Stabliity or quality of stream?
-
- Church Employee
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:41 pm
Stabliity or quality of stream?
I'm curious, what would you rather prefer... a stable, lower bandwidth stream with no buffering, pauses and/or skips or an HD quality stream that may have some buffering, pauses and/or skips involved?
- Mikerowaved
- Community Moderators
- Posts: 4734
- Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:56 am
- Location: Layton, UT
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
That's an interesting question. Are you asking because we can only have one or the other? IMO, pauses and skips are the worst to deal with. However, am I correct in assuming that with ample bandwidth at all points, there shouldn't be a need to choose?
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
-
- Community Administrator
- Posts: 34417
- Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
- Location: U.S.
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
Odd, I thought I responded to this, but I don't see it anywhere.
To me, avoiding skips or pauses is most important. But if the quality is less than SD, I'd probably get comments on that. Kind of a no-win situation.
To me, avoiding skips or pauses is most important. But if the quality is less than SD, I'd probably get comments on that. Kind of a no-win situation.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
-
- Community Moderators
- Posts: 11460
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:27 pm
- Location: US
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
I would prefer a stable, lower bandwidth stream with no buffering, pauses and/or skips,
-
- Member
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 11:57 am
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
stable and lower bandwidth stream as long as long as it is SD level videoquality is much more important.
-
- Church Employee
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:41 pm
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
The reason why I was asking is because in my stake, I'm the STS and the highest upload we get is about 1.2M. Now while this should be enough to broadcast a decent looking stream, I don't trust it always staying at that high a level. Over the past 2 years, we've had problems with our internet at our stake center with it dropping to to around 500k and then coming back up or just dropping entirely. We have since changed our ISP and it seems to be stable. I still don't trust it though cause in test it has dropped down past 700k.
Last stake conference I was determined to have it work. So I set the bitrate to encode at 500k. I did not want the thing to skip, pause, or buffer in any manner....and it worked. Now while the picture quality wasn't HD, the members were able to hear the messages all the way through without problems. It was a first in 2 years, so I was thrilled. Now we are wanting a better picture.....but I don't really trust the system. I would rather have a stable, continuous stream that plays all the way through.
Now I do get complaints/comments that the stream wasn't HD. But I always counter, would you rather have it pause or skip? The answer is always no.
If with enough bandwidth that acts properly, there is no reason why a higher quality of stream couldn't be played....but we just don't have it at our stake yet. Oh and did I say I also don't trust the bandwidth to stay up there.
In any case, we are working on ways to try and make those darn dips in bandwidth irrelevant so that skips, pauses, and buffers won't occur as much.
Last stake conference I was determined to have it work. So I set the bitrate to encode at 500k. I did not want the thing to skip, pause, or buffer in any manner....and it worked. Now while the picture quality wasn't HD, the members were able to hear the messages all the way through without problems. It was a first in 2 years, so I was thrilled. Now we are wanting a better picture.....but I don't really trust the system. I would rather have a stable, continuous stream that plays all the way through.
Now I do get complaints/comments that the stream wasn't HD. But I always counter, would you rather have it pause or skip? The answer is always no.
If with enough bandwidth that acts properly, there is no reason why a higher quality of stream couldn't be played....but we just don't have it at our stake yet. Oh and did I say I also don't trust the bandwidth to stay up there.
In any case, we are working on ways to try and make those darn dips in bandwidth irrelevant so that skips, pauses, and buffers won't occur as much.
-
- New Member
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 12:49 pm
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
Most if not all the cameras the Church is installing in new Stake Centers are SD cameras. I would recommend SD video even if your camera has HD capabilities. An SD stream upload/download needed is 1.5 Mbps/1.0 Mbps, but for HD you need more like 4Mbps/2.1Mbps. If your buildings can really handle HD and have a HD camera why not use it, but even though I myself am someone that cares a lot about quality, I would opt to use SD if I knew it would lessen a chance for failure. Audio is more important for a webcast as if there was no video the message would still come across, but with no Audio there would be no message. That is why it’s important to have an audio backup solution ready in case the webcast fails.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 501
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 7:52 pm
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
For me, if I can maintain the sound with no drop outs, that is so much preferred. However, I would like to have a focused picture for the members to see, but dropouts and buffering can lose the spirit of a great talk. There are some talks that just suck you in and you are hanging on every word and if there is a pause and you lose something then that talk becomes useless. So lower quality video with no drops is better for me. I would find the upper limit and then pull it back a notice or two.
Just my feelings.
Just my feelings.
-
- Member
- Posts: 225
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 2:50 pm
- Location: Texas, United States
- Contact:
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
Unless you have super high quality HD cameras at the source location and HD capable projectors at the recieving locations you are wasting your energy. Seems like the Achilles heel of the solution will remain so-so SD cameras at the stake center and cruddy SD computer projectors at the chapels.
- Mikerowaved
- Community Moderators
- Posts: 4734
- Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:56 am
- Location: Layton, UT
Re: Stabliity or quality of stream?
I have to disagree. I started webcasting in HD (720p) years ago with nothing more than a home video camera on a tripod, with a vanilla notebook PC at the receive end tied to a projector with a VGA cable. Audio was fed to the sound system using a crab box. Since then, our projector has been updated and now (besides being a little brighter) includes HDMI inputs, but it's basically the same process.sammythesm wrote:Unless you have super high quality HD cameras at the source location and HD capable projectors at the recieving locations you are wasting your energy. Seems like the Achilles heel of the solution will remain so-so SD cameras at the stake center and cruddy SD computer projectors at the chapels.
So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.