@ Scott, I'm not sure I understand how it defeats the purpose of anything. Motion currently records AVI videos of whatever motion it detects. The only thing I'm questioning is potentially changing the method in which Motion realizes that actual motion has taken place, and therefore, start recording. Right now it's a pixel differential based system, but what if other sensors could be adapted into Motion to take on that task?

@ Colin, My main thought behind this was sparked with the fall weather being here. I have an outdoor camera mounted in the ceiling of my deck, however my deck is ground level and not on 10' posts like you'd often see with houses. Regardless of what I adjust my Motion settings to (in terms of sensitivity), I can't seem to find the winning ticket. I either have a ton of bogus feeds due to the fact that the wind is blowing the leaves across my deck, or I have the sensitivity so high that it doesn't detect anything unless you're dancing directly in front of it. 

My thought process is this. I'd rather have too many feeds (higher sensitivity) than not enough, because if an event happens I need to look up, that at least ensures I have it even if I have to hunt for it for a while. And that's completely okay. But I was at an open source conference yesterday which talked about LinuxMCE (which evidently utilizes Motion to some degree), however in their demo, they had z-Wave thermal sensors which did the tripping for motion detection. This got me wondering... if I could mount a thermal sensor, that would ensure that I only capture motion of moving heated bodies. That would, in theory, detract all of the leaves blowing everywhere, which I can't mask out or I'll end up masking out my entire deck.

This is all just a thought process, of course. In the back of my mind I'm thinking, what if I have an IP based sensor which is somehow plugged into the motion.conf. Comment out the pixel settings for sensitivity, plug in the IP of the sensor, and each time Motion receives a notification from the sensor, that would thereby trigger the recording in the same demeanor as before. But there again, just a thought process - how applicable this is may be an entirely different story... which is ultimately why I'm here running this by you fine folk. ;) 

Appreciate the time and help fellas!

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 4:57 AM, Colin Law <clanlaw@googlemail.com> wrote:
On 28 October 2012 02:50, Jason Sauders <jasauders@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just a random thought, is it possible to integrate some sort of more
> advanced sensor to trigger motion events beyond the default pixel based
> method? For example, I think it'd be interesting to integrate some sort of a
> thermal camera into the mix. That way instead of movement, actual bodies
> need to be within range (and of course moving) in order to trigger motion.
> There are dozens of different sensor types that would bring up countless
> scenarios, but step one is, of course, figuring out if Motion can even
> support a 3rd party sensor. Any ideas, folks?

Can you explain what the difference would be with a thermal camera.
If it produces an image and if the image changes then it can trigger


WINDOWS 8 is here.
Millions of people.  Your app in 30 days.
Visit The Windows 8 Center at Sourceforge for all your go to resources.
Motion-user mailing list