[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-video] Next Meeting - 14 June 2017 @ 17:00 UTC



On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 10:17:10PM +0200, Kyle Robbertze wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> As we forgot about the meeting today, it has been postponed to next 
> week. So the next meeting is on *14 June 2017 at 17:00 UTC*

Ping. Kind reminder for meeting tonight ;-)

> Agenda can be found here:
> 
> https://storm.debian.net/shared/J5TmO-gmqB9KBPEDR4QO3kLxKXUw_cL_VSuouyAlxV3

I added an item "decide on cameras (see list)".

I contacted the "Kamera-Express" people through their website last week
tuestday, but got no reply; so I called them on monday this week, asking
whether it's possible to get a demo camera of each of the three models.
The answer was that no, they don't do that. They do have a rental
office, but it's in Amsterdam and Rotterdam only, so would be
complicated for me to get (would be a several hour drive, and also not
clear to me who would pay for it...). On top of that, it's not clear
whether they actually have the models that we'd need.

I've been thinking about alternatives, but I don't think there's much we
can do at this point.

The CCC folks have tested the JVC and Canon cameras; my friend said a
colleague of him had been testing the Sony camera (but with different
requirements).

I think that either the Sony or the Canon are our best option. The Sony
because it has pretty good optics and a large sensor, the Canon because
it is cheapest. The JVC has the nice RTMP feature, but it doesn't help
us much (as was pointed out to me), and it doesn't really have anything
else going for it (it does 4K, but we're not even doing FullHD, so who
cares).

I suggest we discuss the merits and demerits of each during the meeting,
possibly figure out whether we can get a different shop to find out
about demo models, and then come to a decision.

-- 
Could you people please use IRC like normal people?!?

  -- Amaya Rodrigo Sastre, trying to quiet down the buzz in the DebConf 2008
     Hacklab

Reply to: