Please add…The fact that this hasn’t been added or at least projected is somewhat disappointing. I’d gladly pay my yearly sub cost, to be able to access the data myself when my internet is down.
Just so you know, we have choices where we spend out security dollars and RING will not be one of those places due to locking the camera streams down. i booted xFinity for lack of compatibility, if your concern is it opens your security model then offer a choice of open use or secured use so that those of us that want to not use the cloud for every thing can, local control is our goal and with out it im afraid i will have to return my ring items or sell them to some one who does not care about local control. i hesantly agree that i would pay the cloud fee as long as i was able to direct connect to my blue iris system
This should be implemented asap !
Another RTSP for paying customers vote, this would be really helpful, i am sure you would generate a lot more interest, the Ring system is good and is one of those just works products, integrates well with some other systems (Alexa echo), so having a RTSP stream available to customers who want to implement it in to there own system would be great, one of the reasons why some people don’t opt for Ring is because no stream feed.
I am sure if you went over to the camera forums (ipcamtalk) and put the feelers out you would gather a lot of interest.
RTSP and ONVIF functionality on your cameras, please !!!
1 Like
Ring should add storage on the camera itself, for say 15 minutes, in case the internet connection goes down. In addition, they could have a premium model of the base station, with local video storage for the cameras, say 24 hours worth of video, so if users have 3 cameras, it would be 8 hours per camera. Then new video recording would overwrite the old one when the video storage capacity is reached.
The video would be saved locally and to the cloud, so that it would be faster to view the video when at home, and the local storage only would be used when the internet connection would be down, and when the internet connection would be restored, the video would be uploaded to the cloud from the base station storage, or the cameras directly if users do not have a base station (though I think the base station would sell more if there was video storage).
It is easy to plug the wifi router in a back up power (UPS) in case of power failure. We have one, it is not expensive and can support more than 4 hours of power outage for both the wifi router and cable modem. The Ring base station has its own battery back up (it would need a bigger battery to handle stored video), so even if both the power and the internet connection are down, the video would continue to be recorded and stored for the cameras that are battery operated.
That would be a much better security system, and would definitely set it apart from the growing list of competitors.
Please add RTSP stream, It can be activated only if you bought a plan. A lot of people need this to store video also local and, even better, integrate to their smart home systems.
you know, I’d like to have a complete security system under the umbrella (ring) including cameras with local storage, this is where Ring fails big! Their competition such as Blink (owned by Amazon) has 5 pack outdoor cameras with local storage for $380 compared with Ring where you can get a 2 pack outdoor cameras, no local storage for like $200 to $320 depending on the camera and you have to pay for cloud storage. Clearly by the years of customers asking for local storage they are just not going to do it because its part of their lame business model to generate monthly fees. I’m sure there are some people who prefer paid monitoring and don’t mind the monthly fees, I’m just not one of those people. I’m going with Blink, Arlo, anything other than these over-priced cameras. they just lost more money, smart business plan!
you know, I’d like to have a complete security system under the umbrella (ring) including cameras with local storage, this is where Ring fails big! Their competition such as Blink (owned by Amazon) has 5 pack outdoor cameras with local storage for $380 compared with Ring where you can get a 2 pack outdoor cameras, no local storage for like $200 to $320 depending on the camera and you have to pay for cloud storage. Clearly by the years of customers asking for local storage they are just not going to do it because its part of their lame business model to generate monthly fees. I’m sure there are some people who prefer paid monitoring and don’t mind the monthly fees, I’m just not one of those people. I’m going with Blink, Arlo, anything other than these over-priced cameras. they just lost more money, smart business plan!
I have replaced all my nest cameras with open wifi cameras and canceled the subscription because of no rtsp option, ring is next on the list (yes i had both), get with it, open it up to those of us who pay already or lose us too.
I would love this feature as we are in a rural area with wireless internet service that does go down on occasion. This could allow all Ring notifications to be preserved when the network is down. Once the network is back up, send it all to the server for retrieval.
Will Ring buy these paperweights back? I am swapping all mine out next month. RTSP is my main reason but harder to hang on when I get emails daily for services being down and now it appears you are only allowed 30 seconds of viewing your camera live before it closes and on the third or fourth try it will just say the camera is unavailable. Sorry Ring but I should at a minimum be able to watch more than 30 seconds at a time of video coming from MY CAMERA on MY NETWORK and most of all access it MY WAY.
Currently there is no support for a local RTSP connection to the ring cameras. Everything has to go to Amazon and the APIs are not supported. It would be nice to be able to keep everything local so I can do real time object recognition locally with my computer. This would be a really easy change to the firmware, and would be really nice for advanced users. (Personally I would buy another 2-3 cameras if it was supported)
RTSP and ONVIF functionality on your cameras, please !!!
