Talk:Closed-circuit television

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wonder its called "Closed".. there should be an explanation about the term's origin

Contents

[edit] some questions

when was closed circuit television invented and who invented it and more informations about cctv & Y IS TECHNICAL info. missing out of the text? circuit used,...........

[edit] neutrality

I read this article as being stronly anti-CCTV. It does mention the argument that it deters crime, but claims this is false - and it doesn't mention the many prosecutions that have been brought as a result of CCTV evidence. Morwen - Talk 10:08, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It also seems to be written entirely from a European perspective. CCTV is different from both a social perspective as well as an industrial perspective in the United States and elsewhere. The UK's proliferation of cameras monitoring public areas, I feel, affects her population's sentiment on CCTV as a whole; and that is evident in this article. ~gadget

This article is clearly biased, with both negative tone and lack of balance in the arguments for/against. Added neutrality dispute tag.

With regards to neutrality, the intent determines the usage. Lets not forget that although the defence and security industries are the main users of CCTV, other industries do so for exploration, operation and observation. There are generally 3 purposes to CCTV:

1. Social & Science: general view of areas to assess traffic & flow, production & progress, the environment & natural phenomena and social & recreational events

2. Safety & Security: with a purpose of controlling losses, viewing loss-related areas and for evidenciary purposes when we talk crimes

3. Surveillance: the intent to obtain information on a subject for investigative purposes

In some way, shape & form, I can almost propose that the arts & entertainment is a 4th purpose as a means of visual expression.

Lets not forget the legal ramifications of CCTV usage in terms of privacy, trade secrets and national security. Again, the social & political experience and tolerance of a group towards "surveillance" impacts a lot on its use in public places. Finally, be aware of the private-public information sharing in terms of CCTV the "Web" isn't just an Internet-only technological infrastructure.

Speeking of "deterrence", CCTV is as good as the delinquent's determination & means, the installation of the camera in coordinnation with other physical security components and the responder's speed of intervention to end the threat, recover the loss & prosecute.

PHA 20:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)PHAPHA 20:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Technical Side

I wonder how massive CCTV systems, like the one in London, work (on the technical side). I would think the amount of storage and processing needed to build a system like this is really massive. Is it mostly an analog or a digital system? is it centralized? is any image analysis/recognition used? what kind of search capabilities are available?

Currently, the majority of such systems use analog video processing and digital or analog recording. Digital Video Recorders (DVRs) have replaced analog Video Cassette Recorders (VCRs) as the primary storage means for most CCTV systems. The larger CCTV systems use computer controlled matrix switching bays, multiplexers, and multiple monitors to gather and distribute video data from multiple cameras. Video is normally stored on magnetic tape or on computer hard disk drives. Long term archiving can use many types of media such as digital tape, hard disk arrays, DVDs, or CDs.

The newest generation of equipment uses digital technology to process and record video. Digital cameras or analog cameras with IP encoders send video data to processing servers that sort and distribute video data to the appropriate workstations and recording devices. The video data can be decoded to analog if necessary at any point in the network. Network Video Recorders (NVRs) record data to hard disk drives at centralized points and Remote Video Recorders are used to record video at other locations on the network, typically at the camera site (on the edge).

Intelligent video software is used on some systems to help automate detection and observation. Objects are classified by these systems using physical characteristics, patterns of movement, etc. Humans can be distinguished from animals. Vehicles can be identified by type, speed, and direction. Some systems incorporate virtual tripwires and other alarm generating features.

[edit] Why "Closed"

"Closed" circuit television is so called due to the nature of it's systems. It is not possible to run along to your shopping centre and tune your TV in to the cameras around you because the system is self contained and non-broadcasting (unlike conventional television). Each camera (or "channel" if you like) is hard wired or has a secure radio signal that links it to the viewing and recording equipment and is not accessible in any other way - both for security reasons and also to protect personal privacy - i.e. the circuit is closed. The requirement for CCTV to be exactly that: "closed circuit" has become ever more necessary as its technology and widespread use continues as a result of the need to comply with data protection legislation and human rights around the world. In most contries however, this legislation also dictates inversely that despite these surveillance systems being "closed" it must also be possible to supply any member of the public (who has legitimate reasoning) with copies of kept recordings of public places should it be requested. So while the surveillance cameras prevent and detect crime by being "closed" it is also necessary to protect the public from such systems being used for incorrect or improper purposes.

Video surveillance performed by large companies across a number of sites is nowadays, very often securely linked to a central monitoring and recording facility over the internet. Indeed a number of cutting edge digitally based CCTV manufacturing companies now promote what they often nickname as OCTV due to it's new Open but secure nature! Arguably, secure or not this and public rights of access (none of which I would argue are wrong incidentally) make it almost as "open" as conventional television.

Perhaps it ought to be renamed Secure Surveillance Television - SSTV rolls off the tongue just as easily!

If you have any questions about CCTV in general please feel welcome to ask me here or on enquiries@definitiongroup.co.uk (don't worry I'm not interested in selling anything to you!). Always more than happy to put years of industry knowledge to good use! Adam.

