Schedule Preset not being applied

schneideris

I am trying out SecuritySpy as a possible replacement for SightHound but have run into a problem with the scheduling. There are 4 cameras in my configuration, I have nothing set in the Schedules tab, but under the Schedule Presets I have created one preset called Night Time Security. For each camera in this preset I have set all three settings (Continuous Capture, Motion Capture, and Actions) to "Armed Sunset To Sunrise". So far, during the day I am getting all sorts of emails.

Looking at the Browser it appears that the Motion capture is sending notifications during the day (ignoring the setting in the Schedule Presets). The Continuous Capture though appears to be adhering to the schedule settings. Given that I am getting emails from the camera it is obvious that the Actions are also not adhering to the Schedule Preset.

Is there something that I am missing that might have the cameras not conforming to the Schedule Preset?

I have to say, the whole scheduling part of configuring the cameras is very confusing. IMO, much more difficult than just having the schedule being a tab under the cameras preferences.

Ben

I think the issue here is that you don't actually need to use schedule presets. Instead, what you should do is simply set each mode (Continuous Capture, Motion Capture and Actions) to the schedule you need by clicking on the "C", "M" and "A" indicators and selecting the appropriate schedule (e.g. "Armed Sunset To Sunrise"). Once set, as long as you don't make any changes, these schedules will stay in place.

The purpose of schedule presets is to have a different set of schedules based on different circumstances, for example a "Home" preset where all cameras are set to the "Armed Sunset To Sunrise" schedule, and an "Away" preset where all cameras are set to the "Armed 24/7" schedule. From your description, it doesn't sound like this applies here.

I do appreciate that there is a bit of a learning curve to the scheduling functions, but once you are familiar with them I hope you will see their power and flexibility. It's difficult to offer this level of flexibility without a certain amount of complexity.

schneideris

Thanks Ben,

Respectfully, I really would suggest re-looking at how the schedule system is used and configured or creating a better documentation for how to use it. Personally I think that a more intuitive configuration is needed. If I am getting confused by it then there is no what I can expect my wife to understand and use it.

I suspect there is real power there, it just doesn't make sense to someone new to the platform. There are so many amazing things with what you have done with SecuritySpy (really liking the HomeKit integration potential, and the way zones are not specifically a box), and it is a real contender to replace my SightHound installation, but this one is making it difficult for me to take that last step because I still can replicate how the system should respond.

On a separate note to add to another post that I saw related to multiple ROI's (zones) per camera, it really would be nice to see that integrated into the camera rather than creating multiple cameras. This could then integrate the scheduling as well (think one camera to many options such as zones/triggers, schedules, actions, etc...). Especially if each camera that I add draws down on the licensing that I purchase.

Ben

We have put a lot of thought into the scheduling system, and it is documented (I hope clearly) in the user manual here: Recording and Schedules. However, I do agree with you that it's quite complicated.

We are considering changing this in the next major version of SecuritySpy, so that the user can draw an area on the image, then specify a task (e.g. recording, notification), then specify the schedule for that task (e.g. "Active Sunset To Sunrise"). This should make things easier to understand, while actually adding flexibility (as it allows for multiple zones per camera, as you describe). But, as I hope you can appreciate, this is a major change to how the software works, so will require major development effort. We are still considering what the best route to go down for the future will be.

schneideris

Thanks. I had read the user manual already so my prior comments still stand. It is quite thorough in many respects, but sometimes that just makes it more daunting. My own preference, and everyone is different, is to have clear scenarios and examples. Even having an area on the forum where people could document their scenarios and how it works might just get you some community engagement in support.

Totally get your statement about the level of effort. I have my share of software development experience and have recently started to learn more about development in the IoT space, but using a Mac as my foundation. In your case I could imagine that there is a whole data structure that needs to be considered at the foundations. Never an easy move. These are the technical debt issues where you build based on what you know at the time, and then after you have more experience and functional needs learn what is going to be needed going forward.