topic Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup in Partner Integrations

Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

Schorschi — Mon, 03 Oct 2016 03:11:53 GMT

Here is an example of a workaround of the delayed recording issue with the wireless Arlo cameras.

Locale is a narrow ~35 ft long path on the side of a house. Two wireless cameras are positioned at opposite ends of the path.

Two rules are defined for each camera, one to record with the triggering camera itself for 35 seconds, the other to simultaneously record with the other camera for 60 seconds.

The first clip shows footage from the triggering camera, positioned above a swimming pool pump and filter. One can just barely see the last of two nightly visitors almost outside the range of the light source by the fence on the left side. Between 0:11 and 0:15 one silhouette can be seen moving against the other camera's light in the background.

The second clip shows footage from the other camera. Note, that the visitors can be seen entering the frame at 0:11, an unusual sight for a wireless Arlo camera, if it were triggered by itself, as one typically only sees the moving object(s) leaving the frame.

Reaction time of the first camera could probably be improved by slightly rotating the camera clockwise in order to cover more ground next to the pump.

All light sources are from the cameras only.

An interesting sidenote is that the timestamps of both clips that are encoded in their download file names are identical to the last digit, 1455332244923.

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

RobertRosal — Sat, 13 Feb 2016 07:18:42 GMT

This would be more efficient and less expensive if Netgear would offer a motion sensor to trigger.

I hate the fact we have to waste a camera to do what a $30 motion sensor can already do.

Great video and capture!

Another Example for others to see. Trigger from Driveway.

https://arlo.netgear.com/hmsweb/users/library/share/link/1B226F4BF9B67458

Full view of on coming object.

https://arlo.netgear.com/hmsweb/users/library/share/link/3C02BC8E57BF8F71

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

Hula_Rock — Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:56:05 GMT

I agree, its a total waste of a camera. Your better off installing a trip wire to put something in motion so Arlo can detect it OR a $10.00 Flood light with motion from Amazon.....

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

NotThatGood — Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:56:41 GMT

Could you please explain how you configure the rules to have the cameras work as you described? I am on their free Basic cloud offer. I haven't played around in the rules area that much yet, but am also I dissapointed in the delay time for the cams to start recording. Unfortunately I don't see that I will be paying for their cloud after seeing how bad the recording works...

At first I rated these cams as 9/10. After checking the recording delay, I would now say it's more like 5/10.

Thanks in advance.

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

Schorschi — Thu, 25 Feb 2016 22:48:11 GMT

NotThatGood wrote:
Could you please explain how you configure the rules to have the cameras work as you described? I am on their free Basic cloud offer. I haven't played around in the rules area that much yet, but am also I dissapointed in the delay time for the cams to start recording. Unfortunately I don't see that I will be paying for their cloud after seeing how bad the recording works...

The number of rules you program or the reaction time of a recording is not limited in any way by the subscription plan you're on. So, upgrading to a paid subscription won't change the behavior of the system.

The only thing the subscription plans limit are the number of cameras you can connect to the same account and the retention period for keeping recorded video footage available to you in the cloud. The Basic Plan, which is the only plan that is free, limits you to connecting five cameras and has a seven-day retention period for recorded video clips.

So, in the above example I have cameras A and B.

You would create a custom mode, and in it create the following four rules to achieve the setup I illustrated above:

If motion sensed on camera A, record on camera A.
If motion sensed on camera A, record on camera B.
If motion sensed on camera B, record on camera B.
If motion sensed on camera B, record on camera A.

One ill side effect I have discovered since my original post is that making the recording lengths for the camera pairs unequal will block the camera with the shorter recording length from being able to react to any new motion events until the camera with the longer recording length has completed recording.

So, originally my rules, including recording length, were as follows:

If motion sensed on camera A, record on camera A for 35 seconds.
If motion sensed on camera A, record on camera B for 60 seconds.
If motion sensed on camera B, record on camera B for 35 seconds.
If motion sensed on camera B, record on camera A for 60 seconds.

The thinking behind these unequal recording lengths was that if motion was sensed by one camera, it would take the potential intruder a few seconds to get to the other end of the pathway where the other camera is located, hence the recording time for that other camera should be longer.

However, I found out that once the first camera has stopped recording (after 35 seconds), but the other camera hadn't yet (before 60 seconds had passed), another motion event at the first camera would be ignored and not cause the first camera to record at all. Because the second camera hasn't finished recording, it is blocking the first camera until after the 60-second recording period is over.

So, I adjusted the recording lengths to be equal between the two cameras in order to avoid this "dead spot" situation. So, the final rules are:

If motion sensed on camera A, record on camera A for 60 seconds.
If motion sensed on camera A, record on camera B for 60 seconds.
If motion sensed on camera B, record on camera B for 60 seconds.
If motion sensed on camera B, record on camera A for 60 seconds.

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

NotThatGood — Fri, 26 Feb 2016 10:06:59 GMT

Thank you very much for the explanation. Will give this a try right away. When it comes to start recording on camera B when montion is detected on camera A, is that made thru the drop-down menu in the web/mobile GUI under "Edit Mode" - Rules - "Record camera (A) on motion" - click Edit - Then do the following? There I can chose one of my 3 cameras and set recording time, but how do I know both camera A and B are "active" and saved?

For me it looks like only the chosen camera is "used" in the rule. If I in the drow-down menu choose for instance the one already picked/green (in this case camera A) the Save button is gray, if I pick camera B the Save button is now green. I then press Save and when checking again, same thing happens.

Edit: When creating a new Mode this is what I can do:

New mode - <mode name> - Next - Here I can choose one of the 3 cameras - Next -
Motion is detected - Next - Motion sensitivity 80 - Next - ""What device do you want
to have video recordet for this rule?" here i can only choose one of them - Next -
Record video - Next - 60 seconds and push and email - Next...

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

NotThatGood — Fri, 26 Feb 2016 10:59:23 GMT

Oops I think I've found it. I had to create a new Mode, else I didn't have a New Rule button...

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

GSARidet — Mon, 08 Aug 2016 20:40:47 GMT

I'm using a Wemo motion sensor and IFTTT to trigger an Arlo Q to start recoding, this works pretty well. I've also set a Wemo plugged in light to come on.

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

Hula_Rock — Tue, 09 Aug 2016 13:30:57 GMT

GSARidet wrote:
I'm using a Wemo motion sensor and IFTTT to trigger an Arlo Q to start recoding, this works pretty well. I've also set a Wemo plugged in light to come on.

So you spent an extra 100.00 on top of the cost of the Arlo Q to get the results you wanted. For me the Arlo Q's motion detection is wayyyy better than its' wirelss camera counterpart....

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

GSARidet — Tue, 09 Aug 2016 15:33:46 GMT

I have had the wemo switches for a couple of years now, so no, i didnt buy them specifically for this. Other folk might well akso have them and if not, it is a decent option that can do other things - a 100 gives you a plug switch too.

Re: Example of workaround for delayed recording using two-camera setup

Agent_Psycho — Thu, 16 Mar 2017 04:04:06 GMT

My camera is 12 off the ground looking over a two car wide driveway. The view and quality is great during the day and good when the flood light is on. The delay can be as long as ten seconds before it starts recording though. Are you saying i need a second camera and a special outdoor environmental configuration and situation like the one shown above to capture all unwanted visitors video footage. If so i am returning this camera. I had someone vandalize my car rescently and I was told this was the best at best buy. I love alot of the features but the night vision is sort of weak. It doesn't travel very far. Not far enough to see past the send car and worse is some times when leaving for work it misses me getting in the car before it kicks on. This is just unacceptable. Please tell me theres a setting i have wrong because i like it otherwise.