I share the same type of experience with the Webcast version 3.
In addition there is a drop in video resolution from version 2 to version 3 of about 30%. In testing with a USB and PCI video interface and a Sony EVI-D70 camera, the S-video signal clearly degrades when using version 3. This is done with the same computer, plenty of bandwidth and a round trip through the video server. The CPU load is about 75% under version 3 and 85% under version 2 hinting to me that some bits are being thrown away. GSC tells me that version 2 is no longer supported but will run OK on the system.
Webcasting Software Crashes & repeating video with Win 7
-
quintonrhq
- New Member
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:36 am
- Location: Bellevue Washington USA
-
Aczlan
- Member
- Posts: 358
- Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:29 pm
- Location: Upstate, NY, USA
What resolution were you running in 2? What resolution are you running now?quintonrhq wrote:I share the same type of experience with the Webcast version 3.
In addition there is a drop in video resolution from version 2 to version 3 of about 30%. In testing with a USB and PCI video interface and a Sony EVI-D70 camera, the S-video signal clearly degrades when using version 3. This is done with the same computer, plenty of bandwidth and a round trip through the video server. The CPU load is about 75% under version 3 and 85% under version 2 hinting to me that some bits are being thrown away. GSC tells me that version 2 is no longer supported but will run OK on the system.
Aaron Z
-
quintonrhq
- New Member
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:36 am
- Location: Bellevue Washington USA
The nominal resolution is 640x480.
The video card is a Video Advantage PCI which has done a few webcasts for us. Everything is S-video oriented. The frustration with version 3 is the inability to change parameters with this card as well as the USB interface so the default mode is it.
I don't know how many actual lines are coming through but I placed a resolution test card in front of the camera and version 3 gave me 10 lines (nominal) resolution and version 2 gave me 14 lines with the same setup.
Webcast would not let me install both versions at the same time so version 3 was uninstalled.
The video card is a Video Advantage PCI which has done a few webcasts for us. Everything is S-video oriented. The frustration with version 3 is the inability to change parameters with this card as well as the USB interface so the default mode is it.
I don't know how many actual lines are coming through but I placed a resolution test card in front of the camera and version 3 gave me 10 lines (nominal) resolution and version 2 gave me 14 lines with the same setup.
Webcast would not let me install both versions at the same time so version 3 was uninstalled.
-
quintonrhq
- New Member
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:36 am
- Location: Bellevue Washington USA
At the risk of further personal embarrassment, I can shed some light as to what I think is going on.
First, the Video Advantage PCI video card is unknown to the webcast version 3 software and defaults to the standard configuration which is 320x240. Webcast version 2 can work with this card.
Second, the webcast version 3 setup has a network speed option table. The calculated bandwidth recommendations are calculated as twice the sum of the constant bit rates for the audio and video from the profiles folder. These are interesting to examine. If you are using a DSL connection with a 1.5Mbps rating then it is logical to avoid settings above that threshold such as the high4x3 profile at 1.7Mbps. Selecting the medium or low 4x3 profile however will constrain the display to a 320x240 image. Using the high 4x3 profile does produce a 640x480 image.
The version 2 high profile at 640x480 claims a need for only 450Kbps.
After calibrating my resolution chart, it is clear that I was seeing a 320x240 image. The system does truly deliver a 640x480 image when correctly fed.
As an aside, the USB interfaces seem to need more CPU cycles to capture video images than a PCI card which may account for greater frustration in getting them to work.
First, the Video Advantage PCI video card is unknown to the webcast version 3 software and defaults to the standard configuration which is 320x240. Webcast version 2 can work with this card.
Second, the webcast version 3 setup has a network speed option table. The calculated bandwidth recommendations are calculated as twice the sum of the constant bit rates for the audio and video from the profiles folder. These are interesting to examine. If you are using a DSL connection with a 1.5Mbps rating then it is logical to avoid settings above that threshold such as the high4x3 profile at 1.7Mbps. Selecting the medium or low 4x3 profile however will constrain the display to a 320x240 image. Using the high 4x3 profile does produce a 640x480 image.
The version 2 high profile at 640x480 claims a need for only 450Kbps.
After calibrating my resolution chart, it is clear that I was seeing a 320x240 image. The system does truly deliver a 640x480 image when correctly fed.
As an aside, the USB interfaces seem to need more CPU cycles to capture video images than a PCI card which may account for greater frustration in getting them to work.