical intelligence on the threat posed by Tamerlan Tsarnaev in particular, but no one is questioning the effectiveness of the agency's use of video. And since my early report was posted, I've heard from several experts about some of the latest technology developments in video surveillance.

Ivideon, a startup in the market, combines conventional video surveillance, from closed-circuit TVs, webcams and IP cameras, with Web capabilities such as online archiving, the ability to plot cameras using Google Maps, and feeding video to websites and even social media.

When thousands of cameras run 24/7 in cities like Boston, New York and Washington, D.C., video surveillance quickly becomes a big data challenge. Analytics and automation technologies are the only answer. The FBI is developing facial recognition capabilities as part of its $1 billion Next Generation Identification program. And IBM sells video correlation and analysis software that provides facial recognition, real-time alerts and situational awareness.

Behavioral Recognition Systems (BSR) is developing software that goes beyond the ability to respond merely to preprogrammed objects by learning about an environment, creating "memories" and providing real-time notifications when the software detects something out of the ordinary. On May 14, the vendor announced that it had completed interoperability testing of its flagship product, AISight (pronounced "eye sight"), with Cisco's Video Surveillance Manager, a sign that such advanced capabilities are moving into the mainstream.

In one example of how this technology will be applied, Portland, Ore.'s public transit system, called TriMet, will use BSR's software to monitor bridges and overpasses. The system will learn the difference between a bus or light rail train and, say, a pickup truck that shouldn't be in the area.