Blue Iris 5 Reolink Cameras and Hardware Acceleration Not working

Here's VLC playing the same Reolink RTSP stream at max resolution the camera will put out (2560x1440) and 30FPS and it us using the GPU as expected/wanted.

You can also see BlueIris using some GPU for the one test stream I have going to it at 1080P from a Reolink @30FPS.

BlueIris has four other Reolink streams hitting it at 30 FPS and 2560x1440 but they only work with software/CPU decode.
 

Attachments

  • vlc.png
    vlc.png
    18.1 KB · Views: 26
Remember a key fact. VLC is simply playing the video. Blue Iris is analyzing for motion and recording, hopefully in BVR format. That's just a "tad" more CPU intensive to say the least. And I'll comment once again the Reolink, and similar cheap cameras, are the only ones that exhibit this type of behavior.
 
Aware of this.
Also I have all motion detection disabled continuous record turned on and direct to disk recording set on.
VLC just playing the video involves decoding the video using the GPU to do it.
Blue Iris for some reason is failing to do this first step using the GPU to decode the stream (before it goes and does anything else) as I understand it.
I also understand direct to disk recording (BVR format or not) in this case would involve no significant change to the video itself that is stored
I can appreciate that the Reolink cameras themselves and not discounting what you say about them in that the are the only ones exhibiting the behavior
And I appreciate your experience and time to help here.
Try not to be too frustrated.. I am listening.
At the end of the day I'd make the customer buy better cameras if they need this hardware decoding because they need to pile more cameras on without maxing out the CPU.
But I need to better understand what is actually happening and why.
I'm extremely interested in figuring out and understanding why Blue Iris is turning it down and saying sorry. vs. when it works at 1080P.
Also Blue Iris support has taken an interest and are trying to help me figure it out.
They didn't immediately dismiss the Reolink cameras as the issue. We are trying some stuff and there are some improvements and updates being done with the software
that is said to improve upon some of this type of stuff.
Thanks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
Read all the problem posts on Reolink. They are junk, they may look like they are working but they are not. Reolink does not use the frame rate or the Iframe according to the standards. Try running it with out hardware acceleration they may work in software, but not with intel GPU processing.
 
What do you like better in the same price range?
Or do you just have to pay a lot more for hardware acceleration?
I've been pretty happy with what they do for the price range even without the hardware accel.
I've had great video quality and some installations have spanned 3-4 years outdoors now and reliability has been fantastic in harsh and varying weather conditions.
I've always considered them entry/hobby/home level equipment and they lasted longer and worked better than I ever expected when I jsut started out playing around with
a couple of them.

I'm also determined to learn the reason WHY BlueIris is deeming the streams incompatible.
So far it's just guessing.
If it's because of iframes or somehow not meeting a standard I'd like to know definitively and specifically why.
So far it's been all assumptions of poor Reolink quality.
Which is fine.
At the end of the day if you really need a feature you ditch it and move on to something better.

I need to know because I'm interested and would like to really know how BlueIris is determining something is not compatible with it.
And having it work perfectly with VLC just make me even that much more curious. :)
 
In the price range of Reolink all you're going to get is the same quality. Good quality costs more, cheap prices mean cheap parts and engineering which result in a cheap product. You're on a Don Quixote quest here in this case "tilting" at Reolink. Many of the member here have tried Reolink, tried all the tricks in the book and worked with Ken, the BI developer, all with no success.

BI has a problem with Reolink because they do not use the "standards" that most other cameras use. The result is a conflict that produces problems with video processing, hardware acceleration and can also effect motion detection. It is no assumption of poor quality, the frame rate and iframe variation are clear proof that Reolink can't maintain a full video stream which is, indeed, poor quality. The proof is right there on your computer monitor. If you're dead set on using Reolink, go right ahead, but you're just going to keep having problems with them. Also, keep in mind that BI is just a "tad" more sophisticated than Reolink software or VLC so some adherence to standards is necessary. BI can't be written to handle whatever some company thinks is good.

My first decent camera was a Dahua 5231R-Z, 2MP with a motorized 12mm varifocal lens. I haven't looked back and am slowly replacing the crap I bought when I started, like that POS Reolink. I consider the cheap, hobbyist, cameras I bought to be a total waste of money, may as well have just pulled a few hundred out of my wallet and set it on fire. It's not a question of price, it's what you get for the price that makes one more valuable, a better deal, than the other.

If you want a less expensive, but infintely better, Dahua, have a look at the 2231R-ZS(turret) or 2231T-ZS(bullet). They're both motorized varifocal and both are under $140 on Amazon, but I'd suggest contacting Andy at Empire Tech. He can beat that price, shipping included. Delivery time from him is generally under a week, but with COVID-19 it may take longer, he's in Hong Kong.

