streaming versus two-way conferencing

Conversations around originating a webcast for conference, including cameras and mixers.
User avatar
thedqs
Community Moderators
Posts: 1042
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:53 am
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Postby thedqs » Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:31 pm

gblack wrote:Has internet reliability been considered here?

Yes it has.
gblack wrote:While in general, outages should be few and far between, they do happen, and with more regularity than other types of traditional media. Peering issues also crop up between networks to cause issues and I'm not sure it's a safe assumption that an entire stake will all use the same provider (my stake includes parts of 3 states with no universal cable provider or ILEC).

The nice thing about many of these solutions is that they do not need to be on the same provider. You just need a spot that uploads the media and another spot to download the media.

gblack wrote:While going with a prerecorded approach isn't quite as nice as a live approach, it does simplify a whole host of technical issues. For a Stake conference, I can see a prerecorded approach being acceptable (correct me if I've missed something).

The only problem with Stake Conference is that, according to my dad who is the stake tech specialist, the church handbook says that Stake Conference cannot be recorded to media. Transmitted to another building is ok though, just not recorded.
- David

BlackRG
Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:31 pm
Location: Utah

Postby BlackRG » Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:26 pm

thedqs wrote:
The nice thing about many of these solutions is that they do not need to be on the same provider. You just need a spot that uploads the media and another spot to download the media.



Sometimes that doesn't work as well as it might seem, particularly if the solution requires some sort of QoS. A good example would be an experience I had working for an ISP a few years back. The ISP wanted to outsource it's news service and chose a good provider to do so. However, despite the quality of the provider they chose, the service was unusable for the most part by the ISP's customers. Troubleshooting the issue, the cause turned out to be poor network performance (head-of-line blocking issue with some GigE routers up at MAE-EAST) BETWEEN the networks used by the ISP and the news provider. Both the ISP and the news provider were using good solid backbones at the time (sprintlink in the case of the ISP, I don't recall who the news provider was using now) but despite the quality of those two backbones, peering in this case wasn't done through a private peering arrangement but through MAE-EAST which was run by MCI Worldcom. MCI Worldcom while acknowledging the problem, had no real stake in solving it as they were neither a provider of the ISP or the news provider and didn't have any direct accountability in the issue. The end result was that the ISP had no choice but to drop the news provider.

Cases like this one are the exception instead of the rule, but they do exist. Obviously performance problems can be found when everyone is on the same provider if the provider hasn't properly designed their network or planned for growth, but the chances for such issues increase as you get more providers involved. Problems between providers can easily end up with much longer resolutions times, and quite often there is no formal effort to resolve such issues and they end up being resolved over the course of months or years due to the natural growth/expansion of the involved networks.

User avatar
thedqs
Community Moderators
Posts: 1042
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:53 am
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Postby thedqs » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:14 pm

As you said, that is more of the exception then the rule, but I do understand where you can get a problem, as with any type of equipment. The only advantage that the internet has over say sat transmission is that it is potentially free. The cost for the church to install sat transmitters at each stake building would be prohibitive, and then as the stake size decreases you lose the need (except for overflow possibly).

Again for meetings where it cannot be pre-recorded (stake conference, stake leadership meeting, ward meetings, etc.) a live feed (sat, internet, etc) or audio over the phone are the two solutions that I can see (again I ask that if anyone has another idea to contribute) otherwise they'll just have to get to the building or get someone's meeting notes.

For meetings that can be pre-recorded (General Conference, Broadcasts from SLC, Christmas Pageant (Video recording cannot be in the chapel), Relief Society meeting (again no video in the chapel), etc) my old stake would record them on DVD and then send them out to each ward building's library, since that is the most reliable.

It just depends on what you want to accomplish, what you need to do, and what resources you have.
- David

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 28500
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Sat Feb 17, 2007 6:35 pm

thedqs wrote:For meetings that can be pre-recorded (General Conference, Broadcasts from SLC, Christmas Pageant (Video recording cannot be in the chapel), Relief Society meeting (again no video in the chapel),


What are you saying here? As far as I know the only video broadcast/recording that can't be shown in the chapel is BYU Football.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 28500
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Sat Feb 17, 2007 6:38 pm

gblack wrote:Sometimes that doesn't work as well as it might seem,


One thing I've read about is capping. Everything might start off well, but somewhere in the 2-2.5 hours the ISP may decide you've done enough and start limiting the bandwidth. :(

User avatar
thedqs
Community Moderators
Posts: 1042
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:53 am
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Postby thedqs » Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:23 pm

RussellHltn wrote:What are you saying here? As far as I know the only video broadcast/recording that can't be shown in the chapel is BYU Football.


Sorry that I wasn't clear. According to policy which the Stake Tech Specialist refered me to, you cannot video RECORD in the chapel.

So say there is a speaker, you cannot record them at the pulpit.
- David

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 28500
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Sun Feb 18, 2007 10:30 pm

thedqs wrote:So say there is a speaker, you cannot record them at the pulpit.


OK, I remember reading something like that past. Might be worth checking the current manual to see if it's still there in the same form.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 28500
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:15 pm

thedqs wrote:According to policy which the Stake Tech Specialist refered me to, you cannot video RECORD in the chapel.


After thinking about it, the manual in question is a policy manual. Not a list of commandments. I would take the recording option (along with the others) and pass it to the stake leaders along with the note on policy. It's their call. Presumably they will check with a higher authority for permission. (I'll leave definition of "higher authority" to them. ;) ) Our call as Techs is to support our leaders, not play legal eagle or the enforcement division. As long as we point out the issues, we've done what's expected of us.

Now, all that said, in my experience, tape delay tends to be a less satisfying spiritual experience then "live", so the quest continues.

ed.tyler-p40
New Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:32 am
Location: Baghdad, Iraq

bldg to bldg

Postby ed.tyler-p40 » Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:16 am

There is existing Technology in place to handle this already, if the Stake Center has decent bandwidth and you're looking for an easy solution. Just have a member bring their laptop and use one of the various Instant Messaging tools, these offer Audio and Video messaging.

User avatar
thedqs
Community Moderators
Posts: 1042
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:53 am
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Postby thedqs » Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:19 am

The problem with instant messaging is that the quality is very poor. Though the solution of using the internet has been post as I mentioned earlier in this thread.
- David


Return to “Webcasting”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest