Posts made by user_588567793635436_588567793635436

My ability to connect to cameras from the PC client was unreliable, and I got better performance after I set my router to treat all of the existing camera IPs as static. i.e. at my router I associated an IP with each camera's MAC address

I note that the camera settings also allow the connection type to be set to static. Can someone explain how connection setup and teardown works in all 4 possible static IP scenarios, i.e.

Router has a static IP assigned to camera MAC address, Client has camera set for static;
Router has a static IP assigned to camera MAC address, Client has camera set for DHCP;
etc (2 other cases)


Since I already have my router set to map camera MAC addresses to static IPs, what is the best setting at the camera (Static or DHCP), and why? Does it matter?

I have a battery powered (Argus PT) that is not detecting a person who runs quickly through the detection zone. Other cameras (E1 Outdoor) are detecting this person properly. A person who moves slowly through the Argus PT detection zone is properly detected.

I’ve tried a variety of settings on the battery powered camera. I noticed that on the PC client there is a pre-motion record option for the battery powered camera that offers a pre-motion record of 8 to 30 seconds. I’m wondering if this setting on the PC client is causing problems for the battery powered camera. Specifically, in order to do pre-motion record I believe the camera has to be recording all of the time. This seems contrary to battery powered operation. Furthermore, my Reolink Android App does not offer the pre-motion record setting for the battery-powered camera. Why is the pre-motion record setting available for the battery-powered camera from the PC client but not the android app? Why is this setting there at all for the battery-powered camera? Could this confusion be causing my battery-powered camera to fail to detect in some cases?
 
I decided to reboot my battery-powered camera.  The android app offers a setting to reboot the camera, but the PC client does not offer an option to reboot the battery-powered camera. I’m beginning to suspect that there are problems with the way the PC client is managing the battery powered camera.
 
I turned off pre-motion record for the battery-powered camera using the PC Client and then rebooted the camera from the android app. I plan to monitor for a few days to see if the camera will start detecting the running person. In the meantime could anyone please answer my questions above?

This post is about Reolink PTZ cameras in general and the E1 Outdoor cameras in particular. It is a little long but I have some specific questions at the end.

Over the past 7 months I purchased 3 E1 OD cams. Over time I found that they could not reliably return to the monitoring point (MP) after panning. Online discussions say there is a problem with the gears. Some people suggest the gears are nylon, they degrade over time, and worn/bad teeth preclude reliably returning to the correct MP. My oldest camera has the worst MP error, the newest one the least, this is consistent with the notion that the gears wear and get worse over time.

So I worked with RL support who has been pretty helpful. After upgrading the firmware on the cameras and doing some more pan testing I documented the problem in detail and RL agreed to issue me RMAs for the three cameras. So far so good.

The plot thickens here because I bought two of the cameras from RL’s eBay storefront and the third camera from RL’s web site. So, they asked me to return the cameras under two different RMAs. They sent a separate email with an RMA for the camera bought from the RL web site and a separate email with an RMA to return the two cameras bought from the RL eBay storefront. OK, I have to pay shipping twice because I’ve had the cameras longer than thirty days, but the physical address to which I must return the cameras is the same place in Pomona CA. Sigh….

Another curiosity is that the RL email providing the RMA for the cameras bought from the eBay store says this:

“As we are not sure if the replacements will solve the problem, may we know if you are willing to” (…take advantage of an offer to provide me with different model cameras) “…Or if you have other suggestions, please also let us know.”

On the other hand the RMA email from the RL web store mentions no problem with providing me an E1 to replace my original E1.

So the eBay RMA team seems to be suggesting the (gear??) problem in the E1 Outdoor cams has not been/will not be fixed, but there is no such mention in the email providing the RMA for the camera purchased from the RL web site. Why am I getting 2 different stories? If anyone from RL is reading this forum, please comment.

For RL users reading this I’d like to hear any reports of MP/PTZ problems possibly related to gear wear, both for the E1 Outdoor or any other RL PTZ autotracking cameras. Are there any RL WiFi PTZ autotracking cameras known to have a long term track record holding their monitor points? If so, are there known design improvements supporting such claims?

@user_588567793635436_588567793635436 Update: I thoroughly tested and examined all of my SD cards and I believe they are all counterfeit. I had some smaller cards on hand and confirmed that they were good. I installed the smaller known good cards and so far no more corruption. Plus, camera connection and playback responsiveness is noticeably improved.

Reolink deserves a lot of credit for helping me get to this point. They responded to all of my emails promptly and respectfully, and looked at their software closely even though they could have (and maybe should have) immediately blamed the SD cards.

I have new cards on order directly from Sandisk. First time buyer from their site, I got a 15% senior discount.

The bad cards came from eBay seller books-8615 and were purchased August 2022. I am processing a refund request. We will see how that goes.

I too am having periodic video file corruption problems. I have authentic brand new 256GB Sandisk Class 10 HC SD cards. I have reported details to RL including copies of the last good recording and the corrupt recording that occurred only minutes later. After the first corruption all subsequent recordings are also corrupted. Reformatting is the only fix. I think they have a file open/close problem and furthermore that their error recovery procedures could be improved. Maybe they could be checking for corruption in the most recently recorded file and if corruption is found take some corrective action. The whole point of supporting 256 GB cards is to create a large video archive and having to reformat long before you fill up the card kind of defeats the purpose, no?

@user_588567793635436_588567793635436

Hi John:

Two things to update/touch base with you on.

1) I've concluded the PT 2K PIR detection range I was trying to achieve is right at its limit, giving marginal and erratic detection results, with detection variations happening due to changing lighting conditions and variations in target motion.  I am going to try using the PT 2K in a different part of my installation.

2) I found a Reolink web page saying the PT 2K does not distinguish between an admin user and other users like the non-battery cameras. But I have been controlling the PT 2K from two different devices and I think that is contributing to some unusual behavior. I suspect Reolink has some bugs to work out for use cases associated with accessing the PT 2K from more than one instance of the app. I've asked them about this and am waiting for their reply.

Skip

@john_350143387672724 Thanks so much!!

@john_350143387672724

The link shows the number of users for viewing a stream but I think my question is different. My question involves playback simultaneously with recording--which requires two different types of access (read and write) to the SD card. Would you be able to do a test at your end? Fire up your app and do some playback while at the same time try to trigger your camera to detect and record. I'd be curious if your camera can do it. And if it can, that seems like another reason for me to return my camera.

@john_350143387672724

I bought it from Reolink on eBay and have already informed them I may need a return. I haven't registered it yet.

Around noon it wasn't working and started after I tapped the camera. Then around five it stopped detecting for 10 minutes, then started again.

Do you happen to know if it can do a detection/recording while using the app to play back an earlier recording?

@john_350143387672724

You're not going to believe this but I was recalling that every time I touch the camera--e.g. to do a power cycle--things start working.

So there had been no detections, push notifications or detections for a few hours, so I went outside and tapped the camera a few times and everything started working again. Did I mention the package was a little crushed when it arrived?

@john_350143387672724

Thanks, I see. My AT&T phone doesn't have those options.

On your screen, can you enable both types of alerts at the same time?

@john_350143387672724

Interesting....the app installed on both of my devices doesn't have these options. Version 4.31.04

@john_350143387672724

Thanks John. Yes, I'm familiar with the many notification settings and I know they vary from one device to another. Case in point is the notification LED which comes and goes for different hardware designs and device generations.

In this case I think my settings are fine, but as shown in the graphic the camera is sending this notification as a silent notification, which is an Android capability for minimizing the intrusiveness of lower priority notifications. I'm pretty sure the choice to make a notification silent is made by the originator, in this case the camera. As I said the notifications to my tablet are not silent, perhaps Reolink thinks my tablet is the primary monitoring device and my phone is secondary, therefore it sends a silent notification there.

Right now I'm running an add-on app on my phone that plays an audible signal when the silent notification from the camera arrives. All of my notifications from other apps are working as I intend. But I'd like Reolink to explain how and why one device gets a silent notification and the other does not, and to give me a little more control over the operation. I suspect accessing the camera by more than one device is a fairly common use case--e.g. husband and wife each want to be able to access the camera.

@john_350143387672724 Right now notifications to my tablet include the audible alert but notifications to my phone are Android silent. I have asked Reolink about this.

@john_350143387672724 Great info--I will look into the GCM stuff.

One thing I think I've noticed is that the notifications seem to not arrive at a device if I have the Reolink app open, but if I close the app notifications can then arrive at that device. Perhaps Reolink feels that if you have the app open you don't need notifications at that device. Do you have anything to share in this regard?

@john_350143387672724 Well then that could explain some of the problems. For starters they would be at the mercy of google--any changes at google could wreck a lot of push notifications. Right now when I send a Reolink Test push from my tablet it goes to my phone, and vice versa. They are both android devices known to google.

@user_588567793635436_588567793635436

Here is screenshot showing search with Match All not working.

@reolink-fiona I search for the terms "PT 2K Notification" and search for Titles with Match All and there are 84 results, many of the titles do not have all three terms.

I tried to attach a screen shot but get an error from your web site: "Something went wrong while parsing server response."

@john_350143387672724

John:

You say "Yes, the upper right-hand corner will show the alert that was triggered."

Not to be picky, but I don't think an "alert" is "triggered"--I note that in the setup there are controls for the "Detection Alarm", "Push Notifications" and "Email Alerts", I think the email alert is the last step of the process. I see those icons and I have all email alerts turned off. And those icons usually appear soon after a moving object enters the FOV.

I think the process is 1) a detection occurs, 2) a recording is triggered, and 3) notifications/alerts are generated/pushed/sent.

I think those icons mean a vehicle, person, or "other object" has been detected by analyzing changes in the video from frame to frame, but the recording and notification/alerts only happen if there is a PIR detection. I say this based on playing around with things but I welcome any observations that suggest otherwise. I suspect waiting for the PIR reduces false alarms, which would be in Reolink's best interest, but from my observations I'd like the option to trigger the recording/push using the same algorithm that is generating the icons on the live video feed. I note that those icons do not appear when a recording is played back.

Yes, I scanned the "share camera" QR code from my phone into my tablet when I installed the app on the tablet. The tablet had no problem connecting to the camera but the notifications all seem confused.

@john_350143387672724

Thanks John for the info.

I did a manual firmware update today and am on V3.0.0.1045_2206130--newer than yours so you might want to look into it.

Does your camera show the person/vehicle/other icon in the upper right corner of the live feed when an object passes through the FOV? Is that icon a good indicator of when detection is in progress? If your feed never shows those icons I can try and post a screen shot.

It is becoming clear that my camera is sending notifications to my different devices at different times. Need to get to the bottom of how the camera decides where to send the notifications. Have you ever run the app on more than one device?