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

Re: [Debconf-video] Testing Nageru in parallel during DC17? [was: (Re: Report from last week-end's single-user single-day DebConf Video sprint)]



Hi Richard,

On 27/06/2017 16:32, Richard Hartmann wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> wrote:
>> I do agree that higher resolution is generally better, and we should
>> consider to switch to 1080p in a few years, when technology has improved
>> to a level where it makes technical sense for us to push that far.
> 
> This does seem to be within easy reach even today, given Nageru's[2]
> performance characteristics. Especially considering the new cameras
> DPL OK'ed the budget for, it would seem like a bit of a waste not to
> try and get 1080p50, or 1080p30, out of them today; else, buying
> cheaper cameras now and waiting until the price drops for
> higher-framerate Q/FHD cameras might be more cost-effective and result
> in a larger hardware pool within a few years.

As far as I understand it, the 1080p+ is simply a firmware change, so I
assume that can be done at a later stage, if and when we need 1080p.

> As it's not trivial to change a whole setup over night and because
> people are most focused before/during the actual events, preliminary
> FOSDEM planning is to record the main talk room with the existing
> system and Nageru in parallel. I do wonder if something similar would
> work for DebCamp/-Conf.

We have just moved from DV switch to Voctomix. What does Nageru offer us
that would justify the move to another new platform?

> I do know that this topic is controversial due to personal reasons,
> but I still feel it's a prudent time to bring this point up again.
> 
> As an aside, the info overlays possible with Nageru's CasparCG[3][4]
> integration would be rather nice for in-lined conference, topic, and
> speaker info.

I see nothing on CasparCG's wiki in my quick scan through their wiki
that mentions anything but Windows only support...?

Cheers
Kyle

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: