Posts made by Crimp On_62210811129

I notice a similar unwanted phenomenon. When I enable the feature to draw a rectangle around detected objects, the camera draws rectangles around cars that are not moving.
The impression this leaves me with is that the software is able to detect the object (car, person, animal) but is not able to detect that the object is "moving". I do not have 'alerts' enabled, and cannot comment on whether the camera provides false motion detection.

A $30 Wyze Cam 4 seems to have no problem recognizing and alerting on moving vehicles.

not possible. have to remove the SD card and put into a different device to erase or reformat it.

There should be nothing wrong with connecting the E1 camera to a power bank using a USB cable with the proper connector on each end. Most Reolink cameras use micro USB for the power connector. Power banks vary. I have some with USB Type A, some with micro USB, some with USB type C.

Of course the power bank can be charging at the same time.

One technique I have used is to define a Privacy Mask that covers the camera name or Date/Time. That results in a black background.

Might consider an internet search for "H.264 vs. H.265".
Only the newest cameras have the processing power to support H.265.

Return it for a warranty replacement.

@antónio-rosa_64256460041 Can you verify that the Reset Button is secure and not exposed to the weather?

The Reolink app (Apple and Android) allows both Live View and Playback from the internet.

@crimp-on_62210811129 I just now looked at the Time Lapse recording, and it indeed shows the time that was part of the screen. Alas, not much 'happened' during this period, so it was pretty much a 'meh' experience. I would want to experiment with settings before employing a camera for a lengthy Time Lapse. i.e. do some short ones first and see if you like them.

@user_811175528280316_811175528280316 I have one running now as a test. Was able to live stream to two separate devices (Windows Client and Reolink Android app). Will know about the water mark and time stamp in an hour.

Any of the modern RLC cameras (not battery powered) would be fine as long as the SD Card is large enough to hold the expected motion recordings and the time lapse. My guess is that if the goal is to create a very long time lapse recording, the camera would not be used for anything else (to prevent running out of space).

@ninoc_787414937526480 This might be something to email Reolink support about. The specifications are very clear that the E1 Pro supports RTSP protocol.

What test reported that the RTSP port is not open?

@joseph_1979 A useful suggestion, except for the effort to access the cameras, remove the SD cards, do the test, and replace the SD cards. Before attempting that, I attempted to format the SD card on my cameras, with these results:

• Argus Pro 3 - worked fine with 64GB SD card
• RLC-410-5MP - failed with 32GB SD card
• RLC-410-5MP - failed with 32GB SD card
• RLC-420-5MP - failed with 32 GB SD card
• RLC-420-5MP - failed with 32 GB SD card
• RLC-510WA - worked with 64GB SD card
• RLC-1212A - worked with 64GB SD card

One possibility is that I have 4 bad 32GB SD cards. (sigh) Any recommendation on which SD card "works" in Reolink cameras?
(If I'm going to the trouble to pull the SD cards in four cameras, might as well replace them and be done with it.)

@joseph_1979 Thanks. I had not realized that the camera automatically rebooted when the SD card was formatted.

Still puzzled that after formatting the SD card, the camera reports it as nearly "full".(29.61GB of 30GB used)

When the Windows Client v8.15.6 Storage Menu is used to Format the SD Card of an RLC camera:

• Does the Client lose connection to the camera for a short period?
• Does the storage menu show the SD Card as being mostly "unused"?

Thanks

Agree. A wired connection is better in a number of ways, provided that it is convenient to install the Ethernet cable. "outside home about 40ft away" raises some flags.

Wireshark captures that the Reolink camera sends out NTP requests and no NTP responses come back.
There must be something different about the way the Reolink camera is being networked that is stopping the NTP responses from getting through to the camera.
Is this camera on the same switch as the other cameras and the port based VLAN is defined the same way?

I agree that this is a very strange situation.

• The Reolink Client must be able to communicate with the doorbell camera because it is able to open the Network Settings, navigate to Advanced, NTP, and change the NTP server to time1(dot)google(dot)com. Then the user can navigate to Maintenance, Date & Time, and select Synchronize. (I do not have a Reolink doorbell, so I am assuming that the settings menu is approximately similar to the RLC cameras.)
• When the user attempts to synchronize, the response is Failure. We have both verified that Reolink cameras are able to use the Google time server.
• Thus, how can it not work? One explanation might be that the Reolink Doorbell simply does not perform NTP lookup. That seems absurd because customers would be going crazy complaining about their doorbell cameras not displaying the correct time. The only explanation I can see is that the NTP packets (UDP, port 123) are either (a) not going from the camera to the time server or (b) the responses are not coming back. UDP is a connectionless protocol.
• If I were to investigate this situation, I would connect the Reolink Doorbell to a managed switch so that I could mirror the port and capture every packet that goes to and from the Doorbell with Wireshark. (That is why Ethernet devices are so much easier to work with than WiFi devices.)
• Once it can be documented how the NTP packets are failing, then the investigation can move toward what is blocking them.

My thought is that "if everything is set up correctly", then the Reolink Doorbell should perform NTP just like every other device. (The forum is not flooded with posts complaining that, "my doorbell doesn't know what time it is!") The question about network architecture is simply because most consumer networking products do not provide VLAN capability. My "guess" is that there are managed switches involved and that the Reolink doorbell is connected to one of them and that switch port is defined to be in a specific VLAN. There is a gateway somewhere that connects that VLAN to the internet.

Would it be possible, for example, to temporarily place the Reolink doorbell in the default VLAN that has internet access? (like most other devices).

In a way, it is fortunate that the Reolink doorbell is a PoE model, which makes it much easier to capture the port 123 traffic to/from the doorbell. (I have found that capturing communications with WiFi devices a lot more difficult than 'wired' devices.

Very strange. When I set the NTP server on a Reolink camera to time1(dot)google(dot)com, it synchronizes correctly.
(When I set the NTP server to garbage(dot)com, it fails - as it should because that is not an NTP server.)
I agree that capturing the actual packets is the best way forward. Either the doorbell sends the request using port 123 or it doesn't.

Mention of VLAN in the problem description "raises a flag" for me. Reolink cameras are like most consumer devices. They have no concept of VLAN tagging. What sort of network are these cameras part of?

My understanding is that cameras connected directly to the NVR do DHCP against the NVR. The NVR can function with no network connection at all. (not practical for most of us, but....)