We currently have a Vivint system with 5 cameras
1 indoor, 1 doorbell & 3 exterior [outside corners & driveway].
Partly I'm sure due to our ISP speeds, the live images buffer a lot & we miss doorbell alerts when someone drops off a pkg.

We've been thinking about adding some for the back yard since we have the pool.

Not a huge fan of not being able to supply constant power to the Arlo, how reliable is their claimed 6mo battery life?

The ones I'm seeing are Arlo Essential Spotlight 4.
These are another option available in the anniversary voucher program at work, so they're essentially free.

Do these need any kind of subscription for 'DVR'/stored recordings?

Longer term, I suppose these could come with us if we were to move, since they have no wired connection to anything in the house.

I have two Ultras and two wired doorbells.

I change the batteries on the ultras every 3 months or so without using any settings to minimize drain, really. I’ve been very happy with them.

-Rob

I like my Arlo Ultra cameras; but they do require a subscription for storage online. I’m not sure about using a DVR equivalent but I’m not interested in that.
Be aware that a new issue has come up with Arlo cameras: they have a drop-dead date, after which they are not supported, although still work. For the Ultras that’s not a big issue for me.

Edited to add: the Essential Spotlight is a newer, much less expensive camera; I don’t know what features they have regarding working with an app; storing online, etc.

BTW I have third-party solar panels to power the four Arlo cameras, and I never have to charge the onboard batteries (in San Diego).

Yeah, looks like Arlo secure is the only way to get historical 'recordings'
Not really wanting to add another subscription, since I'm already paying for the Vivint system.

Good to know for the future & the solar panel charger is a nice feature. Set & forget.

Arlo would be last on my list of cameras to buy.

If you live in a cold climate, they may not work when it gets below zero.

Poor night vision. Batteries that constantly need changing. yuck.

there aren't any professionals that use these. that's a big hint.

Plus I hate WiFi cameras in general. dropouts, especially with high resolution.

Speaking of which, what is the resolution on these? Speaking from experience you want something better than 1080 on new installations, balanced with good night performance (some trade-offs there). It's cool to see faces and not just a blur when some burglar lurks about.

The one thing I've noticed with both Ring and Blink, and presume is the same with all cloud based security/doorbell systems is they have a delay in providing real time video. In fact it's almost impossible to get real time video.

I'm running ATT Fiber 1000, so once it goes out the router its at 1GB, speeds on WiFi to the iPhone are 402/273 though the in house MESH, so the speeds are not slow.

I'll get a notice of motion, click the banner and the app will open and the circle of patience will turn, and turn and turn, the video in 99% of the cases doesn't come up live. Ring is better, I'll get to see the Prime delivery guy getting back in his truck.

Then it's waiting for their servers to process the video, and send it to me in the app to see, so no matter what service you use, if it's wifi cloud based the video is probably going to be post activity.

My basic question would be: Do all of these type products rely on vendor-provided servers (cloud) to host the video streams from the cameras, or is there an option to set up your own server local to the network that they are on (thus eliminating any "uplink" bottlenecks)?

Simple to implement for the vendor, just allow user setting of the IP address to which the camera uploads. The server-side provision is close to trivial, and fairly easily packaged in a VM or other software distribution strategy. Hardware requirements would be modest as well, perhaps as lightweight as a Raspberry Pi or other SBC, probably less than the cost of an additional camera.

Of course, notification to a phone, etc. would still require an uplink capability, but you could get the video much faster.

quote:

Originally posted by architect:
My basic question would be: Do all of these type products rely on vendor-provided servers (cloud) to host the video streams from the cameras, or is there an option to set up your own server local to the network that they are on (thus eliminating any "uplink" bottlenecks)?

Simple to implement for the vendor, just allow user setting of the IP address to which the camera uploads. The server-side provision is close to trivial, and fairly easily packaged in a VM or other software distribution strategy. Hardware requirements would be modest as well, perhaps as lightweight as a Raspberry Pi or other SBC, probably less than the cost of an additional camera.

Of course, notification to a phone, etc. would still require an uplink capability, but you could get the video much faster.

Here is what I do...

keep in mind that my system is a higher end hobby system that I spent a lot of time on, and a fair amount of money.

I ONLY buy cameras that are ONVIF (or similar, RTSP, etc) compatible. I suggest others do the same. This eliminates many (if not most) of the consumer cameras that are highly marketed to the general public, which lock you into their cloud or subscription service.

This way I can use any of the many available IP-Camera viewers on my i-phone or laptop and see my cameras from (most) anyplace on the planet with a very minimal delay.

(for those paying attention, I use OpenVPN to get to my network, where the cameras are)

I've watched my cameras from about 5 different countries and about 10 different states

Very minimal delay, a fraction of a second -- basically no more delay than a facetime call. I also see my cameras on a firestick in my home on an old monitor that I had. Displays 24/7/365. I'm also doing my own recording on each camera 24/7 and have enough disk space for over a month worth of high res video.

By the way, you don't need a Raspberry Pi or anything like that since the modern IP cameras all have a nice web interface on them, and if you use ONVIF, then you get the stream directly from the camera with no other computer etc between.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
I also see my cameras on a firestick in my home on an old monitor that I had. Displays 24/7/365. I'm also doing my own recording on each camera 24/7 and have enough disk space for over a month worth of high res video.

Is this display multi-panel? E.g a separate camera per window in a matrix of windows? Or do you shuffe between cameras on a time-slice basis? What software is involved on the firestick to facilitate this?

[quote]By the way, you don't need a Raspberry Pi or anything like that since the modern IP cameras all have a nice web interface on them, and if you use ONVIF, then you get the stream directly from the camera with no other computer etc between.[/quote}Where is the recording being done? On the camera itself, e.g. on a thumb drive or SDXC chip?

We have 12 cameras at work & use exacvision [or a name close to that] for monitoring them with as on-prem DVR.

System is about 10 years old & due for a refresh, the 2 POE 4 camera pods drop connection a lot & the image isn't nearly as clear as it used to be.