Previously I had an installation of a RLN16 and 9 cameras with 24/7 recording, and while very happy with the actual recording quality, playback (via the Reolink Windows application or Android app) left a lot to be desired. Seeking in the timeline was painfully slow, and massively worse when trying to view multiple cameras (for example when tracking the movements of a person across the site), it even often failed to playback with four cameras up on the fluent setting.

I've recently built out on a new site, with a bigger installation (2x RLN8 1x RLN16 with four cameras per system), and on a whim decided that I would opt for multiple smaller systems in the hopes that the above limitation was disk speed / seek times. It seems I was (at least in part) correct, as seeking on a system only recording four cameras is significantly better, and the fact that when viewing multiple cameras they're often split across NVR's has also helped immensely.

Would adding a second hard drive to each system help performance further?

I'm adding six more cameras in total, and am likely to add few more cameras before I'm done, and am trying to weigh the cost savings of putting more cameras on each NVR vs the benefits of adding another NVR to the mix.

Is there a way to remove a camera from an nvr?

I have 4x nvr's deployed in a location (3x 8ch, 1x 16ch), recording 35 cameras.
One of the camera's is connected to the network instead of the nvr directly (just due to location, a direct connection was not a possibility)

This has worked well for quite a long time (>2 years), as the camera was adopted by one of the nvr's and allowed recording from the system.
Yesterday I replaced a failed rln8-410 (after approx 4 years of service), and immediately all of the cameras that were attached to to it were recognized and setup again, BUT

That one floating camera is now being seen by three of the NVR's, and two of the three seem to be fighting for control (my email is filled with the two systems alternately complaining about video loss for that camera for the last 16 hours).

I've managed to disable the alarm emails for those channels (a process that is extremely unintuitive if the channel is offline, requires using the copy-to function from a working camera channel).
I don't have a lot of faith that it won't randomly stop recording on the intended nvr (due to conflict with the other two units vying for control), so it would be better to not have the camera not show multiple times in the first place. This will surely also confuse the couple of users on the systems if they see the camera in multiple fields.

Was this ever resolved? I have 2x RLN8-410's and 1xRLN16-410 with hw revision H3MB02 that cannot be accessed by UID
On a whim upgraded the 16ch unit to the latest bios (2012070 released a few days ago); no UID access.

And one RLN8-410 N2MB02 that does work.

It had been a non-issue to me because I access over vpn, but now I have a request for access via the app, and would rather not have to punch more holes in the firewall.

On Playback, drag at least one camera into the box. Click on the icon called ”Timeline” (three arrows going right and left).
At the top of the Timeline, there is a button for ”Download”.

Perfect! Even the download window is greatly improved.
That was the last piece of the puzzle I needed to retire the old software, Thanks!

I haven't seen this mentioned, so I might just be missing the obvious, but I don't see a way to download footage from the playback tab, nor a way to adjust the stream setting from playback (recorded playback is always fluent, which is ok as far as I'm concerned, just an odd change)


Loving how fast it is (from launch to all cameras populated) compared to the 7.x software, cameras by name instead of channel, saves camera sorting between sessions (when dealing with 33, soon to be 37 cameras, this is a big deal!), audio seems more reliable, menus and settings are way faster.

Previously I had an installation of a RLN16 and 9 cameras with 24/7 recording, and while very happy with the actual recording quality, playback (via the Reolink Windows application or Android app) left a lot to be desired. Seeking in the timeline was painfully slow, and massively worse when trying to view multiple cameras (for example when tracking the movements of a person across the site), it even often failed to playback with four cameras up on the fluent setting.

I've recently built out on a new site, with a bigger installation (2x RLN8 1x RLN16 with four cameras per system), and on a whim decided that I would opt for multiple smaller systems in the hopes that the above limitation was disk speed / seek times. It seems I was (at least in part) correct, as seeking on a system only recording four cameras is significantly better, and the fact that when viewing multiple cameras they're often split across NVR's has also helped immensely.

Would adding a second hard drive to each system help performance further?

I'm adding six more cameras in total, and am likely to add few more cameras before I'm done, and am trying to weigh the cost savings of putting more cameras on each NVR vs the benefits of adding another NVR to the mix.