Replies: 8 comments 15 replies
-
|
Love this idea! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
hello, i have 32 hikvision différents model with ONVIF bad implementation i can do the hikvision brand issues |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm happy to support here too. I have an Axis Q6128-e I have some python knowledge (and some other languages etc). I do wonder though how much effort this proxy would be, opposed to a "patched" frigate build. I will need to better understand what the gap exactly is (why is that function so essential for autotracking and how would a proxy/patch fix this), and if this fix is the same for all axis cameras and all other brands too, or if they just all have different quirks. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I have just finished up writing and testing software that does this for axis cameras, I’m not sure about other cameras but perhaps others can build on my code in time. It functions by running on the same box as frigate, intercepts then translates onvif soap commands to axis VAPIX commands, and then sends VAPIX commands to the camera. It also works in reverse to send frigate the correct information. I have a bit more work to put I to it and hopefully in the next few days I’ll have it packaged up to run in docker or home assistant as an add on. I shall return. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I think go2rtc itself may be a good place for it. It already exposes an ONVIF server, and PTZ controls are being worked on. @AlexxIT, do you have some opinion on it? However, go2rtc exposes a single ONVIF server. I don't know if different PTZ controls can be tied to different ONVIF profiles. If yes, all good, but Frigate would need to support selecting which profile to control the PTZ on. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
If there is any movement on this, I am willing to contribute support for a Sunba 405-D20X. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Went ahead and created a small proxy here: https://github.com/eporsche/frigate-to-baby1t-onvif-proxy It translates from RelativeMovement to Continious Movement (which my camera supports) Does not support zoom or automatic follow yet. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Sorry guys! I got sick and lost track of this project. I have it mostly working but somehow broke it while trying to get it packaged as a downloadable add-on, had been running locally for a while but since I ran out of free time, I had to revert to my blue Iris build... which I don't like. Want to get back on frigate.
My life is always busy but gets stupid crazy at times. I'll try to post my code as it sits and see if one of you guys can take it to the next step, I'm absolutely swamped at work and with the family. Teamwork makes the dream work. I should have posted it long ago.
…________________________________
From: sirduke989 ***@***.***>
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 10:53:26 AM
To: blakeblackshear/frigate ***@***.***>
Cc: Mark Mann ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***>
Subject: Re: [blakeblackshear/frigate] Camera control proxy (Discussion #16960)
lol, I wish I had found this like 1 week earlier before starting from scratch and proto-typing an ONVIF proxy in Node-Red for my TP-Link Tapo C500 cameras. Forking your repo to see if I can add my Tapo changes. I'm still pretty new to ONVIF specs but catching on quickly and was able to get AutoTracking working with the C500 which responds to RelativeMovement commands although the cords don't appear to be scaled correctly for the FOV.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#16960 (reply in thread)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BRVDA7F6IAWTNOPOHOU7YPT34IPBNAVCNFSM6AAAAABYL7SMF6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43URDJONRXK43TNFXW4Q3PNVWWK3TUHMYTIOJTHA4TCNQ>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Many cheap cameras have incomplete and buggy implementations of ONVIF or don't implement the specifications at all, relying on proprietary protocols for camera control.
Even expensive cameras rarely work with Frigate's autotracking system due to incomplete ONVIF implementations.
Frigate developers understandably resist including workarounds for these issues in the codebase. It would make it messy, complex and expensive to maintain.
Would it make sense to create a separate project that provides an ONVIF proxy? It could implement all the hacks needed for various cameras, including ones that don't support ONVIF at all but have other protocols or APIs to control PTZ and other camera features, while providing a clean, ONVIF-compliant interface for Frigate (and other consumers).
Or perhaps it should provide a new, modern API rather than ONVIF, which is arguably overly complex and is starting to feel dated. (If one were to create a protocol from scratch today, one probably wouldn't base it on SOAP.) Then it could also support common camera features not covered by ONVIF.
Essentially, it could do for camera control what go2rtc does for video streams.
(This discussion started with this comment.)
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions