`min_person_area` doesn't seem to be filtering objects about frigate HOT 9 CLOSED

I do have min person area defined for all regions on my cameras. And yes, if it wasn't defined, it would skip the continue and add all detected person objects.

from frigate.

Taking a look, I think this section is flipped. I think it's behaving more like a max_person_area since it's skips adding the person to the object if region cutoff value is larger than the actual value.

If we wanted it to behave like a min_person_area, I would think that it would look more like:

# if the detected person area is larger than the
# min_person_area, don't add it to detected objects
if region and person_area > region['min_person_area']:
    continue

Maybe I'm mistaking the meaning of min_person_area?

from frigate.

Looked again, and I still don't think that is the issue. If the minimum area for that region is larger than the detected person's bounding box, the continue statement tells it to skip that object and move on to the next one. That is exactly what we want. Also, if this was flipped, I wouldn't get any detection on my cameras. I do agree that the person in your image seems too small for that threshold. Are you sure the right config file is being used?

from frigate.

I'm using the config a the top of the post with redacted credentials. I can see the white bounding region boxes in my mjpeg debug view, so I know it's reading the config.

I'm not super familiar with Python, but If min_person_area wasn't included, wouldn't it just evaluate false/not existing? Then it would skip the continue line and add the object.

So I'm wondering if your config contains min_person_area.

from frigate.

Thanks. I'm following now.

I'll see if I can step through it some more to resolve it.

from frigate.

What version are you running?

from frigate.

latest tag on docker hub. https://hub.docker.com/r/blakeblackshear/frigate

It looks like there are tags after that though.

from frigate.

I added a label to show the person size from the master repo. It looks like the sizes are way higher than I thought. I wanted to filter on 3000, but it looks like what I really want to filter on is 30000 (or maybe 300000?). Since a closeup of me near the camera clocked in at 500000 on my 1920x1080 image.

from frigate.

I'm closing this. After getting the viewbox with the area size figured it, it was definitely the case that they were way larger than I thought.

Merge this PR if you'd like them added. #47

from frigate.