The thing is, while triangular and poly-zones would likely take slightly more processing power in the camera, Wyze worries about how much all this storage of images takes, while users complain about all of the false and unsatisfactory triggers. Wyze would likely save a ton of money (i.e., be economically advantageous) and minimize user frustration if the false triggers were minimized by allowing more detection zone control including zone shape.
I just purchased the Wyze cam yesterday (not the pan version) and am absolutely loving it! One issue I’m running into is the height of the detection zone. I want to make it shorter because it’s picking up cars that drive by but I seem to be limited on how short I can make the zone. I’ve read other posts where users were running into this issue as well. Have there been any updates to this or are there any work arounds?
Thanks for your help!!
Well, the simplest workaround is simply to aim the camera downward a little more. The base is adjustable, so you can pivot it down further. I doubt you’re trying to capture what happens in the sky and the tops of the trees, right? Haha
That depends on if the camera is inside looking through a window in that case the camera needs to be flat against the window to reduce glare
True. Flat against the window is the best way to reduce glare, although even when it’s flat against the window, the distance between double-paned glass can cause glare. Personally, I have mine against the window and angled slightly down. That means the top edge of the camera touches the window and the bottom part is slightly away from the window. But there was glare even when it was flat against the window, due to the two panes. I’ve addressed the glare issue in another way:
I have black non reflecting tape around the perimeter of the front of the camera
Nice. Do you have any photos? Is it on the camera itself, or on the window? I tried a solution where I stuck black paper to the window with a hole for the camera. I thought that would fix the issue, but I found that the outer pane reflected the blinds from behind anyway. I wasn’t able to get it exact enough, especially since I needed to angle the camera slightly down. That’s why I made the box, so that the blinds behind the camera would be totally hidden from its point of view, even in the other pane’s reflection.
I still get a little bit of glare from the white of the camera against headlights occasionally, but I’m going to replace that one with the black camera and hopefully mitigate that issue too
Well you have the black box all you need is a black Cam in there , yeah the tape is just stuck to the front of the camera, and the camera sits on this
The tape is just to make the camera black instead of white, basically?
Mostly to seal the light out from the room, I have been thinking about actually taping the camera to the window for a tighter fit
But the tape effectively does the same thing as a black camera? Or does it extend beyond the camera itself?
It’s thicker then normal tape in could be compressed some more
I think what he’s asking is are you using the tape to mask the white of the pastic housing or also using the tape past the edge as a shroud/hood to keep light out.
That’s exactly what I was asking. Thanks.
I think he meant, “All of the above”
The tape is just around the corners of the camera there is a tiny bit of white still on the face it does not extend beyond the camera
I wonder how black felt would do. They sell it in regular and one side adhesive versions. One should be able to get a good seal with it.
Unfortunately I can’t tilt it down any further because I have it pressed up flat against a window and the ledge on which it is sitting is too small to back it up.
What if the screen were divided up into 57,600 squares, 320 wide and 180 tall, and you could select which of them you wanted to be notified of a change in (say by tapping on them to toggle)? You would give up some of the granularity of the current detection zone, but you could have non contiguous areas.