Better motion detection?

Support and queries relating to all previous versions of ZoneMinder
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 8:25 pm
Location: Germany

Post by michl080 » Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:50 pm

sry i dont understand how to apply a patch
patch -p1 < zoneminder-1.23.3-motion-6.patch

patch -p1 <zoneminder-1.23.3-motion-6.patch

note there is no space behind the "<".

and don't apply the patch in the src directory, run in in the parent directory.


Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:27 pm

Post by sledgehammer » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:25 pm

It seems to me that a lot of this work has already been done in the 'Motion' program. Its got a smart-mask feature to filter out moving branches etc, its got an auto noise filter which, err, filters out noise and then there is the despeckle feature that removes general uninteresting gunk (couldn't think of a better word for it)

In my system I found setting Zoneminder up for motion detection was very difficult so chose to use 'Motion' instead which was successful. However I preferred the Zoneminder web interface over the various efforts that support 'Motion'.

I was in the end able to marry and run 'Motion' and Zoneminder together with 'Motion' telling Zoneminder when actual motion had been detected and 'undetected' (using . Both programs were capturing from a bttv card at the same time which, I believe, is a feature of V4L. It is also possible to run 'Motion' at a lower capture frame rate and resolution to that of Zoneminder.

There are issues however:

1) sometimes a 'motion ceased' message goes missing and Zoneminder carries on recording for hours. This usually happens when there is a sudden system full load. A nightly backup in my case.

2) I can only get as far as Linux kernel 2.6.20 after that motion and Zoneminder don't want to play any more. May be due to issues with V4l2 and the compatibility layer to V4L

My system is basic but I am running four b/w cameras at 384x288 at 8fps and get very good motion detection and have been for months. Over the last few days the sun and wind has caused a number of false triggers so I have been tweaking the despeckle feature on 'Motion' which has helped a lot. If the weather is as predicted for tomorrow I will be able to confirm if I have improved things.

So has anybody else done something similar to this? preferred 'Motion's' motion detection to Zoneminders?

And finally is it worth looking at the detection routines in 'Motion' ripping them out and putting them in to Zoneminder?

Posts: 5109
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:07 pm
Location: Midlands UK

Post by jameswilson » Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:37 pm

I agree that while the zm motion detection is amazing i have struggled to understand it lol
I doubt phil would look at motion code and vice versa, but maybe if we understood the features your on about we could impliment them
James Wilson

Disclaimer: The above is pure theory and may work on a good day with the wind behind it. etc etc.

Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

Post by SyRenity » Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:13 pm


This is interesting - in fact I suggested about a year ago of looking at motion as the motion detection replacement.

Perhaps motion could be put to a separate module, and enabled by users?

Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:14 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio USA

Post by overly » Tue Jul 29, 2008 9:34 pm

Could you post a URL for Motion so I could take a look at it?

I've googled and found several motion detection software examples, but not the one you're referring to.

Bluecherry PV-149 4-port capture card
Topica TP-936WIR-30C camera
Cheap Harbor Freight camera
HP Athlon 64 X2 w/ 2GB
Slackware 13 - kernel

Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

Post by SyRenity » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:04 pm

Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:33 pm

Is this integrated now

Post by mike548141 » Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:41 pm


Has this new motion detection code been integrated into the main code base now?



Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 9:57 pm

Re: Is this integrated now

Post by enzo86 » Sat Oct 10, 2009 1:19 am

mike548141 wrote:Hi,

Has this new motion detection code been integrated into the main code base now?


BUMP, has any of this code been included in the latest release?

Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:33 pm

Post by BlueH2O » Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:06 pm

I think this would probably help me alot. Has there been any progress?

Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 4:23 pm

Re: Better motion detection?

Post by cookacounty » Wed Dec 18, 2013 4:28 pm

+1 for using "Motion" integrated into ZM.

Motion pretty much works out of the box for my cams. After hours of messing with the ZM motion detection my findings was all but useless for anything but the simplest of cases. Very little documentation on what the blobs and filters do.

I thought I read somewhere that ZM didn't want to use motion because of the ffmpeg licensing.
I think that Motion does NOT require ffmpeg libraries, it just supports using them.

Overall I love ZM, it just needs better motion detection!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests