New Person Detection Feedback

Is anyone else finding person detection far far far more accurate especially at distances over 20 feet? I’m catching people marked correctly that distances that are way over 20 feet. And it’s working consistently too. For instance this person is easily 70 -100 feet away… walking across the street…Wyze does it again

4 Likes

Yes, that is correct, the entire frame is analyzed. I should have been more clear about this when I indicated that video clip was processed by PD AI. I think I read that Wyze PD AI uses the view from the Wyze camera lense.

rbruceporter: Both clips were triggered by a Cam v2 and the clips have a share button on them, and when pressed, asks if I saw a person in the clip. I will send both in.

1 Like

Yeah I think it’s been great since the beginning and it just gets better. They should’ve started with their own system from the beginning because they know what they’re doing. I’ve only had two times that my dog tripped it. And my dog walks around the house a lot and outside a lot so I think that’s amazing.

2 Likes

I am very pleased and impressed with the new PD and I too find it more accurate at a farther distance.

2 Likes

The accuracy at distance is quite impressive at times. The other day I submitted a PD clip saying that “I didn’t see a person,” but when I looked again a second (or third) time I realized there actually was someone walking around a car in the far corner of the frame quite a distance from the camera. He was almost invisible to me, but not to the camera.

4 Likes

I had the exact same experience. I was about to submit a video, as not seeing a person. Then, I noticed a person walking around a car, in the distance. They were so tiny in the video. I was really impressed. Wyze’s own person detection, in beta, is already better than that other company’s.

1 Like

I will submit my post here as well as I did in another tread a little while ago.

It looks like AI is not learning right. At least it seems like it favores some cameras and not others. Some days it does very good and then some days will not. It misses so many events where I walk in front my cameras in purpose to see if they will trigger person detection and it amazes me how many times it will not detect me moving in front of them, not even as a motion detection. Imagine if someone comes to your property with the intentions of breaking in an your cameras decide to skip on that event? Way too frequently it will see my dogs, cats, wasps or other moving object as a person and that is just not right.
I hope learning algorithms get improved before they decide this is working in acceptable manner because it is till not
A point to understand is that I’m not here to rant but to tell how things are looking on my end and I hope developers take this as valuable feedback and not only what sounds good and pleasing to their ears. We all want this to work great like it could. I have 4 cameras installed and wanting to add more but at this point I’m holding on to see how reliable they will be after the public AI release.

2 Likes

I have the same problem with mine. Some of my cameras do great only detecting people and some of my other don’t do so well and sometimes even thinking my dog is a person.

1 Like

I’m still very much waiting to be added so I can add my cameras and help test this new feature! Hopefully it happens soon, so I can try and help submit feedback!!

When is this being (re)launched? I thought it was to be launched 2 months ago… can we get an update?

it’s still currently in what I am affectionately calling the Beta- Beta. its a very limited controlled release to make sure the servers function as anticipated and don’t get overwhelmed among a few other things. for something so close to the company as person detection ( which is the reason many people by the products to begin with) I would much rather they delay the full public release instead of being premature and having the entire system crash in that initial day/ week/ month. it will undoubtedly be very very popular.

2 Likes

Problem is, that is the wrong way to do the beta. You WANT people hammering the servers to MAKE SURE, come release time, that they will have adequate available server resources to handle the millions of connections.

There is no easy & good way to test the millions of connections without having TONS of people just hammering it. This is why all MMO game companies have open betas just so they can get a good picture of what an actual load looks like, not one that “in theory” should work.

Hopefully, they will understand this now, before they do a release, and the service is always down.

2 Likes

Wyze doesn’t understand software or hardware testing. Letting anyone be a hardware beta tester is poor practice. I don’t know of any company that allows that. My mom could sign up and be a Wyze beta tester. And I love my momma but she’d be horrible!

Edit: I actually meant alpha hardware tester. Beta testing is paying FULL PRICE for early access.

Let’s see, I signed up to beta test for the following companies. Ring, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Wyze, Google to name just the ones I am currently testing for. So now you know a bunch of companies to go with Wyze!

None of them required more than just signing up. Some make you sign an NDA but most don’t. Sometimes you have to hunt for the sign up forms other times not.

2 Likes

The companies I’ve beta tested for, Logitech, Fanatec, Warmup, Dish network and a few others has questioners that you fill out. They ask what experience level is, can you do basic DIY, they give a sample issue ask you how you’d trouble shoot it, what if any fixes you’d suggest and have you write it up so they can see how you convey info. I just recently signed up for Appleseeds to test Apple iOS versions and it took me 20 mins.

You’re testing hardware for all of those? If so you might want to tell them to be a little more picky too. I’m not saying you’re a bad tester but lately those companies have had issues themselves.

1 Like

For beta testing to be valid the last thing they need is a non average user. They want regular users that are the same as the users that will use their products when they are released. Companies may be pickier with Alpha testers but beta testing is designed to be wide open and non exclusionary.

I suspect this will be another area where we may have to agree to disagree but that’s okay.

Yes I am testing hardware and software for all those companies. Some actively and some I am waiting for the next round to start. But I enjoy being a guinea pig for both hardware and software. It’s fun as long as you understand going in what to expect. :upside_down_face:

4 Likes

I have to agree there, you want a broad range of people, including and probably most importantly average users. I have tested for other companies in the past and have had to fill out some paperwork first for some, but I assume that is so they can select from a broad range of people.

1 Like

I agree but Wyze “beta” testing is actually alpha testing. Early access is beta testing. And one area we disagree is I believe that competent testers should still be exclusive to beta. Once you have a product through beta and feel it’s ready for the masses that’s when you send it to someone like my mom. You say “ act like you just bought this and make it work.” And get their feedback. Because most customers don’t read instructions and aren’t nearly at the tech level we are. So they need to be assured the end customers can make it work and not get frustrated and return it.

Your right, we don’t agree, but that’s what makes the world go around. Meantime we need some more caught on Wyze clips to make us smile.

1 Like

Your turn to post something funny. Although I’m going to mount a pan outside today so never know. Lol

1 Like