Best posts made by Jose_320595376935068

Cynthia, I'm sure you are very, very sorry for the inconvenience, but the reality is that telling Support about any serious issue is useless. Days ago I wrote about my cameras had suddenly disappeared from the app and were replaced with "My Device" ones (that is, inexplicably all configuration was lost). I told Support about it and all I got was "it is a known problem" and "R&D said they will fix it in the future" (!). Maybe related to this thread, last weekend I was unable to connect the cameras using the iOS app in a WiFi network, but at least I could use 4G or a Mac client. I told Support about this, but since then the situation has become worse because now the cameras are unreachable for any mean, 4G, iOS app or Mac client. Moreover, it occurs randomly: last night all worked fine again (for 4G at least), but this morning all is failing again, some cameras connect but not others, with no clear pattern. In the meantime the app now tells me that I can register the products (again?) to get the extended guarantee (!!). Last but no least, one camera seems to detect motion on time only in the right side of view field. Any person walking in the left area is "detected", so to speak, when his foot is already disappearing at the left margin of the picture. Support response? "It might be the normal performance of this camera" (!!!). A "half camera" I would say. So you are sorry, but I'm angry and disappointed because all the time wasted trying to get solutions or, at least, good answers to so many issues.

In order to reduce false alarms, it's advised to combine the methods of setting up the proper sensitivity and defining proper motion detection areas on Reolink Client software.
[/quote]

Although tweaking sensitivity may do the trick in some situations it is not by no means a solution because it also affects distance and on time catching of real intrusions, so defeating the purpose of having a camera to detect them as soon as possible. The same is true for detection areas, of course very useful to mark where you don't want to get an alarm, but no at all to discern about what is causing it.

[quote quote=1458619]
Intensive motion like rain/snowflakes, insects attracted by IR lights, may also cause frequent alarms which may not have a good solution to it.

In this and previous threads you have already received an excellent idea to largely reduce this problem.

Second, isn't it the users responsibility to manage battery life, and not yours by restricting access? For instance, my argus 2s are plugged to a solar panel and constantly at max charge during the day, it's a shame I can't access it via web browser...

I'm using Argus Eco and PT cameras from a few weeks only, and very strongly agree with that statement. Reolink people should be aware that we have not chosen these models by whim, but because the required position of the camera doesn't make possible a plug or a POE, but this should not imply such cutting of many basic features whose relationship with the battery is not clear, and moreover when most, if not all, of battery-power users have solar panels as well.

It looks as the battery-powered cameras were the "poor relation" with respect to the rest of Reolink devices, thus using the charging issue as an excuse to cut some features that actually could be easily implemented but we, users, need: web browser access, "common user" type, motion detection area (!!!), saving to FTP server (!!!) or privacy mask, to say the most obvious ones for me.

Escapes me what most of these have to do with battery level but, anyway, if the phone and PC applications are able to know the battery status and whether the camera is connected to a power source (solar panel or other), I don't see what problem would be to implement something as simple as:

- Define what charging threshold would each "problematic" feature require.
- If the user configures some feature requiring a given battery level and it is likely to fall below the threshold, notify the user that feature will be on hold until battery recharging.
- Moreover, there could be an overall, user-defined, threshold for battery warning, although never less than the default, factory defined, one (this would cover the case the user was a long distance away from the camera and would prefer to have some security margin to deal with the issue).

As Vincent Le Bourlot and other participants have said, it is the users responsibility to manage battery.

You could at the very least allow for FTP transfer to a customer's own equipment in the same way you allow for emails to be sent. Whether the video is uploaded to your AWS bucket or a customer's own site should be no difference in power requirements.

I fully endorse that request. The usual 'to prevent battery drainage' mantra is a complete nonsense on this regard.