|
|
| Is the age of privacy at an end? |
|
|
|
|
It appears that the “Age of Privacy” that began in the 18th century with the incorporation of hallways in public and private buildings may end with the incorporation of personal video security and digital gateways in living and working spaces of the 21st century.
The trend began in casinos, banks, and prisons. It expanded to red light cams, police in-car cameras, gas stations, and convenience stores — and has continued unabated from there. Meanwhile, personal security video use continues to grow from its nanny-cam roots.
In the analog era, all these installations produced primitive picture quality
|
|
WAYNE COLE
|
|
at best. To get around the recording time limitations of a single tape, various schemes evolved that primarily relied on time-lapse recording and video frame or field multiplexing. Both approaches further degraded imagery to the point where the video’s value as evidence or investigative information fell somewhere between highly suspect and downright useless.
When the digital convergence arrived, security video likewise began to evolve in ways that resulted in increased storage capacity and better image quality. The digital trends in miniaturization also increased quality and capacity with decreasing cost.
The advent of the Internet also affected security video in profound ways. IT-based security video eliminated the investigator’s major nightmare of trying to get useful information from that cheap six-hour VHS tape that had been reused every second or third day for the preceding three years. Loss of magnetic particles from a tape that would cause major dropouts was no longer a concern — with DVR and computer- based recording, even if the video storage was set to overwrite every 24 to 48 hours, the quality of the recorded video was consistent. Archiving also became less problematic in terms of space and shelf life.
The advent of the “connected generation” was driven by still photo and video-capable cell phones, the appearance first of webcams for the desktop then webcams embedded in laptops, and low-cost wireless video solutions. The advantage in these technologies is that investigators can often find photographic or video evidence produced on these devices by the perpetrators themselves, who unwittingly create very graphic and indisputable “confessions” in real time.
Plus, walk through any retail computer or electronics store and you are bound to see at least one multi-camera, day/night security system for home use. Even stores like Costco and Best Buy have systems available in their electronics department intermingled with the big-screen TVs, Blu-ray players, and computers.
As personal and family security paranoia fed by the press obsession with events like the Elizabeth Smart case increase, more and more homes will be built with (or retrofitted with) personal video security systems. The mainstreaming of voyeurism and exhibitionism created by shows like Big Brother, as well as people who have chosen to live their home lives under the scrutiny of 24/7 Internet camera coverage, may signal the end of privacy as a socio-political value.
Wayne M. Cole, CCV, CLVI, and member of the AGCV Board of Advisors, is also the owner of IHP, a video production company located Santa Barbara, CA. Contact him at wcole@ihpweb.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|