If you want a really nice 4MP have a look at the Dahua IPC-T5442TM-AS(fixed lens turret) It has a 1/1.8", or is it 1/1.7" sensor and can maintain full color with some ambient light. A little more expensive, in the $160 range but the video, day and night is excellent.

If you buy from Andy, all of his cameras can be upgraded when new firmware comes along.

kingsecurity2014@163.com
Andy's ipcamtalk vendor forum: EmpireTech Andy
Andy's AliExpress store: Empire Technology Co., Ltd - Amazing prodcuts with exclusive discounts on AliExpress
Andy's Amazon store: EmpireTech-Andy @ Amazon.com:
forum: EmpireTech Andy
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SouthernYankee
Hey, thanks for taking the time to answer my questions and give the suggestions that you have from experience. It is very much appreciated.
I am not "dead set" on using Reolink or any other cheap stuff.
These work 'good enough' for the jobs I have used them for really really have for 2-3 years and still working well now.
I have not experienced any noticeable problems with them and I have been very pleased with the video quality and system reliability where they have been used.
They work fine for general purpose stuff that I have used them for and without using hardware decoding.
If I need 'better' image quality or hardware decode or consistent or guaranteed framerates on any scale in the future I will use something better that is designed to do what I or a client needs.
Guess I just don't know yet what I have been missing with better cameras not have I yet really needed to know.
:)

$160 is still cheap to me.

I will try one out!

Thanks!
Take care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
Trust me, when you see the difference, especially at night, you'll understand better where I'm coming from.

No problem. I hate seeing someone beat their head against the wall chasing an unfixable problem. I've done that myself far too often.
 
Thanks!
I'm not trying to be too stubborn.
Part of it is We have these things out there all over the place and of course had a desire to also figure it out if it were figure-outtable.
Aside from that I'm genuinely just interested in knowing exactly how things work or don;t work in this case.
Just got the Email from Ken that he tried and it's not gonna work (see above) lol.
I appreciate that he looked into it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
One final, I promise, comment.

Here's a video of four different Dahua low light, Starlight, models. It willgive you a better idea of what a decent camera will do under low light conditions.

Multiple camera low light test

Corona virus is spreading all over the world, and so we're all forced to stay home. Here in Poland all shopping centers, schools, kindergarten, playgrounds, etc. are closed. So, together with my wife, we have to find way, to do our regular job, and take care of children. It is time consuming and...
ipcamtalk.com ipcamtalk.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: MichiganBroadband.com
Just a followup and to close this subject properly.
After a number of BlueIris software updates (and there have been a lot of them over the past three weeks).
A significant number of the updates were titled: "RTSP sub-streams for high-MP cameras Other minor enhancements and bug fixes"
It now works fine and I have working hardware decode on ALL of the Reolink Cameras.

In asking the developer specifically what the problem was and what exactly was fixed to make it work they replied:

“I believe I was only waiting for the Intel driver to return a frame after 10 were fed into it, otherwise assume the decoding was non functional. It was learned that in some cases it may be 12-15 frames before the driver provides output, and this adjustment was made to make the software more "patient." This likely correlates to varying encoding properties used by the camera, but I do not have detail on that."

Anyhow this seems to coincide with the Reolink cameras doing something different or not the right way from what I gather as was discussed in detail earlier/above.

Anyhow it is cool that it is working better now.

Regardless of the quality of the Reolink cameras (or lack thereof) I was looking for a technical reason as to why this was not working yet would work fine in other software suck as VLC playing the same RTSP stream.

This pretty much answers that at a high level and now it works.

-Steve
 
  • Like
Reactions: cscoppa
MichiganBroadband.com said:
Just a followup and to close this subject properly.
After a number of BlueIris software updates (and there have been a lot of them over the past three weeks).
A significant number of the updates were titled: "RTSP sub-streams for high-MP cameras Other minor enhancements and bug fixes"
It now works fine and I have working hardware decode on ALL of the Reolink Cameras.

In asking the developer specifically what the problem was and what exactly was fixed to make it work they replied:

“I believe I was only waiting for the Intel driver to return a frame after 10 were fed into it, otherwise assume the decoding was non functional. It was learned that in some cases it may be 12-15 frames before the driver provides output, and this adjustment was made to make the software more "patient." This likely correlates to varying encoding properties used by the camera, but I do not have detail on that."

Anyhow this seems to coincide with the Reolink cameras doing something different or not the right way from what I gather as was discussed in detail earlier/above.

Anyhow it is cool that it is working better now.

Regardless of the quality of the Reolink cameras (or lack thereof) I was looking for a technical reason as to why this was not working yet would work fine in other software suck as VLC playing the same RTSP stream.

This pretty much answers that at a high level and now it works.

-Steve
Click to expand...


I can also report it's been working for me. I have 3 RLC-410W's and honestly I love them. I did have to update my Intel driver to the latest version to get them decoding properly.

Screenshot_1.jpg
 
cscoppa said:
I can also report it's been working for me. I have 3 RLC-410W's and honestly I love them. I did have to update my Intel driver to the latest version to get them decoding properly.

View attachment 61671
Click to expand...
Unfortunately reolink is a lying scamming company that posts fake reviews by its employees on forums like this. Reolink cameras can never be compatible with blue as BI requires that you be able to set your cameras iframe interval. Reolink's crappy firmware does not allow that. The result will be video tearing, missed video when using direct to disk recording. This is why blue iris recommends a keyframe interval of 1.0. You can see in your screenshot that yours .40 and .50. To top it off, they have no large sensor options for low light and most of their cams use a poor ir design that will cause spider web issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: user8963
fenderman said:
Unfortunately reolink is a lying scamming company that posts fake reviews by its employees on forums like this. Reolink cameras can never be compatible with blue as BI requires that you be able to set your cameras iframe interval. Reolink's crappy firmware does not allow that. The result will be video tearing, missed video when using direct to disk recording. This is why blue iris recommends a keyframe interval of 1.0. You can see in your screenshot that yours .40 and .50. To top it off, they have no large sensor options for low light and most of their cams use a poor ir design that will cause spider web issues.
Click to expand...

I haven't noticed any of the tearing, in either live preview or playing back recorded clips. I am using Direct to Disk. I'm aware of the keyframe interval issue but it doesn't seem to be causing me any ill effects.

I know they're nowhere near the quality of some of the cams you guys use, but I got all 3 for $140 (2 at $40 and one at $60), which is less than the price of one "quality" camera.
 
cscoppa said:
I haven't noticed any of the tearing, in either live preview or playing back recorded clips. I am using Direct to Disk. I'm aware of the keyframe interval issue but it doesn't seem to be causing me any ill effects.

I know they're nowhere near the quality of some of the cams you guys use, but I got all 3 for $140 (2 at $40 and one at $60), which is less than the price of one "quality" camera.
Click to expand...
It will happen when you need the footage. Murphy is alive and well. You can purchase low end starlights for 100. You are better off with one good camera that captures a solid image vs a low end cam that will produce a blur (reolink firmware also increases the exposure to make nightime still images look good, but movement creates a blur). Finally, if you want to buy low end cams, buy from anyone else but reolink. At least you can adjust iframe intervals and you wont be supporting scammers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MichiganBroadband.com
I have a similar problem. I have my BI 5.4.9.18 system default set to IPP, and all of my cameras were showing I in the BI Status window, except for my 6 Reolink cameras. I tried several of the fixes suggested in this thread, but none worked. Then, on a whim, I clicked Video: Configure: Find/inspect, and then that camera started running as I+. It didn't have a sub stream configured, so I went back into the config and added "/h264Preview_01_sub", and now I have a sub stream and HA working on that one particular camera (RLC-420-5MP, hw version IPC_51516M5M, fw v3.0.0.116_20103101).

The BI log shows "HW VA not compatible" for those cameras.

This fix did not work on my 5 older cameras, a mix of ancient IPC_3816M and somewhat-newer IPC_51316M models, so I'm still looking for a generic fix, other than swapping out the cameras.

edit: And now I just found this post over on Reddit this suggests switching the Camera Brand explicitly to Reolink, and the leaving the suggested stream settings as populated (*RLC-410/411/420/422/423 Baseline RTMP) and now all my Reolink cameras are showing up at I or I+!

As a bonus, the overall connection to the Reolink cameras is also a lot more reliable. Previously they'd take a looooong time establish a connection when BI started up.

Baseline CPU utilization for 11 cameras/50 Mpixels is now 4-6%.

Hope this helps someone else!
 
Last edited:
After weeks of "negotiating" with Reolink, we were provided with a firmware that allows to set the iframe. However, I've noticed that Reolink has not as yet placed it within their downloads.

  • Model RLC-410-5MP
  • UID 95270001QNF22YO3
  • Build No. build 21112401
  • Hardware No. IPC_51516M5M
  • Config Version v3.0.0.0
  • Firmware Version v3.0.0.720_21112401
  • Details IPC_51516M5MS10E1W01100000001
RLC410-iFrame.png

RLC410-BI-HW-VA.png

The firmware was provided as: IPC_51516M5M.720_21112401.RLC-410-5MP.OV05A10.5MP.REOLINK.pak
 
  • Like
Reactions: cscoppa
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom