Thanks, Ill send you a PM. If anyone has 4.2.9.3 I'm still interested in getting a copy of the update file.
4.3.0 - February 23, 2016
- Thread starter mcx
- Start date
Thanks, Ill send you a PM. If anyone has 4.2.9.3 I'm still interested in getting a copy of the update file.
I was getting the dancing motion on one of my cams prior to installing 4.3.0.4 today. I am not getting this same thing any more (currently any how).
4.3.0.3 same issues for me as reported here. 4.3.0.4 via normal in-app update fixed them, including false motion alerts. Thankfully.
That's EXACTLY what I was seeing before! Thanks for posting it. I will apply the latest update and check my "dancing mulch" to see if it's still doing it.
4.3.0.4 has fixed my alert issues but using multiple zones seems to cause "corruption". I was setting up a 3 zone trip when all of a sudden my zone masks got all messed up almost looked like random masking (all the letters instead of just the 3). Disabling zone edits and using just the one mask (A) solved it..sucks was really hoping to get zone to zone trips setup.
I've been getting this issue for some time, looks like the whole 4.3.0 and beyond has fixed it for me. Had 'dancing' grass for a few months.
I currently have a zone A and B setup on my driveway camera. Zone A is on the street/sidewalk and zone B is on the driveway itself. I also have it set to alert on A-B crossing and it seems to be going well so far.
Perhaps it is the 3 zone setting that is causing problems?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Can I have multiple rules setup?
Example I used to have a hotspot setup on the same kind of driveway setup you have (street/sidewalk and driveway) on the driveway for any motion, now I've added a zone for the sidewalk/street and put the object detection to A-B so it should only trigger when someone/something crosses from one into the other, but can I also have another rule setup to record anything moving inside the driveway zone (like we used to have before the zones) too, but just not alert me for those ones?
Example I used to have a hotspot setup on the same kind of driveway setup you have (street/sidewalk and driveway) on the driveway for any motion, now I've added a zone for the sidewalk/street and put the object detection to A-B so it should only trigger when someone/something crosses from one into the other, but can I also have another rule setup to record anything moving inside the driveway zone (like we used to have before the zones) too, but just not alert me for those ones?
Welcome to the forums davem.
You can achieve what you've described above by deselecting the 'H' Motion Zone under the Alerts tab. Recording will still be triggered by movement in the hotspot, but the alert won't be.
According to Ken (the BI developer) more motion options are still to come, including I believe multiple rules per camera (which can only be done now by cloning cameras).
Last edited by a moderator:
4.3.0.4 seems to have improved the false alerts, but the cancel shadows option still isn't working nearly as well as it used to. Clouds passing over that are clearly only affecting brightness slightly and not affecting color (and not blowing out), cause alerts.
Mike
Mike
You can in fact achieve this as this is exactly what I am doing. I have a clone of my driveway cam. One is set to record on all motion and the other is set to use the zone rules and trigger an alert when someone/something crosses from A-B. Clone the camera and you should be all set.
The zone crossing rules are not working very well for me. It works OK when an object starts say in the middle of zone A and moves to the middle of zone B, but I'm finding that a small object can start in zone A but near the zone B border, move just a few pixels into zone B, and set off the alert. I realize i can make more zones and have it cross from A to B to C or set the object detection size larger, but that only delays the issue: it's still there. This brings me to my next question which is not mentioned in the help:
In the object detection dialog, there are two checkboxes so you can set the object movement to say 100 pixels and check the top box and you can also check the bottom box and enter A-B so that objects crossing from A to B or B to A will trigger. The question is, are these two boxes an AND or an OR? If you have both boxes checked as in my example, does it require than an object travel between zone A and B AND it must travel at least 100 pixels? Or is it an OR operation: an alert is triggered when something passes between A and B OR moves 100 pixels (even in a single zone)?
Mike
In the object detection dialog, there are two checkboxes so you can set the object movement to say 100 pixels and check the top box and you can also check the bottom box and enter A-B so that objects crossing from A to B or B to A will trigger. The question is, are these two boxes an AND or an OR? If you have both boxes checked as in my example, does it require than an object travel between zone A and B AND it must travel at least 100 pixels? Or is it an OR operation: an alert is triggered when something passes between A and B OR moves 100 pixels (even in a single zone)?
Mike
From what I can tell they are ANDed so long as you have a check in both boxes. So you check'em both and the rule would be like you said, the object must move 100 pixels AND move from A to B BUT... it also must meet the min. object size and contrast rule before it will be considered for the object detection and zone rules.
Thanks. That's what I figured (would make sense) but I asked because I've seen a couple instances where a small object moved from the very edge of Zone A just barely into Zone B and it set off an alert (Motion AB). To me, it looked to have moved far less than 100 pixels even though that was my setting and both boxes were checked. I'll keep an eye on it and post a clip if I can get one that is definitive but I'm wondering if the "object crosses zones" is overriding the minimum pixel path and it shouldn't be. I suppose maybe I could set a minimum pixel distance that is greater than the frame width (which should never be satisfied) and then see if cross-zone motion still sets it off. I'll try that and report back.
OK, did that... set it to 2000 pixels (on a 640x480 camera) and checked both boxes. Never fired, so at least I know the zone crossing criteria is not overriding the pixel length: both conditions must be met.
Mike
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for testing this for us, Mike. What I can't tell for sure about the object travels in pixels is when it starts assessing that rule. If I have a rule setup to trigger on A-B and walk around in zone A for enough time to trigger MAKE time and I have traveled back and forth across the screen in zone A to satisfy the travel distance rule too, does that mean that as soon as I cross into zone B that the event will fire? In my scenario I could infact satisfy your 2000 pixel rule even on a 640x480 camera if I am walking back and forth and BI keeps track of that. My guess is that it doesn't track it but...
That leads to another question really. Is the distance to travel based on being in zone A, zone B, or any combination to amount to 100 pixels?
That leads to another question really. Is the distance to travel based on being in zone A, zone B, or any combination to amount to 100 pixels?
From my testing, it appears that the pixel distance doesn't depend on which zone it is in. I have a couple 640x480 cameras split into A-G zones, equal width, left to right, so no one zone is even 100 pixels wide and alerts still fire as expected so the 100 pixel distance must be allowed to cross zones. I think where the two might conflict is if you have zones that are not overlapping or adjacent (there's a gap)... then the gap could stop the motion and not allow for the pixel distance you are looking for.
My guess is it looks at the start and stop motion points and looks at the distance between and doesn't add back and forth motion, but I don't know that for sure.
Mike
I've still not quite gotten a handle on how the zones work WRT motion crossing zones. The attached shows the first frame of an alert that lasted about 10 seconds (@5 fps). I had it mark object recangles so we could see what it thought it was detecting. First off, it's not detecting that the objects are shadows (and this worked well pre-4.3) so the "Cancel shadows" option is less effective than it used to be. Second, I have the motion detection set to (both boxes checked):
- 150 pixel distance
- Crosses zones: AB>C, BC>D, CD>E, DE>F, EF>G, GF>E, FE>D, ED>C, DC>B, CB>A
So the rule is 150 pixel length and must cross three adjacent zones. The motion on the attached frame was listed as "Motion DEF" so it thinks something moved 150 pixels and it crossed zones D, E, and F. Zones in the picture are evenly spaced: A through G left to right and only extend from the wood-line down (grass only, not the trees). BTW, that was the only red object rectangle in the entire 10 second alert sequence, so I guess it thinks that since that red square occupies the very right edge of zone D, all of the width of zone E, and the very left edge of zone F, it's calling that "crossed zones D, E, and F" even though there is only one frame of (movement) data. I would think the software would follow a specific object from one zone into another zone (at a later frame) but it looks to me like if there's any motion at all in three zones, it is firing.
