On 3/3/23 00:07, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > ... >> https://www.videolan.org/developers/x265.html >> can be linked to vlc and ffmpeg, and anything linked to them. > Ffmpeg binaries are a patent violation and distributing them is a violation. > It is small enough that MPAA-LA is not going after them. But it makes it > impossible to use ffmpeg with libxh265 in anything corporate. MPAA-LA does > not care about you viewing your security cam in your house, LOL. Did U say anything about "corporate'? No. ffmpeg binaries are not a violation for home use. This was settled back when the lame mp3 source (before mp3 patents expired).
> ... > > The reason that cams like the Reolink cams use H.265 to encode Not all. Reolink E1 Pro uses H.264. > >> https://www.libde265.org/blog/2014/02/22/gstreamer-4k-h265-hevc-plugin/ >> Anything that uses gstreamer can play h.265 with this gst plugin and >> libde265 library.. > None of this hodgepodge of programs is going to be able to keep up with > encoding a video stream using > A low power CPU like the ARM A9 in a camera. That's why they use hardware > encoders. > >> Whether a plugin/extension/HTML5/js/nodejs can be massaged so as to display >> in a web browser is another exercise. > Once more it's pointless since Chrome supports the hardware decoders in Kaby > Lake and later CPUs that have them. > >> H.265 is a topic on the Zoneminder forums, so they are aware: >> https://forums.zoneminder.com/viewtopic.php?t=31787 > Actually, everything on that above link is wrong. The first post says: > > "the issue is, once enabled, zoneminder no longer allows you to watch saved > events or scrub multiple events." > > Which is completely wrong since I'm staring at a Zoneminder saved event that > is saved in H.265 right this second with no problems! > > There's also a post in that thread about decoding H.265 in Javascript which > is nuts because because Chrome/Edge on modern hardware can already display > native H.265. The whole javascript idea would only benefit Firefox, and > Chrome running on older hardware. It would be a lot less work to just write > a patch for Firefox to use the hardware decoder. Mozilla did this for the > hardware AV1 decoders already, they can do it for the hardware H.265 decoders > easily. > > I think the posters in that thread really were unclear on the issue. Of > course, that thread is older than the fix that Google made to Chrome to > support hardware decoders. > >> https://forums.zoneminder.com/viewtopic.php?p=129677&hilit=H.265#p129677 > This link is accurate. ZM transcodes incoming H.265 or any other video codec > a camera might use into H.264 for the live view. The initial poster of that > thread very likely had some other issue in his configuration. > >> Unfortunately, I missed your Zoneminder talk. I have it running here with 2 >> cellphones [1] and just added a Reolink E1 >Pro [2]. Once I figured out that >> I needed their windows app (WINE FTW!) to activate rtsp and ONVIF I was able >> to find >the h264 streams. why were these disabled by default and no web >> console! > You don't need their windows app to activate rtsp in most Reolink cams. You > can access the camera admin interface with a web browser and go to network > settings and there's a tickbox that is buried there that turns on the > protocol. > > It is interesting to find out you enabled rtsp on an E1. According to the > following from Reolink the E1 does not support rtsp: > > https://support.reolink.com/hc/en-us/articles/900000617826-Which-Reolink-Products-Support-CGI-RTSP-ONVIF > I have a Reolink E1 *PRO*. There is *NO* web interface. A weird non-standard server runs on port 9000 (for reolink apps) and RTSP and ONVIF were disabled. > But personally I'm not much interested in wifi security cameras like the E1. > In Oregon the law says it's illegal to record someone where there is a > reasonable expectation of privacy, and most indoor homes have that > expectation implied so as a rule I refuse to assist or install video cameras > inside of a home. If someone wants to record their cat while they are away, > that's fine, but a DIY set-and forget wifi cam like the E1 is what they use, > and they won't be calling me to help them. Irrelevant, off topic. I do not live in OR nor have asked you to install anything for me. I also do not think you fully understand "reasonable expectation of privacy" when it concerns private property. > Retail businesses are public places so I do those, and wifi cams are just not > reliable enough plus most businesses doing indoor cams have drop ceilings so > it's easy to run ethernet cables to cams. Irrelevant commentary >> https://www.linuxgalaxy.org/kingbeowulf/repurpose-cellphones-as-home-security-cameras/ > Yeah that one has banging around for a while. Most people in homes want to > use security cams outside and weatherproofing a cell phone is not easy. It > might be fun for making cat videos of your cats when you aren't home, though. > But the big issue is you still have to run a charging cable to the phone. > So if you are going to run a cable to it then dispense with it and just run > an ethernet cable to a real cam. > > The idea of using an indoor wifi cam or phone for security is ridiculous, if > they can get inside of your house to be able to be seen by the indoor camera > you have already lost. Agreed that weatherproofing is a challenge. The rest of your comment is nonsense. Recycling a cellphone to keep it out of a landfill is NOT ridiculous. Mine are mounted on windows looking out and running a USB cable was trivial. The E1 Pro is mounted for a view of front living room, front windows and door. Somebody "outside" is not as much a concern (nothing to steal) than someone actually breaking in (an actual crime). Works perfectly well for my needs. The server is locked and why would a burglar/invader take time to look for it? Not everyone can or should spend $$ for professional hardware and installation. That is just nuts. > >> If you happen to know how to get the Zoneminder camera motion control >> working on E1 pro, ping me offlist! > Call Reolink support! Seriously - makers like Reolink depend on tech support > to know what additions they need to make to their products. > They won't help, out of scope. The motion control is already active, I just need to learn how to create the configuration file in ZoneMinder so that ZoneMinder can send the correct commands via rtsp/ONVIF. -Ed
