Use-case scenario · Retail · Jaipur · 12 cameras
The retail chain that had muted its own security app
The most common failure mode in retail security isn't a missing camera — it's a muted notification. This store had stopped trusting its alerts entirely. The work was almost entirely about precision.
- Sector
- Retail
- Location
- Jaipur, Rajasthan
- Cameras
- 12 existing cameras across the shop floor and stock room
The challenge
- Motion alerts fired constantly during trading hours, so every notification had been switched off.
- With alerts muted, the system had effectively reverted to a recording archive.
- Stock discrepancies were found at counting, weeks after the event.
- The owner ran three branches and could only be physically present in one.
What we did
Start by removing alerts, not adding them
The first fortnight was spent classifying and suppressing: animals, shadows on the shutter, headlights through the front glass and general trading-hours movement.
Three zones, not twelve cameras
The till area, the high-value shelf and the stock room door. Everything else records but does not alert.
Dwell time instead of motion
The high-value shelf alerts on lingering rather than on presence, so a browsing customer generates nothing and an assessment does.
One app across three branches
Each shop reports into a single account, so being in one store no longer means being blind to the other two.
What changed
Un-muted
Notifications switched back on and kept on
3 zones
Generate alerts; the other cameras stay silent
3 branches
Visible from one phone
The concern this scenario addresses
The endless false alarms used to drive us mad, so we'd stopped trusting the cameras. Now I only get pinged when it actually matters.
Typical of retail store owner, jaipur — illustrative, not a customer quote.
Illustrative scenario, not a report of a completed project. It shows how PGAK would be configured for a site of this type and the outcomes such a setup is designed to achieve; the figures are modelled, not measured at a named customer.