So it appears to me if you have a simple rule like A-B, it will fire any time an object occupies part of both zone A and B even at the same time and even for only one frame. And it also looks like it is firing if anything happens in zone A, and then subsequently something different happens in zone B. A tree could wobble in zone A and then a couple seconds later, a person 50 feet away in zone B could close their car door, and it will consider that A>B and fire. So obviously it can't detect an object moving through zones as it isn't following an individual object. It's more like "something happens in zone A followed by something happening in zone B". Now, I realize it can be difficult to follow an individual object frame to frame but maybe some methodology of color/size could be used. I also don't think that seeing an object that occupies zone A and B in a single frame should be considered "moving between zones", else shadows or blowing limbs that happen to move a little right on the boundary between two zones (but never crossing FROM one TO another) is going to set it off.
In this alert example that I attached, there's also only one frame with a red rectangle: the first frame in the sequence. How can one red rectangle be considered moving and how did it satisfy the 150 pixel distance rule when there's only one motion box in one frame?
Questions like these are what is preventing me from being able to use this new system effectively.
Mike
- 150 pixel distance
- Crosses zones: AB>C, BC>D, CD>E, DE>F, EF>G, GF>E, FE>D, ED>C, DC>B, CB>A
So the rule is 150 pixel length and must cross three adjacent zones. The motion on the attached frame was listed as "Motion DEF" so it thinks something moved 150 pixels and it crossed zones D, E, and F. Zones in the picture are evenly spaced: A through G left to right and only extend from the wood-line down (grass only, not the trees). BTW, that was the only red object rectangle in the entire 10 second alert sequence, so I guess it thinks that since that red square occupies the very right edge of zone D, all of the width of zone E, and the very left edge of zone F, it's calling that "crossed zones D, E, and F" even though there is only one frame of (movement) data. I would think the software would follow a specific object from one zone into another zone (at a later frame) but it looks to me like if there's any motion at all in three zones, it is firing.
So it appears to me if you have a simple rule like A-B, it will fire any time an object occupies part of both zone A and B even at the same time and even for only one frame. And it also looks like it is firing if anything happens in zone A, and then subsequently something different happens in zone B. A tree could wobble in zone A and then a couple seconds later, a person 50 feet away in zone B could close their car door, and it will consider that A>B and fire. So obviously it can't detect an object moving through zones as it isn't following an individual object. It's more like "something happens in zone A followed by something happening in zone B". Now, I realize it can be difficult to follow an individual object frame to frame but maybe some methodology of color/size could be used. I also don't think that seeing an object that occupies zone A and B in a single frame should be considered "moving between zones", else shadows or blowing limbs that happen to move a little right on the boundary between two zones (but never crossing FROM one TO another) is going to set it off.
In this alert example that I attached, there's also only one frame with a red rectangle: the first frame in the sequence. How can one red rectangle be considered moving and how did it satisfy the 150 pixel distance rule when there's only one motion box in one frame?
Questions like these are what is preventing me from being able to use this new system effectively.
Mike
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
oldrolla
Young grasshopper
This is pretty much what you get from BlueIris.....and by no means am i canning it as it is a fantastic bit of kit.
But it comes with very little...for want of a better word....instructions when a new version is out....or what that version contains.
But hey....i like a challenge and i must admit that the motion algorithms are getting slicker NICE!
Edit....and you wont get any bit of software updated as much as BL does
But it comes with very little...for want of a better word....instructions when a new version is out....or what that version contains.
But hey....i like a challenge and i must admit that the motion algorithms are getting slicker NICE!
Edit....and you wont get any bit of software updated as much as BL does
This is pretty much what you get from BlueIris.....and by no means am i canning it as it is a fantastic bit of kit.
But it comes with very little...for want of a better word....instructions when a new version is out....or what that version contains.
But hey....i like a challenge and i must admit that the motion algorithms are getting slicker NICE!
Edit....and you wont get any bit of software updated as much as BL does
No argument from me. I won't use anything else!
That said, I just wish I understood some of what is going on under the hood so I could more effectively utilize it.Mike
oldrolla
Young grasshopper
Mike....i here ya mate but not much we can do. I wish i knew what was going on under the hood too!!