U.S. Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate
Policy Considerations for the Use of Video in Public Safety
HSHQPM-15-X-00122
June 2016 30
particular aspects of the area. Depending on the mission, the individual or team determining
sighting and location will look at how to optimize the ability for that video source to address as
many objectives as possible (e.g., critical Infrastructure protection, egress and ingress, parks vs.
roadway, rail and perimeter protection, dignitary protection, etc.).
Another common sighting consideration is separation: how far apart to place the cameras. This
decision may have to consider spacing and density of buildings, terrain and camera uses
involving simultaneous job tasking for operators (e.g., monitoring traffic conditions, as well as
security of government property). If natural topography or structures will block the view or the
ability to track an incident from one video source to another, then the camera density may
need to increase. This may also be a function of the capability of the cameras being utilized. For
example, if the cameras are fixed, there may be a need to place multiple cameras in a location
to provide different views. In contrast, a single PTZ camera might be able to cover multiple
directions. A fixed, very high-resolution camera might also provide sufficient detail to allow
operators to perform digital searches, such as zooming to specific areas, while continuing to
monitor the wider field of view.
Sighting may also involve a variety of different information requirements. If personnel need to
address differing concerns like traffic management, known threats in an area or general public
safety management, more cameras may be required to prevent users from competing over
resources. This multiple purpose requirement might also affect the type of equipment used
(e.g., PTZ versus fixed versus high definition) as a way to solve this problem.
Another factor affecting sighting is the manner in which cameras are connected. Wireless
connections and consequent bandwidth considerations will affect the quality level of the video
that can be delivered into the system. Additionally, wireless signals will suffer from interference
from other radio sources (known and unknown) in the area depending on the frequencies and
channels available in the area. Employing qualified subject matter expert consultation when
determining source locations and field of view is very important. An example scenario would be
that the police nominate camera locations due to crime statistics. Before installing the cameras,
one has to consider sighting (e.g., does the camera field of view invade privacy?) and location
(access to power and data transmission). Funding (both the amount and who funds it) is also a
factor in deciding on location and sighting. Examples of funding factors include: higher
implementation costs when considering one location over another; recurring cost associated
with a location; or the funding source (agency or individual interest) may have stipulations
associated with the mission for the video installation.
If a particular sight or field of view will involve the use of analytics (e.g., identification of left-
behind packages, crowds gathering or dispersing, change in speed of a vehicle relative to