Poor Live and Recorded Video Quality

[Coppertop]

I've have 5-cameras installed around my house (inside and outside) and they are great pieces of kit. One major issue I am experiencing is with regards to both live and recorded video quality.
All cameras show a strong wireless signal and battery. However viewing live or recorded images from cameras mounted outside result in lots of pixelation. My green lawn flips between crystal clear to a green sea. Similarly at times I can make out the individual paving block in my driveway and in the same video/live recording it turns into a sea of grey. All cameras are set to record at the Highest Video Quality

Any suggestions would be most welcome; as unless I can find a solution I may be forced to return the cameras for a refund

[jguerdat]

It does similar things for me. I strongly suspect compression issues. I'd like to see an update that allows you to choose compression level. You can try Best quality video but it still happens to me even with that setting.

[Nhellie]

Just to try and isolate the issue, can you try pointing the camera on another location. Probably too much bright light on the outside. How's the recording/live feeds at night? 

[Coppertop]

I tend to agree with you. The video quality setting seems to make no difference

[Coppertop]

The same issues with the night time recordings and live feeds as well. It's annoying because the still images you see when there is a video recording are so sharp and clear

[Nhellie]

I see. The only thing weird is because you said "However viewing live or recorded images from cameras mounted outside result in lots of pixelation" so I would think its about the lighting. What firmware version are you using? 

[jguerdat]

Hmmm... Maybe it IS the lighting since my cameras are outside. I have nothing to compare to that way. I've seen it at night, though, so maybe it's not the same thing.

[Coppertop]

You probably have a point. The camera inside my home shows great. However outside, even if the cameras are not in direct sunlight, the video is poor.

[ShawnJethro]

I just installed the four camera system and have been very unhappy with the video quality.  Night or Day.   In a normal daylight setting I might be able to identify a stranger, but in a night time setting the video is useless beyond determining skin tones and clothing options.   Very disappointed.

On the plus side, installing the system was a dream and it operates very well.

[TomMac]

---

ShawnJethro wrote:

I just installed the four camera system and have been very unhappy with the video quality.  Night or Day.   In a normal daylight setting I might be able to identify a stranger, but in a night time setting the video is useless beyond determining skin tones and clothing options.   Very disappointed.

snipped

---

You do understand that at night or with a low light level, the camera switches over to black/white.  This must happen for the IR illuminators to operate.

The IR lighting does have a limited range of say about 10m max ( with some fall off to the side angles )

Either way, I don't see the video quality as poor... Maybe you could post a few snapshots/vids to show your problems ( they say a pic is worth a thousand words )

[jguerdat]

Another possibility is that your I'net connection for uploads is <1Mb/sec.  According to posts here from Netgear support, that can lower your video quality.  Have you run speed tests from sites such as speedtest.net?

[Emmett]

I totally agree, the picture sucks and I can't adjust it to be an better.  This is the best we can get.  We mounted the camer about 14' high on a pole to try and catch license plates of cars about about the where the purple jeep is.  You can't read the writing on the post office truck right below it.  Any try at enlarging the image only makes it more out of focus.  I'm not exactly sure how close the camer would have to be to catch license plates you can read, but I'm guessing it's close enough to be stolen by the same people we are trying to catch.  If anyone know's a way to improve the "HD" quality of this camera besides "Best Video" in the camera settings, please let me know.

Very frustrating system as well.  Who builds a totally wirless camera only it's base station requires an ethernet connection?  The same company that makes range extenders that's who.  This cloud storage only thing is bullcrap too, they could have put a flash drive in the basestation. The whole thing feels so locked down you would think Apple made it. So disappointed.

 

[ShawnJethro]

The night vision only reaches out about 20 feet for any use in identifying facial features.   Additionally, i believe the viewing angle is too wide to take advantage of any resolution.   However, the upside is the speed at which the system communicates motion, I don't believe that I've seen anything that works this fast. 

[ShawnJethro]

My upload speeds are generally 10-40 mb so I can't imagine that would be the issue.

[Emmett]

It just doesn't do the job I need it to do.  In this photo, this gentleman is about to dump all of that trash furniture in front of our gate.  I can't see his license plate from about 10 feet away.  It's panned down too.  Also, the motion sensor doesn't always work.  There is one video with all that furniture in it and the next video filmed non of it is there and my Store Manager is locking the gate.  There were 2 guys carrying about 4 pieces inside the gate and the motion sensor did not go off.  There's other stuff I don't like as well.  They could have put a flash drive in the basestation for when interenet connectivity is down.  Also, the company that makes range extenders made the base station of a totally wireless camera, wired.  No local storage seems like a gag that Netgear can keep charging people subscriptions.  Just logining in and seeing a BUY MORE CAMERAS button as big as my video annoys me. 

[HeatherABC]

Last night was my first night with my cameras. I noticed the one aimed at my front door did that too. It was horrible. My son came home and while it was recording it either breaking up and/or missed recording and it looked like he teleported out of the frame. So far I like this system, but if this is common I'm not sure if it will be staying. Doesn't do much good if someone breaks in to not get good video of them and that's the main reason we have this system.

[KristynM]

HeatherABC,

Have you noticed this only on the one camera aimed at your front door? You could try to swap locations with a working camera to isolate the issue to help determine if it's the location of the camera or if it's the camera having an issue. The breaking up of the recording or missed recording, could possibly be due to your internet connection. Please ensure that your upload speed is at least 1mbps. Also your camera should be no further than 300ft from the base station as well as taking into consideration any obstructed interferences such as concreate walls.

[HDR]

I actually called the Arlo support line today about my new system. Video quality EXTREMELY dissapointing. Almost useless. Unbelievably easy setup. Love the total wireless concept with base station, but guys, video quality no better than a cheap Walmart babycam. PLEASE make some HIGH DEF OPTICAL ZOOM (critical) cams available for this system or I predict a rapid demise of this brand.

[DigDogs]

Thought I would add my 2 cents... People, please read reviews and look at some actual samples of recorded footage online, so that you know what to expect for resolution and the angle of coverage you are getting.  I have dropcams on the inside of my house and Arlos on the outside.  Both systems use a wide angle coverage but work for my needs.  (In fact I caught a tenant smoking weed on the property, could even make out the little pipe and kit).  To expect these cameras to pick up license plates from more than a small distance away is unreasonable.  These cams are meant to pick up movement over an area.  The resolution with the guy dumping the garbage looks fantastic for a wifi camera but if you want to get a plate be prepared to pay for a completely different camera from a different company.  Why buy a wide range camera and then criticize it?  

Last point, I mounted a scope to a dropcam in a window and it picked up further detail such as faces just fine at a distance of 300 feet or so.  Plates are really hard and they even make a special license plate recognition camera for that purpose.  For me, however, I am going to get a hard wired system, maybe with a ptz camera to zoom in on plates, and use the Arlos as a redundant system.

[Hokallabird]

Realy bad video quality outside... 

To much money for this!! 

Is it realy thi bad?

the blue colour is realy pixel...

[jguerdat]

Looks fine to me.  Blue sky will reflect on white snow providing an overall blueish cast, a long-time phenomenon with photography since your brain filters out the blue that's actually there.

Maybe I'm not seeing what you are?

[Hokallabird]

So you dont have pixeling in the movies? Do you look att the computer or with mobil? 

The details is bad if you looking att the big picture on the screen. 720p? hmm looks like a riped cam movie or something. Not the 720p detail!

[jguerdat]

Sorry but 720p resolution is less than 1 megapixel.  Use a 1MP camera and compare results.  Also in there is compression with a fairly strong amount being used in these cameras.  Lesser compression would clear the image but only to a point - you still have to deal with only 921,600 pixels.  Your average cell phone camera uses at least 8MP but a 720p video from that camera will look about the same, given differences in compression.

BTW, 1080p only gets you about 2MP...

[Hokallabird]

aha oki 😕 so not so good for bird watching then. 

[hokeysmoke]

720p, when done well, would provide a wonderful, sharp HD image.  ESPN, for example, uses 720p for all of its HD broadcasts.  With Arlo, although the stream is truly 720p, it is dramatically compressed to about 730Kbps, whereas a Comcast ESPNHD broadcast could provide as much as 19,000Kbps, or 25x the bit rate.  With that in mind, Arlo actually looks quite good considering how little data is being recorded.  One could argue that to use the term "720p" is a bit disingenuous, but it is technically correct.