INDUSTRY WORKFLOW
AI CCTV evaluation for warehouses
Assess loading bays, stock areas and after-hours approaches against the way your warehouse actually operates. Delivery activity and legitimate work should be part of the test.
Start with the operating workflow
Warehouse supervisors coordinate deliveries, cleaning and stock movement. Security needs the zone, hours and exceptions so an alert is actionable rather than simply another notification.
Define an observable event
A person enters a closed loading bay after dispatch, excluding a scheduled collection.
Limitations to test
Forklifts, pallets, vehicle occlusion and open doors can change a scene substantially. Detection is not a stock ledger and does not prove inventory shrinkage or theft prevention.
Technical requirements
- Camera views with usable target detail beyond racking and parked vehicles.
- Day/night testing under actual bay lighting and vehicle headlights.
- Delivery schedules, network/processing and named shift response owners.
A scoped deployment example
Illustration: test a rear bay and a goods entrance with legitimate collections alongside staged restricted entry. Compare evidence usefulness with the supervisor's manual event log.
Acceptance-test approach
Agree event definitions and an independent log. Test both quiet periods and dispatch peaks, recording false alerts, missed events, delays and recovery after a network interruption.
Use the evaluation worksheet →Available evidence
PGAK has published recorded demonstrations of its own (listed on the evidence page), each with its conditions and limits. No customer result or measured accuracy report is published yet, and the deployment scenarios are illustrations, not verified deployments.
PGAK’s own recording for part of this use case is shown further down this page, with its conditions and limits. It is a demonstration of one scene, not a measured result for your site; ask for evidence of the exact workflow you need.
Inspect evidence status →Cost drivers and responsibilities
Camera count is only one input. Include processing, site preparation, configuration, integration, support, taxes and contract terms. Agree who maintains the feeds, reviews events and responds during an outage.
Understand project pricing →Privacy and safety boundaries
Restrict shared footage to authorised security and operational purposes. Agree retention, visitor notice and controlled export; avoid unnecessary identification.
Counting what crosses the line at the dock
A frame from a PGAK camera at a loading bay, taken during an evening unload. The vertical line is the counting boundary an operator drew, and the counters beside it move as things cross it.
The model is trained on a sack, and it counts sacks crossing a line. It is not an inventory system: it does not read a label, does not know whose consignment it is and does not reconcile against a stock ledger. What it gives you is a machine count of a known item type moving in and out at that bay — a figure to check a document against, not a replacement for counting the stock itself.
What a project here involves
Compatible cameras and recorders you already own are reused wherever they are suitable. Detection runs on an on-site processing unit, and camera suitability, stream access, processing hardware and network are all confirmed at the assessment — with anything extra itemised in the quote before you commit.
What the quote is made of
| Component | What decides it | Price |
|---|---|---|
| Cameras reused | Which existing cameras give a usable view for each use case — confirmed on a still image of each view. | Quoted per site |
| Cameras moved or added | Only where a use case needs a view no camera has (plates and faces usually do). Each one named in the quote. | Quoted per site |
| On-site processing unit | Detection runs here, next to the recorder. Model, quantity and warranty depend on camera count and analytics. | Quoted per site |
| Software / licences | Which analytics on which cameras, the term, and the basis for renewal. | Quoted per site |
| Installation and configuration | Stream setup, zones, schedules, alert routing and commissioning. | Quoted per site |
| Pilot | Agreed scenes, acceptance criteria and duration before rollout. | Quoted per site |
| Support | Hours, response versus fix time, and who replaces failed hardware. | Quoted per site |
| Taxes | Stated separately on the quote. | Quoted per site |
How it is evaluated
- 1. Self-check — Two minutes, nothing sent — find likely blockers.
- 2. Scope on paper — Cameras, use cases and acceptance tests, written down.
- 3. Site assessment — PGAK checks streams, views and network on your cameras.
- 4. Pilot against criteria — Precision, recall, false alerts and delay, agreed in advance.
- 5. Written proposal — Itemised as above; you decide whether to roll out.
Evidence for this page
- Sacks counted across a line at a loading bay. Recorded 19 December 2022 on an existing dock camera with a single counting line. The transport company's name and telephone numbers are blurred throughout; they belong to a third party. Not proved: It counts a known item type across a line. It is not an inventory system and does not reconcile against a ledger. See it →
Discuss this use case
Send a callback request with this page’s context. Camera count is optional; do not include credentials or footage.