New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Axis ANVE Exam - Topic 5 Question 98 Discussion

Actual exam question for Axis's ANVE exam
Question #: 98
Topic #: 5
[All ANVE Questions]

In good conditions, a pixel density of 250 px/m (80 px/ft) is required for

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

In good conditions, a pixel density of 250 px/m (80 px/ft) is required for identification purposes. This means that at this resolution, the image quality is sufficient to identify individuals, objects, or other details accurately. Identification requires the highest level of detail among the common surveillance objectives (detection, observation, recognition, identification). This pixel density allows for clear and precise visual information necessary for identifying specific features such as facial characteristics or license plates.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Deane
3 months ago
Totally agree, recognition is the key here!
upvoted 0 times
...
Gilberto
3 months ago
Wait, are we sure about that? Seems high!
upvoted 0 times
...
Paris
3 months ago
250 px/m sounds right for detection.
upvoted 0 times
...
Diane
4 months ago
I thought it was for identification.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cathrine
4 months ago
That's definitely for recognition!
upvoted 0 times
...
Audry
4 months ago
I vaguely recall that observation might need less detail, but I can't quite remember the specifics.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tony
4 months ago
I’m a bit confused; I thought detection required a lower pixel density than recognition.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ernie
4 months ago
This seems similar to a practice question we did on pixel density, and I feel like identification was the answer there.
upvoted 0 times
...
Keneth
5 months ago
I think I remember that 250 px/m is related to recognition, but I'm not entirely sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Murray
5 months ago
I feel confident about this one. The pixel density requirement and the options provided give me a good framework to work with.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brunilda
5 months ago
I've got a strategy - I'll start by eliminating any options that don't seem to fit the context, then carefully compare the remaining ones.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jenelle
5 months ago
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The options seem similar, so I'll need to really analyze the differences between them.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cyndy
5 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. The question is asking about the required pixel density for a specific purpose, so I need to carefully consider each option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ceola
5 months ago
Hmm, this seems straightforward. I'll focus on the key details like the pixel density and the options provided.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desmond
5 months ago
This looks like a straightforward question about how notable event urgency is calculated. I think I've got a good handle on this topic, so I'll carefully review the options and select the best answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Britt
1 year ago
This is a no-brainer, it's clearly B) identification. Unless you're trying to read someone's mind through the screen, that is.
upvoted 0 times
...
Man
1 year ago
Gotta be C) detection. I don't need 250 px/m to recognize a picture of my cat, that's overkill!
upvoted 0 times
Ammie
1 year ago
I would go with C) detection as well, it seems like the best fit for the pixel density mentioned.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristian
1 year ago
Yeah, I think C) detection makes the most sense in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mickie
1 year ago
I agree, C) detection seems like the most appropriate option.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Celia
1 year ago
I'm going with B) identification. Anything less and you'd be squinting at the screen trying to make out the details.
upvoted 0 times
Nakisha
1 year ago
I also think B) identification is the right choice for that pixel density.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ronnie
1 year ago
Yeah, I think B) identification makes the most sense for clear details on the screen.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashlee
1 year ago
I agree, B) identification is definitely the best option for that pixel density.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lyndia
1 year ago
But don't you think that in good conditions, a higher pixel density would be needed for identification rather than recognition?
upvoted 0 times
...
Gussie
1 year ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is A) recognition.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lyndia
1 year ago
I think the answer is B) identification.
upvoted 0 times
...
Thersa
1 year ago
Hmm, C) detection sounds right to me. That level of detail seems more for identifying specific objects than just general recognition.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carmelina
1 year ago
D) observation, definitely. I mean, who needs that kind of pixel density to just detect something?
upvoted 0 times
Gilma
1 year ago
D) observation, definitely. I mean, who needs that kind of pixel density to just detect something?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ora
1 year ago
C) detection.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lindsey
1 year ago
B) identification.
upvoted 0 times
...
Xochitl
1 year ago
A) recognition.
upvoted 0 times
...
Maryann
1 year ago
C) detection.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sanda
1 year ago
B) identification.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shala
1 year ago
A) recognition.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Germaine
1 year ago
I think it's B) identification. Seems like a pretty high pixel density for just recognition.
upvoted 0 times
Laurel
1 year ago
I think D) observation makes sense too, as it would need a high pixel density for detailed viewing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mattie
1 year ago
I would go with C) detection, as it requires a higher pixel density for that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Louann
1 year ago
I agree, it does seem high for just recognition.
upvoted 0 times
...
Toshia
1 year ago
I think it's B) identification. Seems like a pretty high pixel density for just recognition.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel