Arlo|Smart Home Security|Wireless HD Security Cameras|NETGEAR
Reply
Prodigy

Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

As some of you may know, I have been really frustrated with the performance of this system.   After countless tests, tickets, an RMA for a camera, it was time to dig into this further.  I have heard everything: “You should move the camera”, “camera angle is bad”, “try installing a shield”,  “the flux capacitor is set to high”, etc.  Believe me when I say “I tried everything”.

 

In the spirit of trouble shooting I have been working with Christine at Netgear.  Kudos to her, she is the only one I have seen post from Netgear that actually cares about their product.  I just wanted to share the latest test that I conducted with the Arlo community in hopes that it helps fine tune this product.  

 

My communication with NetGear (Christine)

 

 

 

Good Morning Christine,

 

I had some time yesterday afternoon to do some testing (materials impact reflection of IR) when I got home from work.  As per your request, I adjusted the camera so less brick is showing. 

 

 

Testing environmental conditions as follows:

 

Body Temp:  97.9 degrees

 

Screen.png

 

 

Here are IR Thermal readings: (from left to right  concrete driveway, grass in fron yard, brick on the front of my house)

 

Thermal.jpg

 

 

From my truck parked in the street, I set the system to "ALL MOTION ON" (sensitivity set at 90%).  I walked from my truck to point A > point B > point C > point D > point E > point F.  As you can see Arlo picked me up walking from point C to point D:

 

Route.png

 

 

LINK TO VIDEO: https://arlo.netgear.com/hmsweb/users/library/share/link/C22D88499B887561

 

Follow up notes:

 

Q:  Have you attempted to place the camera on the other corner of the garage?  

A:  Yes,  I also installed the camera in the middle of the Garage and at the other end of the house.

 

Q:  Have you had a chance to relocate this camera to point back at the house?

A:  No,  the only location that affords me that angle is a young tree.  I would have to cut some branches away to give me a clear view (if any) of my front door and cars parked in my driveway.

 

Q: One more thing I wanted to check in with you about is the location of the base station. At one point, didn't you have it sitting on top of your router? Is so, we should also think about relocating it to at least 6 feet away from the router to see if that makes a difference.

A:  it was sitting on my router at one time,  we had discussions earlier about that and its location close to a smart TV.  I relocated the Arlo base station to the opposite side of the room, 15 feet away.

Message 1 of 27
Guru

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

@Hula_Rock

Do you think its possible the PIR sees a 'bad signal to noise ratio' re with the concrete driveway?? I could see where this might be a somewhat reflective surface... how is the response at night?

--------------------------------------
Morse is faster than texting!
--------------------------------------
Message 2 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

@TomMac I hope that is not the case since most driveways are made of concrete.  As per netgear "motion detection range decreases as ambient temperatures get closer to 98.6 degrees".  I will run a second series of tests early in the morning to see if the results improve.  I also plan a conducting tests when the South Texas heat reaches temps above 100 degrees.

 

I have a hand held FLIR 160 unit which shows some interesting results. It clearly shows the heat generated from the human body clearly walking accross the driveway.  I will post the FLIR unit video soon (video being used as part of a consumer review on my system)

 

early thoughts.......  Netgear might want to look at different PIR sensors and lense arrays to imporve motion detection.

Message 3 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

@ChristineT

 

 

Here are the results of a second test I conducted.  The test case was completed during the Heat Peak hours of the day, about 10 degrees different from the first test of 80 Degrees:

 

 

The temperature of the concrete driveay shot up almost 15 degress over the ambeint temp but the motion detection caught me at the same point. 

 

Temp.png

Thermal_2.png

Route_2.png

Message 4 of 27
Apprentice

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

What are you trying to pick up? The driveway and door? Or just the driveway? Could you try using a different mount to have the camera be more at an angle? There's a cheap($6) mount that works wonders for that.  It must be frustrating..i had the same issue and i was able to fix it by moving the base station 30 ft(Used through the wiring power adapters) and changing the wifi channel to 11 on the router. 

Message 5 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

@mountaindewbass

 

Trying to catch the door and dirveway.  I recently had a box taken from my front door which this system failed to catch.  This camera is installed with of of those $6.00 security camera mounts (from Amazon Prime)  I moved my basestation 15 feet away from my wireless router and used NetGear Wifi Analytics to find the best Wifi channel to use in my area.  Channel 7.

 

Thanks for the Input !!!!

Message 6 of 27
Guru

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

 

<The temperature of the concrete driveay shot up almost 15 degress over the ambeint temp but the motion detection caught me at the same point. >

 

 

At least it seems to tell that the sig to noise ratio isn't the problem if the camera is kicking on at the same point.

--------------------------------------
Morse is faster than texting!
--------------------------------------
Message 7 of 27
Guide

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

I'm very interested to see if you figure something out, Hula.  I have a similar angle and height for my driveway camera.  I have to get about five to six feet away from the camera before motion is triggered.  It has also been really hot where I live.  What is weird is that it was working better a few weeks ago.

Message 8 of 27
Tutor

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

Hula,

 

Here's my story.  We've had issues with kids in the neighborhood causing problems so I decided to try and catch them in the act.  I went to BestBuy and purchased the single camera Arlo system a few days ago.  I set it up in a matter of no time and mounted the camera on the magnetic ball above my garage facing the street.  The street is about 25ft from the camera.  I intend for this to pick up a lot of falso alarms, etc.  I wanted to test the motion so I could adjust sensitivity up and down to see how well it would work.  Initially I had issues, but after the initial system update to get latest versions, everything started working as expected.  During the day at the default 80% it picked up everything on the street, cars, people walking by, etc.  I made a second rule and eventually found that 55% would catch movement of people or cars about half way up the driveway, which is what I wanted.  I used the original rule for night and found that 90% would pick up everything on the street.  This still included people and cars.  I was so happy with how it worked I decided I wanted to put more camera's around the house.  Another out back and 2 more inside.  I went back to BestBuy at purchased the 4 camera version.  Mind you I did NOT take back the 1 camera kit yet.

 

This is where it gets weird.  When I got the kit home last night I removed the magnetic ball from the garage and replaced with the "secure" mount that came in the 4 camera kit and started testing.  Deactivated old base and deleted camera.  Setup new hardware a single camera.  Weird...same process as before, same WiFi location, but nothing was detected.  Deleted ALL default rules and modes and created fresh for the current day/time.  No movement.  Put the camera into motion test mode and nothing.  I then pulled the camera down, opened the batter covery, waited 10 seconds, and closed the batter cover and remounted the camera.  I was then able to get motion detection randomly within about 2-3 ft of the device.  I spent nearly 6 hours, until 1am through all temp, humidity (sun/rain), and day to night transition trying to troublesehoot this issue with no change.  I eventually added the camera from the original 1 camera kit and tried it, thinking maybe a sensor or something was bad on the new.  Instead of going with an unknown with the other's I figured I'd use something I already knew "worked".  Guess what...SAME ISSUE!!!  Now this camera isn't working.  Only thing now is that the base station is different.  I tried all of the typical suggestions I read about, powering off the base station (which did upgrade the FW, but not the cameras).  I even tried changing camera power modes to see if it helped.   NOPE!

 

I eventually synced all the cameras and let them update overnight.  All cameras are now on the same/latest version.  However, no change in response really.  I did start to pick up the occasional car on the street but it's still nearly off the screen by the time it starts recording.

 

I've seen a lot of suggestions about how to test or what could be wrong.  I'll give my 2cents below...

 

1)  The base station is too close to your WiFi - Sounds plausable, except, guess what...I'm still able to connect to my Arlo app and stream cameras with NO delay or timeout with clear uninterrupted video.  If WiFi was the problem, you wouldn't be connecting your base station WIRELESSLY from your phone and it would disconnect.  This never happens, therefore, WiFi is NOT the problem, regardless of where you have it in relation to other devices in the house.  They can use that as an excuse to try and "make you go away" all they want, but it's NOT the problem.

 

2)  Bad camera position - Sorry, don't buy it for one second.  As in my case, everything worked just fine until I changed to a different base station.  Remember I am using the camera from the original kit and now I have issues.  I have not yet switched base stations back, but it will be a couple weeks before I can as I'm leaving for vacation tomorrow.

 

3)  FW versions - Again, don't buy it.  I tested on the current base station with 2 different firmwares, and now two different firmware on the cameras.  It's basically identical issues. 

 

 

Ultimately I have a couple choices.  Cut bait and take everything back.  I could also take everything back and swap it out for one of the other 4 camera kits on the shelf.  I'll know what decision I want to make when I swap the 1 camera kit base station back and see if that resolves all of the issues.  I'm still not sure how a different base station could give a different result.  Again, I'm using the camera that "worked" from the original kit.  The ONLY thing that's changed at this point is the base station.  I'm using the exact same results, etc.

 

 

FYI...

One other thing to note while testing last night.  I did notice that while testing walking up the driveway to the camera in multiple positions (on mount, on ladder, height, angle, etc) the camera would only work consistently with me about 3-5 ft from it.  If I was within that small distance the motion detection worked.  The other piece of this that goes with Hula's experience is outside of that 5ft range there was MASSIVE delay to record.  Inside 5ft and it seemed ok.  Something has triggered all the camera's operational range much shorter than what I experienced before.

