Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 204 posts

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#191

Post by omgwtfbyobbq »

goodells wrote: post #23

For my apartment, I run rtsp-simple-server[1] on my home server and use Raspberry Pis with generic USB webcams running ffmpeg to stream the audio/video to the RTSP server. Then I run camera.ui[2] separately for a nicer interface on top of all the cameras, HomeKit integration, etc. The only downside hardware-wise is I don't get any indoor IR night vision with these, which some of the nicer "smart home" account-locked…

Ditto on the Pis. I use zoneminder, but whatever works, works.

I also have a few IR cameras that work ok. The biggest issue is finding decent ir LEDs.

The ones that come with the IR cameras aren't great. I purchased standalone IR LEDs, which are better for reliability and ir illumination.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#192

Post by starky »

thewebcount wrote: post #150
kunwon1 wrote: post #6

I have worked professionally with access control and surveillance. I can give you two manufacturer recommendations: Axis and Geovision. Axis cameras are high end and expensive, but they will, in my experience, do anything an IP camera could reasonably be expected to do, and they will do it well. They are European in origin and are available from various retail outlets to ship this week. Geovision cameras are low end…

Christ on a cracker, Axis' website is horrible! I saw one model that looked interesting, but can't find a price. You have to click on "How to Buy" to get redirected to another page where you then have to click on "Find a Reseller Near Me" which takes you to a form you have to fill out with a bunch of personal information and then send to them, and maybe someone will get back to you. How do these companies stay in bus…

The security camera industry works through a network of integrators that install the cameras for end customers. These companies are primarily B2B, they don't have any interest in B2C sales of just a couple cameras.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#193

Post by c_o_n_v_e_x »

idbehold wrote: post #98
EvanAnderson wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fun story re: the term "explosion-proof": I was given a tour of an industrial facility where conditions required explosion-proof equipment. The tour guide made a point of calling out the explosion-proof motors in one of the rooms. One of the other tour group members asked the question "Why would it matter if these motors survived an explosion?" I visualized the facility exploding in a fiery blaze and a motor, fully i…

> Explosion-proof means that it won't cause an explosion Wait, what? The implication is that their other cameras regularly cause explosions?

>Wait, what? The implication is that their other cameras regularly cause explosions?

Non-explosion protected electronics... sure. All you need is an atmosphere of sufficient concentration and a spark with sufficient ignition energy OR a hot surface that is above the atmosphere's auto ignition temperature (think a hot resistor on a PCB). Some chemicals have absurdly low auto ignition temperatures or ignition energies. Engineers must spec equipment for chemicals they expect to encounter within the hazardous area. Engineers also have to factor in how often the flammable atmosphere will be present. All of this is spelled in out IEC60079 for Europe and RoW. US has their own standards.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#194

Post by c_o_n_v_e_x »

woofcat wrote: post #104
idbehold wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Explosion-proof means that it won't cause an explosion Wait, what? The implication is that their other cameras regularly cause explosions?

It has been certified that it can/shouldn't produce any sparks or arcs in the event that it's in a gas filled room.

That's only for one form of explosion protection. Some methods of protection are for explosion prevention, other forms are mitigation.

Explosion proof / flame proof enclosures don't prevent explosions. Their sole purpose is to contain the explosion and to ensure that the gases escaping from the enclosure do not ignite the surrounding atmosphere. The beauty of a flameproof enclosure is that I can put standard, non-protected electronics into an enclosure and use them in a hazardous area. It's a much more affordable way of deploying electronics into hazardous areas, rather than designing from scratch and certifying.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#195

Post by c_o_n_v_e_x »

palotasb wrote: post #138
idbehold wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Explosion-proof means that it won't cause an explosion Wait, what? The implication is that their other cameras regularly cause explosions?

Think about oil rigs or coal mines where all electronics are potential sources of sparks/arcs and thus explosions.

Coal mining equipment explosion protection is particularly onerous as you have to protect against dust (coal dust) and gas explosions (methane).

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#196

Post by dheera »

LeFantome wrote: post #177
dheera wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RTSP streams never work, they always have several seconds of latency, and web browsers don't support them well if at all. Someone should invent a webcam that directly speaks WebRTC. Open a HTTPS connection and POST a SDP to get it started.

What? ONVIF is RTSP under the hood. Literally the entire professional surveillance industry is based on RTSP.

Yeah it all sucks. I've tried just about everything. Massive latency. Enough for a bad guy to get away in many cases. I've seen even upwards of 30 seconds. We really need WebRTC. Badly.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#198

Post by martin8412 »

bri3d wrote: post #115
ishanjain28 wrote: post #58

Reolink! They perform quite well even in direct sunlight(47C temperature) and rain. Low light performance is not super great but I can't blame the camera for that. The only thing missing is the lack of IPv6. I like everything else about it. I have the 510A, 810A and duo 2 poe

I've had mixed luck with Reolink cameras. The RTSP streams have always been really unreliable for me, although the HTTP streams are pretty good. They also do the classic hardware-manufacturer thing where they send random beta firmwares to people on forums on Google Drive that add massive swaths of features (ONVIF support, even), but then they get lost before they make it to release.

It wildly depends on the model of camera. Never had an issue with my RLC-823A cameras. I've heard many horror stories about their earlier models.

Re: Ask HN: IP cameras that don't require an app or internet?

#199

Post by npteljes »

I have an Axis cam that I purchased used, quite cheap. It basically runs Linux, a web server, something that serves RTSP, and maybe other things too. It has a neat web UI for administration, online manuals, and easy endpoints where you can get camera output and metadata easily. I can highly recommend.
Post reply on HN