Motion Sensor Masking/Zones?

I wish there was an option to change how far out it can detect things. Like I only want to see motion that’s detected at my mailbox/front steps 10 feet away, maybe my front lawn that’s 15 feet away, but not the street that’s 25 feet away.

Isn’t that essentially what the sensitivity slider does?

You would think. But even when I set it down to a lower sensitivity I don’t get the people at my mailbox but still get vehicles that pass down the street.

I rigged a blinder on my front camera. It only triggers when someone is about 20’ from my house. Its mounted about 8’ or so high. I keep it on 24/7 at about 7 setting.
It works for me.

1 Like

Physical masking like @Mark_Griffith described, or like we were discussing previously in this thread, is the way to go.

There’s no way for software to impose a hard limit of 10 ft, 20 ft, etc on a PIR motion sensor with 100% effectiveness.

1 Like

As far as a rudimentary PIR sensor is concerned, it doesn’t see depth in a traditional sense except for the intensity of the heat based on a distance. A car at 40 ft may give off the same IR signature as a person at 10 ft.

My guess is that the sensitivity sets the threshold for the IR signature (voltage) that triggers the recording. That is why cars can still be detected while people can slip under the sensor. :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I see that Blink is already looking into this possibility and just wanted to second this request. I have the same issue that most are complaining about especially with XT and image sections creating to much alert and finding the right balance between sensitivity/location to get the right alert. I have used other systems that had “masking zones” and it was great but I understand that PIR works differently than image analysis so maybe a dual system approach will work or maybe a different PIR as mentioned by Mark_Griffith. I don’t know if the base station can also be used as the processing station for image analysis to avoid the whole cloud delay. I may consider a cloud image processing option if it was not expensive, one of the big appeals of Blink for me was the free cloud storage along with being wire-free. Also maybe the processing can be done by the app on the cell phone. My 2 cents.

I too think either simple masked zones or zones with decreased sensitivity would be great to have. FOSCAM has motion zones implemented pretty easily. You basically have bar from each border that can be moved in to ‘crop’ to the desired area; other systems allow much more complex settings, but this simple define crop area would be sufficient for 90% of the users. IMHO this is the biggest weakness of the Blink system today, now I want to add more cameras, but without this capability it’s next to impossible to create a decent system (that does not have too many false alerts.

1 Like

Not sure how far you made it into the thread, but see above.

Why do people say they are using PIR for motion detections. I don’ know that this is the case, the center is a obviusly a IR emitter and a LED (blinks red), not sure it’s s PIR detector (have not taken it apart os seen Blink confirm this). In any case PIR some sensors can be masked electronically (I do SW development and have worked with them, it’s rare trait, but sensitivity selection means they are getting more than a on/off signal. I’ve also done motion detection with cameras, so many techniques, including looking for bodies, but it requires some processing horse power, even it only processing 1 frame per second.

Blink has confirmed that they use PIR motion detection - many times. As far as the red IR emitter, I believe that is used for the night illumination on the XT cams. I cannot comment on the rest of your post since it is way way beyond my technical knowledge.

Thank, I’m new here, just getting up to speed. I have 3 camera on 2 systems (so they can be scheduled independently). A HQ PIR that does digital masking costs $10+ (Honeywell) so its not going to be used in a camera at this price level.


Blink designed their hardware/chipsets around ultra low power consumption to get the max run time out of the 2 AA batteries. Here’s a great article on the system for you to check out:


Thanks, makes perfect sense, but they are now using 2AA Lithium vs CR123(A) (23000mAh vs 21500mAh) in order to get the 2yr battery life; when they started in 2014 the Energizer Ultimate Lithium AA had just been released (it works best with high current loads; as this chip presents in bursts).

The AA Energizer ultimate lithium also holds up in extreme weather, -20F for weeks here last winter. They kept my cams going even though they are only rated for -4F.

That’s the PIR sensor on the blink XT. Or more precisely, it’s the fresnel lens covering the PIR sensor on the Blink XT.

The IR LED that turns on to provide illumination when the camera records in the dark is a little lower down on the camera body than the PIR sensor.

Two different components with different functions.

1 Like

And in heat my camera continued to work at 120F & 122F here in Phoenix AZ

Yes I’d love the ability to mask off area’s to reduce ‘false’ triggers

You can in a crude way, by putting a bit of tape over the sensor

The problem with that is there’s no way of knowing which area you have masked off with the tape. Then you’re stuck removing and adding tape trying to figure out how far you need to go to get a certain area to not register motion. I’ve been trying this for months and still haven’t gotten it just right.