Message 9 of 27
Tutor

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

I spoke with Netgear/Arlo Support this afternoon and have a case opened.  I explained the entire situation.  The person I spoke with seemed as stumped by the information I provided as I have been.  One thing that did come to mind is that on the one camera system I only ever had 1 camera connected.  When I tested the old cam with the new, I never removed the new.   Therefore, I have 2 pieces that are different than the original 1 cam setup.

 

Support person agreed that exchanging base stations and only connecting the one cam (original) to test would be a start.  If that "fixes" the issue and I no longer have recording lag or motion sensing issues again, then I can disconnect and connect each camera one by one to see what the results will be.

 

After tomorrow I'm leaving on vacation so It'll be some time before I can test the hardware after tonight.

Message 10 of 27
Tutor

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

FYI...

 

I called support because I got an alert that my UPS package was delivered on my porch.  Never got an alert from Arlo.  The walkway to my porch is a few feet in front of the Arlo with a right-to-left approach from the driveway.  I never got an alert and no recording, however, 2 minutes later, Arlo recorded a car in the street almost 30 feet away driving by.

 

*banging head on desk*

 

Message 11 of 27
Guide

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

I feel your frustration.  I had the same thing happen yesterday with a package.  The amazing thing is that I have had motion triggered from lizards (which are tiny) crossing my driveway, eight to ten feet in front of the camera.  The same thing happens with small birds - but I struggle to get motion to activate.  It takes me walking about five feet away to get the camera to trigger.  I have tried walking across the camera view from multiple directions, at different distances.  So it isn't an issue of me walking straight towards the camera.  One thing that several of us seem to have in common is that the cameras are outside, facing driveways.  My other two outside cameras perform much better.

Message 12 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

Those are the same results I am getting! It works flawless catching cars driving by 30 feet away , not so good in the target area...
Message 13 of 27
Highlighted
Tutor

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

Long story short, I took both the single and 4 camera systems back to Best Buy and got my money back.  I Hooked the 1 camera system back up last night and now I'm having the same problem with it, that I had with the 4 camera system.  No improvement in the delay or reaction.  I should have just stuck to a single camera, but I'm glad I found this out before waiting beyond a time when I could return it.

 

I just don't have the time to troubleshoot something like this.  This shouldn't be a shot-in-the-dark product with these kind of issues at release to market.  This should be near foolproof and the ONLY thing we should be dealing with is WiFi issues, not IR detection and recording lag when this technology has been around for years.

 

Was hoping that the base station swap would resolve something.  Unfortunately it didn't.  Sorry Netgear, not going to be your beta tester.

Message 14 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

Just came back from vacation,  Not Happy with the what Arlo Captured.

Message 15 of 27
Guru

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)


Hula_Rock wrote:

Just came back from vacation,  Not Happy with the what Arlo Captured.


Hope it was good !

 

btw , new base and cam sw last day/night,  maybe things will be better,  Motion detect has a slight improvement.

--------------------------------------
Morse is faster than texting!
--------------------------------------
Message 16 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

System is on now,  lets see if there is an improvement..

 

what are the release notes ?

Message 17 of 27
Guru

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

no notes yet released

--------------------------------------
Morse is faster than texting!
--------------------------------------
Message 18 of 27
Virtuoso

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)


Hula_Rock wrote:

System is on now,  lets see if there is an improvement..

 

what are the release notes ?


Hula, with the update, the camera settings change, make sure to bump them all back up.

-Robert
Message 19 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

wierd, my sensitivity settings did not change and I confimred the the new firmware is on the cameras.  I played with the sensitivity and rebooted the base station.  lets see what happens....


RobertRosal wrote:

Hula_Rock wrote:

System is on now,  lets see if there is an improvement..

 

what are the release notes ?


Hula, with the update, the camera settings change, make sure to bump them all back up.


 

Message 20 of 27
Guru

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

Agreed - nothing got reset here, either.

Message 21 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

I see very little, if any improvement....  waiting on the release notes.

Message 22 of 27
Master

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

Hi Hula_Rock,

 

The release notes for the base station firmware version 1.4.2695 and camera firmware version 1.2.2688 is found on this link.

 

 

Regards,

 

DaneA

Arlo Team

Message 23 of 27
Prodigy

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

WOW 28,000+ thread views.....

Message 24 of 27
Tutor

Re: Motion Detection Testing (Part Deux) (materials impact reflection of IR)

Here it is over a year later and I just stumbled across your post, with almost exactly the same issues as you have or had I'm left to wonder if your problems where ever resolved? From what I've read it would seem the only way to verify that I am not the dummy which I feel like is to stop wasting time on this 4 camera setup and just trash this so called whatever system, to everyone who got this thing to record anything other than dead air my hat's of to you but you surely understand my disbelieve. Going to keep an eye out on any new post for a little while and maybe something conclusive or positive will show up, yeah right.
Message 25 of 27