Cuddelink 2020 GEN 2 version
- Thread starter john volkman
- Start date
john volkman
5 year old buck +
there isnt a setting for batch 2 minutes. when running a network, run batch 5 or batch 1 hour as the shortest cell batch, anything shorter like batch 1 or 2 will clog up your network. Clear your cards and the que and start over with a batch 5 setting and it should work better.
john volkman
5 year old buck +
from what i understand this is verizon metering the amount of text data on you phone . they have not been able to provide us an answer as to why they are doing this. lower your cell batch to 5 or 10 and it think you wont have as many of the small images. your email images or images on photos on camp will be full size this only occurs with text images.
Great...I’ll clear everything and start over. It’s on batch 2.
john volkman
5 year old buck +
batch 5 means it sends via cellular network when he que hits 5 images, batch 1 hour means it sends each hour if the que has any images waiting.
That explains a lot
DavidHunter2001
5 year old buck +
I upgraded all my cameras to 8.3 about two weeks ago and now several of my cameras are taking hundreds of images with no animals. Happens day and night. One camera has 2200 images. I keep having to clear the que's and finally told the cameras to use a 15 min minimum delay which I am sure I am missing a lot of what I am trying to capture. Did something change on the trigger sensitivity?
Check to see if you have accidentally turned Time lapse on. Look at an image, if there’s a clock image in the lower left you have time lapse on.
DavidHunter2001
5 year old buck +
I logged into the camp this morning and made sure they are all set to no time lapse so that is not the problem. Since 10:25 am this morning until 4:35 pm I have three cameras that have taken over 220 pictures each. I have seen this happen if I get some leaves moving in front of a camera before, but that is not the case with these cameras. This is making my cameras useless if I have to clear the que's. Who knows if I am missing any good pics.
Last edited:
Please help me with camera position. I went to set these out on the property yesterday and was suprised how weak the they transmitted. Yes I'm in woods and #2 drops off a steep hill but I'm not at very far apart on any of these...way less than a 1/4 mile in most cases.
#1 is my home cell.
#2 is 1100ft away that drops off a steep hill.
#3 is basically a repeater because I could not get #1 to connect to the #4 position (less than a 1000 ft away
#4 is 575 ft from the repeater cam #3
#5 is 836 ft from #4, 857 ft away from #3 and 1100 ft away from home.
When I put #2 out yesterday it had a signal of 22. Report says 12 this morning.
If you were laying this property out, how would you do it? I'd rather not waste a camera as a repeater in a position that really means nothing to me. Should I move my home to the front of the chain...like #5 position? Would that matter? My thought process was to have it center of the group but now I'm rethinking this.
#1 is my home cell.
#2 is 1100ft away that drops off a steep hill.
#3 is basically a repeater because I could not get #1 to connect to the #4 position (less than a 1000 ft away
#4 is 575 ft from the repeater cam #3
#5 is 836 ft from #4, 857 ft away from #3 and 1100 ft away from home.
When I put #2 out yesterday it had a signal of 22. Report says 12 this morning.
If you were laying this property out, how would you do it? I'd rather not waste a camera as a repeater in a position that really means nothing to me. Should I move my home to the front of the chain...like #5 position? Would that matter? My thought process was to have it center of the group but now I'm rethinking this.
I’d probably swap 1 & 3
I’d like to eliminate 3 all together. It’s a wasted spot.
MadMadHoosier
5 year old buck +
Hi Reeltight:
That just does not make sense, that you are not getting connections at those distances. But I notice you are looking at the report from Camp.cuddeback.com. From my experience, that report seems less accurate than the one that is being emailed daily. The emailed version always lists all my cameras, while the camp version will usually be missing some. For example, this mornings email report lists 20 cameras (4 of 24 have dead batteries), yet the camp report only lists 15? It seems the cameras with low link levels ( my worst is as low as 6) are the ones missing from the camp report, yet they still send pictures just fine and still show up on the email report.
When actually hunting I have it send pictures every hour and email the report once a day. All other times it is sending pictures every 4 hours and still emailing report once a day. I'm covering about 200 acres, with the closest camera at 900' and the furthest camera at .65 mile. Two links is the most used on this 24 camera setup. A second setup on the other half of the property is hillier and does use more links, but they still average 1000' between cameras with no connection problems.
Give your set a day or two to settle in, and see if the email report is more accurate for you.
The email report looked the same, but I know what you mean about the camp report. Heck I've looked at it at times where it didn't even show my home cam. But now #2 is up to 18. The only real hill on this property is the drop off into the swamp at top of picture (pie shaped property).
I may shift some things to see if I can get 5 to connect direct to 1 and then 5 to 4 so I can eliminate 3.
DavidHunter2001
5 year old buck +
I run 18 cameras on 700 acres and mostly in timber. Furthest camera with 1 link is 1130 yards away with a link level of 24. So I don't think distance is the issue. Have you tried a post mount? Perhaps you will get better transmittion. Or use a smaller tree to test.
No on the post mounts. Trees are 4-6". 1130 yards through trees? Geeze...I'm struggling at 1000 feet.
MadMadHoosier
5 year old buck +
So Reeltight:
Been trying to guess why many of us get 1000' or more through the woods and you seem to be struggling with much less than that. Looking at your imagry, the inner portion of your property seems to be more Coniferous and I wonder if your stand of trees has more (moisture bearing) foliage closer to the ground than some of us. Moisture in any foliage can block electronic signals. My Deciduous forest has the majority of it's foliage in the upper canopy, so even though I see "some" signal degradation in the summer, it is not significant.
Think about the "line of sight" foliage between your camera placements and see if some adjustments will help - while still covering the points of interest you want. I would look for an appropriate spot around the orange mark on your map below, and see if moving Camera 3 to that location gave better signal paths. Even though not directly between 1 & 4, it might allow an adequate path. I bet you will figure it out soon without too much more trouble. Good luck!
Been trying to guess why many of us get 1000' or more through the woods and you seem to be struggling with much less than that. Looking at your imagry, the inner portion of your property seems to be more Coniferous and I wonder if your stand of trees has more (moisture bearing) foliage closer to the ground than some of us. Moisture in any foliage can block electronic signals. My Deciduous forest has the majority of it's foliage in the upper canopy, so even though I see "some" signal degradation in the summer, it is not significant.
Think about the "line of sight" foliage between your camera placements and see if some adjustments will help - while still covering the points of interest you want. I would look for an appropriate spot around the orange mark on your map below, and see if moving Camera 3 to that location gave better signal paths. Even though not directly between 1 & 4, it might allow an adequate path. I bet you will figure it out soon without too much more trouble. Good luck!
Bpressley
5 year old buck +
Your signal strength will vary based on terrain, timber, weather. I've had some cameras about a 1/3 of a mile away connect in the mountains and then they struggle with 900 ft between them. Same cameras, different terrain. It's something that you learn to deal with. I've been running this system for 3 years and have concluded that small groups with 1 link each and levels 40+ will give the best battery life. I don't try to stretch them out anymore. I have 5 cell units and 20 cameras. The avg distance I get an acceptable signal at would be roughly 800-1000 ft or less.
As far as your setup. I would move cam 2 closer into your group unless you really want it at that location. If you don't want to move it, you can move your other cams closer or buy more cams to place in between. Ideally it looks like 2 cell units for each side of the property would work best.
Ha...that's what I'm trying to avoid but it's probably inevitable to cover the property like I want to. Remember...I'm just getting started. I'm new to trail cams and this is the system I chose based on multiple cams on a single cell account.
Question...Why would I buy another cell? I mean, what's the advantage of two cells when I can daisy chain upto 24 to this one camera.
