Video Skipping 10 Seconds Ahead During Playback

[bugsysiegals]

I've got my test rig setup, am having Blue Iris record me while I pretend to be interested in breaking in our vehicles in the driveway, and as I watch the video back, each of the recordings skips ahead ~10 seconds.

It happens in every video and seems to happen about 10 seconds into each video. I can actually see the timestamp on the video skip ahead 10 seconds. I can also see the Blue Iris "run time" in addition to the video timestamp skip ahead if playing it back through iOS app instead of the web browser.

If I log into the camera directly, I can playback the motion detected events which were recorded to the SD Card in full without any issues.

I've unplugged and disabled all cameras in Blue Iris except the one I'm testing, BI shows 1% CPU with 350MB RAM used, and still the same issue...

It does this whether the PoE switch is connected directly to the router or directly to the 2nd NIC in the BI PC. The switch is uplinked with a 1GB SFP port and each camera is plugged into the switch ports which are 100Mb each. The PC has an i7 4770K CPU and is running Windows 7 on a 250GB SSD with 4TB WD Purple for video recording.

Any ideas why Blue Iris is jumping ahead?

Let me know what settings you need to see ...

 

[SouthernYankee]

Good screen shots.

1) turn off teh sub streams if you are not using it.
2) never have your camera data running through the router.
3) for initial testing set the video to continuous recording, not triggered.

After changes test again.

 

[fenderman]

I've got my test rig setup, am having Blue Iris record me while I pretend to be interested in breaking in our vehicles in the driveway, and as I watch the video back, each of the recordings skips ahead ~10 seconds.

It happens in every video and seems to happen about 10 seconds into each video. I can actually see the timestamp on the video skip ahead 10 seconds. I can also see the Blue Iris "run time" in addition to the video timestamp skip ahead if playing it back through iOS app instead of the web browser.

If I log into the camera directly, I can playback the motion detected events which were recorded to the SD Card in full without any issues.

I've unplugged and disabled all cameras in Blue Iris except the one I'm testing, BI shows 1% CPU with 350MB RAM used, and still the same issue...

It does this whether the PoE switch is connected directly to the router or directly to the 2nd NIC in the BI PC. The switch is uplinked with a 1GB SFP port and each camera is plugged into the switch ports which are 100Mb each. The PC has an i7 4770K CPU and is running Windows 7 on a 250GB SSD with 4TB WD Purple for video recording.

Any ideas why Blue Iris is jumping ahead?

Let me know what settings you need to see ...

View attachment 36756 View attachment 36759 View attachment 36760 View attachment 36761 View attachment 36762 View attachment 36763

your recording settings are are messed up. Post them.
also set a pre-trigger time of 3 seconds.

 

[bugsysiegals]

your recording settings are are messed up. Post them.
also set a pre-trigger time of 3 seconds.

Isn't that what I provided?

 

[fenderman]

Isn't that what I provided?

trigger>motion

 

[bugsysiegals]

Here they are ...

 

[fenderman]

Here they are ...

View attachment 36778 View attachment 36779 View attachment 36780

you need to lower your make time and likely size. What is likely happening is that the movement is insufficient to re trigger. So it does not record until later.
Also set your break time to at least 30 seconds.

 

[bugsysiegals]

Good screen shots.

1) turn off teh sub streams if you are not using it.
2) never have your camera data running through the router.
3) for initial testing set the video to continuous recording, not triggered.

After changes test again.

Thanks!!

1) Done
2) The cameras are on there own vlan/subnet and are properly firewalled ... is it still bad to run through the router? I understand they create extra traffic on the router but when looking at netdata entware software, they’re only creating 10Mbps traffic at this point with all other router metrics looking excellent. Reason for wanting them on the router versus direct to BI is to have email notifications for SD Card, illegal access (failed login attempts), making camera adjustments without remoting into the BI PC, and streaming specific cameras to TinyCam on our Firesticks. I’d like to setup a process to have a Raspberrry Pi automatically change camera profiles for better SD Card recording backup and perhaps it could automate some other features depending on weather conditions, etc. There seem to be a lot of opportunities I’d miss so I’m just wondering if there’s a strong enough reason not to go this route and give up these things....
3) Will try tomorrow

 

[bugsysiegals]

you need to lower your make time and likely size. What is likely happening is that the movement is insufficient to re trigger. So it does not record until later.
Also set your break time to at least 30 seconds.

Thanks Fenderman, I suppose I really need to learn all the settings!!!

 

[looney2ns]

It's advisable to run all cameras to a POE switch. Connect the BI server to the same switch as the cameras, then run one cable from the switch to the router.
Lan ports on routers sometimes choke with all the camera data running through them.

 

[bugsysiegals]

Thanks for the info and that's very close to what I've done. I have all the cameras connecting to the PoE switch and the switch connecting to a port on the router but instead have the BI PC connected to another port on the router rather than to the PoE switch. I'd done this to keep them on separate vlan/subnets but now that I'm more familiar with linux iptable rules I suppose I could combine them.

From a technical point, is there a difference between what you suggest and what I have? I'm fine with saving a router port but just wonder if the router wouldn't still need to process the outbound camera data and then route it back out the same port back to the PC? Perhaps this doesn't cause the same issues as traveling from one port to another?

 

[fenderman]

Thanks for the info and that's very close to what I've done. I have all the cameras connecting to the PoE switch and the switch connecting to a port on the router but instead have the BI PC connected to another port on the router rather than to the PoE switch. I'd done this to keep them on separate vlan/subnets but now that I'm more familiar with linux iptable rules I suppose I could combine them.

From a technical point, is there a difference between what you suggest and what I have? I'm fine with saving a router port but just wonder if the router wouldn't still need to process the outbound camera data and then route it back out the same port back to the PC? Perhaps this doesn't cause the same issues as traveling from one port to another?

There is a difference. When the pc is connected to the same switch nothing passes the router.

 

[bugsysiegals]

There is a difference. When the pc is connected to the same switch nothing passes the router.

I didn't know that, thanks! Is there any reason or advantage to why people use this method versus connecting the camera PoE switch to a 2nd NIC in the BI PC and then connecting the BI PC main NIC to the router? It seems the method here is better since the cameras can still be accessed by other devices in the LAN, assuming that's what you want or setup firewall rules to only allow what you'd like connecting to each other.

 

[fenderman]

I didn't know that, thanks! Is there any reason or advantage to why people use this method versus connecting the camera PoE switch to a 2nd NIC in the BI PC and then connecting the BI PC main NIC to the router? It seems the method here is better since the cameras can still be accessed by other devices in the LAN, assuming that's what you want or setup firewall rules to only allow what you'd like connecting to each other.

both methods prevent data from passing the router. the second nic prevents the cameras from accessing other network devices.

 

[bugsysiegals]

both methods prevent data from passing the router. the second nic prevents the cameras from accessing other network devices.

Perfect ... thanks fenderman ... now it's absolutely clear! Thanks looney2ns ... I'll use your method and firewall the cameras from all but the specific devices I wish to have access to them.

 

[bugsysiegals]

FYI - for anybody else who reads this, my Blue Iris iOS app took at least 4-5 seconds to open and was slow to load the cameras when the switch and PC where connected to the router or when the switch was connected to a second NIC in the PC but now opens almost immediately with the PC to the PoE switch and switch to the router!!