More insight into diskspace usage / timeline recordings per camera

[Latinum]

Currently the only way of finding out how much has been recorded is by looking at a camera and zooming out as far as possible. I would like see how far back in the past I can go and how much space each camera/stream is using.

It would also be nice to somehow get an estimate of how much diskspace you need per camera to decide what kind of disk I should add to the system to be able to go further back in the past.

[Eric Meeson]

You can use the little up arrow over the timeline to pop out the wide view timeline, then hover the mouse over the far left to see how far back it goes without having to change zoom around.

As far as space is concerned, first up, set your cameras to H.265 or H.264+ if possible, it's compression is ridiculous with no quality loss over regular H.264

Second, to find say, recorded time per GB we can do a little math on our own. If you log into your camera directly, it will have a setting for bitrate, usually in Kb/s. With a little plug and chug we can find that GB/Day = 0.011 x bitrate in Kb/s

http://www.kylesconverter.com/data-bandwidth/kilobits-per-second-to-gigabytes-per-day

For example, Wyze cameras stream at 1920 Kb/s so 21 GB per day per camera. My Lorex cameras are locked in at 4096 Kb/s so 45 GB per day per camera. You can set cameras higher than that of course, but about 1024 Kb/s per MP is a reasonable guess (25 fps)

This gives you a base estimate of 11 GB/Day Per MP. Full load 24 MP would then be 4 days/TB. I'm seeing much better than that with H.265 compression however. I'm seeing around 6 days/TB on my system of about 30MP, which is pushing it because about 10MP of those cameras are inside where there should never be motion, set to no detection (they're just recording for security purposes).

If you want to go down a rabbit hole, check out this Hickvision chart.

[Latinum]

That little arrow helps, thanks :)

With regards to calculations, sure I can do the math, but if you want to make a consumer-product you need to give your users insight through a the UI. At the moment I feel the UI is a mix between a product for professionals and consumers. Personally Iwould try to separate functionality a lot more in "day to day" functionality and "expert / setup" functionality.

[4K]

I'd agree you with that it's a mixture between a product for professionals and consumers and that's one reason it's not really ready for the general public yet. The user interface is not that user friendly especially for people coming from a cloud service that are used to an exact time their recordings are available for.

[Eric Meeson]

I really hope they don't change it much though. Learning curves aren't bad if properly documented, and this system is already much more powerful than any of the cloud services I've seen. I would hate to see function diminished in an attempt to simplify things rather than just providing education on how to use the better system.

[4K]

We could have both a powerful system and a simple user interface. There are a lot of options, such as an advanced page and the ability to go back to the old user interface. Facebook just changed their interface and you can switch back to the old one (for now):

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/08/how-to-get-new-facebook.html

Do you have anything in mind that you really like about the user interface that you're worried might change? I've seen companies remove stuff that people liked before because they didn't know that people liked it so much (or just didn't care) and it caused them a lot of bad publicity. We're in a unique position as users because Camect is actually looking for and has been listening to feedback. It's actually my reason for joining the forum here. They're actually valuing user feedback. It's not just a waste of time like is the case with a lot of other companies where you can't get through to them even if it's a serious issue.

[Eric Meeson]

Oh man, the link to switch back to the old one leaves a bad taste in my mouth from all the Gmail refreshes over the years where they ended up making things just a little worse for my workflow every time it seemed.

As for the UI, I'm not married to anything in particular, it's really just the concern that the pursuit of ease of use will end up diminishing advanced functionality. Personally I'd always rather take time to read the manual and have a more powerful piece of software/hardware than to have it stripped down to the point where it works with no introduction at all. I think it can be very easy to lose stuff there. I'm all for an advanced UI though if there becomes the option for two down the road. I'll always pick the poweruser option.

[4K]

That's a valid concern, because it has happened.

It is possible to have both ease of use and advanced functionality but it's up to each company to offer it. I'd like a simple mode and advanced mode (or advanced options if there is just one mode). Right now it's a combination of the two and that's confusing.