[edit] CCTV Cameras

I have made CCTV Cameras redirect becuase it would eventually be asked to be merged. KILO-LIMA 19:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge CCTV Images

I have proposed merging (really just redirecting) the article CCTV Images to here. In my opinion this article seems to already adequately cover the issues surrounding CCTV Images. However, anytime the redirect is added to the CCTV Images page it is reverted. As Londonlinks has threatened an edit war over this issue I think it is best to bring the topic to a discussion rather than disrupt Wikipedia. James084 13:40, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it makes more sense to keep this stuff together in one place at the moment. CCTV Images and CCTV Cameras are pretty much identical at the moment. The articles are also heavily lacking with respect to the current state of technology. Yes, I am putting my hand up to address some of that. One thing that certainly needs to be done is a separation of the technology and the social aspects of the article. That might be worth splitting into two articles later on. loom 04:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merging and Redirecting Policy CCTV Images

There is absolutely no point in redirecting an article/contribution to another page without actually merging the content - otherwise contributors who spend their valuable time contributing articles to Wikipedia will simply see their articles disappear from the Wikipedia - which cannot be a sensible approach to adopt.

If redirects are set up simply because an article falls within a wider heading, then you will eventually end up with a Wikipedia that has unwieldy articles to read - each article amounting to a mini-book.

Any subject has divisions and those divisions cannot and should not always be redirected into a wider article for the foregoing reasons -- especially if the redirection occurs without any attempt to actually subsume the separate article in the wider article.

What should occur is simply to add an internal link to the wider article (if need be) if it has been omitted, or alternatively to include an internal link in the main article to the divided article. In that situation a reader can if he wishes divert from either article to elaborate some point and then return to the article he was reading.

If several articles are merged under one umbrella-heading, the Wikipedia will soon begin to read like a book and it will be nigh impossible to edit separate articles because they will be so large.

Setting up a redirect without more ado is also simply a lazy way of "editing" and constitutes an unnacceptable form of censorship.

Londonlinks

[edit] Proposed restructure

I'm thinking of restructuring this article to seperate the social and technological aspects of CCTV. How does this sound?

1. Overview
1.1 History
1.2 Applications - Saftety, security, monitoring traffic, etc

2. Technology
2.1 Analogue Technology
2.2 Digital Technology
2.3 Recording images - Frame rates, resolution, retention times etc
2.4 Technology Comparison

3 Social/Legal issues
3.1 Privacy
3.2 Fears of technological development

4. See Also

5. External Links

I'm sure that other things will come up. comments? Suggestions? loom 05:13, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Restructure 2

The proposal as suggested would result in a mini-book on the subject of CCTV which is not what Wikipedia is about. The advantages of using an online source of information is that topice can easily be subdivided into specialised content through the use of URLS.

In this way, the general topic can be covered adequately touching upon all main areas, but more use should be made of internal or external links to cover in depth those subjects which are really entitled to separate treatment under a separate article.

Otherwise most of these subjects may just as well appear under "Electricity" and then ultimately under "planet Earth".

Articles must be kept to a manageable proprtion as in any Encylopedia, or else Wikipedia will become a depository of books rather than s depository of articles.

[edit] Proposed Restructure 3

I'm not suggesting that a large amount of additional content be added to the article, only that it's structure be changed such that the application, technology and legal and social implications of CCTV can be seperated. It may be that some of these things be spun off into individual articles if they grow too large.

How many sections/subsections doeas an article need before it becomes a mini-book and what is the convention for breaking it into multiple articles?

loom 22:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CCTV - External Link might be of interest...?

Apologies in advance if this enquiry / request is being made inappropriately, but having looked through the information on Closed-Circuit television, I wondered if the following CCTV information site, would be of interest for adding to the External Links section? http://www.doktorjon.co.uk 85.210.21.16 08:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CCTV - Does anyone understand this sentence ...?

CCTV for use outside upper ment special facilities were developed as a means of increasing security in banks.

[edit] CCTV - Merge

Surely Closed-circuit Television and Closed-circuit Television Camera should be two seperate, but cross linked, articles. The first title discussing the general concept of CCTV, general technical, legal, social. The second; a more detailed discussion of the cameras, the types employed and particularly the technologies they use. Additionally, other types of CCTV/Video surveillance equipment may also warrent their own, independant articles in the future. This would, as mentioned by others, be too much for a single Closed-circuit television entry. - M.M —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.41.61.50 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 16 October 2006.


[edit] Astronomy Cameras

http://www.wateccameras.com are used in Astronomy. 0.0003lux are used for watching the black sky through a Telescope. 0.003 is about the limit for use in security surveilance applications. Any lux more sensitive results in Image smearing. This info should be added to the wiki without it coming accross as advertising - but as a technical fact. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.11.241.194 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 23 October 2006.

[edit] Ambiguous Statement

  • The following statement seems a little ambiguous to me.

In the United States there is no such data protection mechanisms. It has been questioned whether CCTV evidence is allowable under the Fourth Amendment which prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures". The courts have generally not taken this view.

I can't tell whether they are saying that the courts haven't taken the view that CCTV evidence is permissible, or the view that they violate the Fourth Amendment. Could someone please clarify this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ricree101 (talk • contribs) 02:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

I'm new to wikipedia; forgive me if I blunder. I've been researching cctv use in law enforcement for a paper I'm writing, and while I'm not a lawyer, perhaps I can add something here.

Basically, the law is evolving rapidly, as it often does when new technology intersects with police work.

The current law basically says a policeman cannot point or take a camera someplace he can't go. But a policeman could be standing on a corner, watching you; therefore a police camera could be on the corner, watching you.

The fairness of this, or whether it violates Fourth Amendment, is a subject of lively debate, to put it mildly. Today, in most jurisdictions, a camera operate may follow a person (i.e. pan and zoom). Some argue this should not be permitted without a warrant. However, to answer your direct quote, courts have accepted as permissible video evidence obtained (in a public place) without a warrant. The usual practice, I am told by people I've interviewed in the field, is that a police officer testifies that the video being seen in the courtroom accurately and fairly represents what he saw.

FWIW, I'm also told that the bigger value to police is not necessarily at trial, but just in getting the first "break" in a case. A suspicious incident is occurring, for example, and then the suspect gets into a car. The license is run, this leads to more information, and eventually persons are arrested and tried. Often the original video is never used, as it does not itself show anything clearly criminal.


Regarding another comment that the article seems UK biased; yes, it is a bit, but then again that might be OK, as the UK has much more experience, and many more cameras, than we do. This, plus similar legal traditions, I think makes it applicable and of interest to US readers, and English-speaking readers in general.


I hope this helps. I love wikipedia, so I'd like to be useful. - Cheers! Oliver OliverHeaviside 02:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First two images

When I open this page, I see images of a high school massacre and a two-year-old about to be murdered. Unless it's absolutely necessary to show images of such a sensitive nature (and in this case, it's not necessary at all), don't use them. More sterile images from a supermarket or bank would be much better. Are Columbine and Bulger relevant? Somewhat. Are they necessary? Not at all.

I agree, 99,99% of the surveillance is of completely innocent people, it's way NPOV when the article only shows pictures of murderers and such. CCTV is used to watch the population with the hopes of finding something illegal, nothing else. Ran4 16:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links policy

Hi all,

If you are going to add an external link, please read the wikipedia guidelines on NPOV and spam.

In particular, I'll consider external links to pages hosted by or advertising a CCTV company both non-neutral and spamming.

If you think that my reasoning is wrong, please discuss here.

Ivansanchez 19:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Would someone add SecurityWorldHotel.com as it covers the security industry and with that much of the world's CCTV-events?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.115.0.76 (talk • contribs) 11:44 (UTC), 19 June 2007.

Securityworldhotel has a non-neutral POV, and is comercially biased, so the answer is "no". Ivansanchez 21:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
So all newspapers and news sites that are commercial are therefore lying? I beleive that wikipedia users looking for CCTV would greatly benefit from using SecurityWorldHotel.com as it covers new products, business news and general industry news.
You are confusing "lying" and "biased". In the CCTV news world, every product is the bestest of its category, and every installation is wonderful. Wikipedia visitors need to see the two faces of the coin. Also, Wikipedia is not a news site. If you feel that your news items are interesting, please consider joining the Wikinews project. Ivansanchez 21:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Ivansanchez, you may be surprised to learn that Wikipedia policy ( WP:YESPOV ) allows biased, commercial, non-neutral POV information in Wikipedia articles. However, I agree that links to CCTV companies are unlikely to be encyclopedic enough to be allowed by other policies -- Wikipedia:External links and WP:NOT#LINK. And I agree that http://www.wikinews.org/ is a better place for "news".
If you are a CCTV-related company, I think your best bet for getting a link in this article is with the "references and citation" loophole ( Wikipedia:External_links#References_and_citation ). First put a relatively plain-looking page on your own website with encyclopedic information. Information that fills in the blanks of something like "___ million CCTV cameras were sold in England in 2007", or "___ CCTV cameras were sold to the U.S. Navy in 2006", or "In 2007, ___ percent of CCTV cameras sold were in color, ___ percent were grayscale, and ___ percent were thermographic", or "In 2007, ___ percent of CCTV cameras were hard-wired analog, ___ percent were ethernet cameras, ___ percent were analog wireless, and ___ percent were digital wireless", or "CCTV cameras are a $___ million/year industry", or "Typical CCTV cameras have a __ year warranty, and typically about ___ percent of CCTV cameras are returned for warranty repair", or "Although early CCTV installations typically used ___ cable, by 1999 most new CCTV installations use ___ cable". Go do some original research, and document the results on your website. Then use a "reference" link in this article to that specific page on your website to help us fulfill our WP:verifiability mandate.
--68.0.124.33 (talk) 01:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Torchwood

Torchwood Institute, a fictional organization from Doctor Who and it's spinoff Torchwood, uses CCTV cameras extensively in it's operations. --Khokkanen 17:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)