1 Like
This, would pay to get access. Also, this would allow me to extend on the Ring platform by adding additional Ring cameras. Even though I like the cams, I now cannot purchase them because of not being able to add them to Surveillance Station
1 Like
Thank you for the requests and feedback on this feature, neighbors!
At Ring we value both your security and your privacy. For this reason, when you are not subscribed to a Protect Plan, your videos are not stored anywhere and can only be seen in real time. This means there would be no means or alternative way of storing your videos without a Protect Plan, as this is what saves your recordings.
At this time, the best way to save your videos beyond your subscription storage, is by downloading them directly to your computer or mobile device. This can be done in both the Ring app and from Ring.com when logged in and visiting via web browser.
Hello Chelsea,
I have been monitoring this thread over the past 18 months. I am truly disappointed in the lack of engagement by Ring staff on this simple issue. More so, your response does not fully address the concerns/recommendations of this thread.
Most of the users here, myself included, are willing to pay MORE for a local storage/DVR option when WiFi cuts out. So your issue of not storing videos without a Protect Plan subscription is moot. At this point, my only reason for staying with Ring is because of the cost-effective Alarm monitoring solution you currently offer. Ironically, the same plan that includes cloud storage for videos…
I have been researching the market to identify cameras that offer similar futures to Ring with local storage in addition to storing videos in the cloud. Ideally, something that also supports Apple HomeKit (another issue with Ring to be discussed later).
While some consumers will pick and choose their plans to save money, most of us want a system that will offer 24/7 around-the-clock security. Ring has certainly been lagging on this aspect of its cameras compared to competitors. This is why I am hesitant to buy any new Ring products other than Alarm related. Even then, I already retreat buying two Z-wave modules for my locks when I should have gone with Apple HomeKit modules.
There may come a time where a lawsuit, perhaps a class action lawsuit, for RIng Cameras that fails to capture an important event because of accidental loss or purposeful tampering of the internet.
The best way to address this is for Ring to allow Subscribers to purchase an additional base station with or without a monthly fee increase. This base station would connect to the router and manage all of the camera feeds. It will be large enough to store the recordings for seven days. This base can upload videos to the cloud during the night to reduce bandwidth bottleneck issues during the day.
A local storage/processing base is genuinely something I hope Ring pushes out soon before other solutions appear that makes users jump ship.
1 Like
Hello Chelsea,
I have been monitoring this thread over the past 18 months. I am truly disappointed in the lack of engagement by Ring staff on this simple issue. More so, your response does not fully address the concerns/recommendations of this thread.
Most of the users here, myself included, are willing to pay MORE for a local storage/DVR option when WiFi cuts out. So your issue of not storing videos without a Protect Plan subscription is moot. At this point, my only reason for staying with Ring is because of the cost-effective Alarm monitoring solution you currently offer. Ironically, the same plan that includes cloud storage for videos…
I have been researching the market to identify cameras that offer similar futures to Ring with local storage in addition to storing videos in the cloud. Ideally, something that also supports Apple HomeKit (another issue with Ring to be discussed later).
While some consumers will pick and choose their plans to save money, most of us want a system that will offer 24/7 around-the-clock security. Ring has certainly been lagging on this aspect of its cameras compared to competitors. This is why I am hesitant to buy any new Ring products other than Alarm related. Even then, I already retreat buying two Z-wave modules for my locks when I should have gone with Apple HomeKit modules.
There may come a time where a lawsuit, perhaps a class action lawsuit, for RIng Cameras that fails to capture an important event because of accidental loss or purposeful tampering of the internet.
The best way to address this is for Ring to allow Subscribers to purchase an additional base station with or without a monthly fee increase. This base station would connect to the router and manage all of the camera feeds. It will be large enough to store the recordings for seven days. This base can upload videos to the cloud during the night to reduce bandwidth bottleneck issues during the day.
A local storage/processing base is genuinely something I hope Ring pushes out soon before other solutions appear that makes users jump ship.
1 Like
It looks like our voices were finally heard with Amazon/Ring finally announcing Ring Alarm Pro today. I will be looking into this a bit more but from the outset, it sounds like what most of us want.
Edit:
Looks like the new feature has a specific name called Ring Edge for local storage. See my new post and question regarding this feature. Slightly disappointed but better than nothing for now I guess… I really hope at launch that users are not required to choose between cloud or local storage but just have things processed and stored locally only to have it uploaded to the cloud at a later time to make use of the 30/60 day cloud storage… Or have an ability where we can connect our own larger hard drives to store 30 days worth of footage like a traditional CCTV setup. A maximum of 512 gb for users with 10+ cameras may be insufficient.
Bad business decision by ring. Owing to lack of RTSP feed I have removed and replaced with doorbird.
1 Like