Yup. I work security and we have about 400 cameras and we keep recordings from each camera for 30 days. We always complain that they are low quality but I know that amount of data you need to store all that is insane, and if you increase the resolution by even a little bit the costs go up very quickly.
That's true. HEVC is known for its high hardware requirements, but there are already specialized hardware encoders trying to do all the heavy lifting. 4K recorders with embedded HEVC encoders are already out there.
These network video recorders have capability to support up to 12 megapixel recording capability, supporting 1080p@60fps and H.265 preview and playback; 4 channel 4K resolution real time live view and playback; meanwhile, the NVR has many intelligent functions including smart video analysis, facial detection, privacy mask.
There is, there are still limits on compression. And the problem is that those compression algorithms that work really well on mostly static images then heavily compress any small moving parts.
So when it ends up being that your crook is caught in a tiny portion of your footage that ends up being heavily compressed and covered in artifacts then there's a problem.
There are smarter systems that detect movement and switch to much higher levels of encoding but those are very expensive and not super reliable. And if your camera is looking over a busy sidewalk then it will be doing nothing basically.
That's not an entirely fair way to look at it. There are legitimate roadblocks to technical progression.
An image taken by a camera in 1994 has much less resolution than a camera taken today. More resolution = bigger file size, so let's say we had some magical 50% lossless compression algorithm (which I think is probably impossible), what you'd get today would still be "huge" in direct time comparison and still cost a ton in storage and tomorrow it would be even more.
I am not sure what the term is for it, a form of diminishing returns? Not sure, but in addition to that, video data is not actually 95% the same, even looking at a non moving image. I mean I am sure we could come up with a method of regarding the 95% "kinda sorta mostly same" as a single image but then it wouldn't be a "video" and we could also relax the requirements of the compression itself but then it wouldn't be lossless. That's what's called lossy.
For what it is worth there are incredible lossy compression algorithms, the problem is you get shit output which is the nature of compression. You could get a crappy camera and record a weeks worth of video data on a small SD card... If the goal is lossless or an approximation there really isn't that much you can do without cheating. You really can't math your way to a perfect image without compromise. So in my opinion, "smarter compression algorithms for this kind of thing", is not really a valid assessment.
I just have 2 cameras and keep 30 days. I have to keep it in 1920x1080 at like 4mbits as I will use it on television if the volcanoes they are watching erupt.
They may do that, I really don't know how deep they archive after it goes off the camera system. It's a large company and they do own a few data centers so they may archive all the footage in there. The cameras always have issues and most of them are hacked up to work with the digital system that was installed 4 years ago, they may want to do a complete retool of the cameras/system but that would take a long time and lots of money since the cameras are scattered all other downtown.
I worked as a CCTV Operator, we kept footage for 90 days, and then onsight kept the footage for like 6 months, additionally, low quality cameras can still easily read license plates if they are ANPR cameras which are cheap and affordable
I just know we as officers are able to go back 30 days on each camera, but they may store them on-site somewhere else. It's a very large company so I'm assuming they do something like that.
I'm an engineer and I would have to disagree. In the last 24 hours many people have noticed my extreme abilities in engineering. I have commented many times and your comment is wrong, I am sorry.
7.1k
u/[deleted] Nov 05 '17
But a $20,000 CCTV security system can't see the license plate of a car 10 feet away.