Hi, On Wednesday 20 April 2005 23:06, John Lightsey wrote: > We really need to focus in on what we're striving for though. There are > three different ways we can go about this: > > (1) Live streaming + recording of the streams. > (2) Very simple recording (1 camera per presentation with no real > editing) and a rapid turnaround time for putting the presentations > online. > (3) More complex recording and editing with a longer turnaround time. > > We've already discounted (1) as a primary goal because no one has > experience with it. I take it that (3) makes some people skittish > because timeliness is an issue and there are worries that complex > editing will never get done; (3) is what I've been aiming for at my > local LUG. So if we're shooting for (2), rapid turnaround as top > priority, then we'll end up with 1 camera panning between the speaker > and the screen. You film the presentation in one take, dump it to a PC > using kino, run it through mencoder to create a web-suitable clip, put > it online somewhere and save the original Quicktime DV files in case > there's any call for a higher quality version. Just to sum up some "new" events: as we now have a person (hrobak) with experience in 1.) it seems we can and will take more sophisticated approachs, like live editing and streaming. We should settle for fallback-solutions, too. > For wireless vs wired mics, we use wireless at HLUG so that the speaker > is free to move around without worrying about the mic. There is > occasionally RF interference on the tapes, but it has never ruined a > presentation. Pack 100 laptops and cellphones in a room and it might be > a different story. As we have a room with >100 laptops and cellphones before the 9th, we can and should test this. regards, Holger
Attachment:
pgp5jELWI_aq1.pgp
Description: PGP signature