Perhaps we could let the remote folk pilot the camera...
Of course someone would need to write a protocol for that.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 12:57 AM, Bob Hinden
<bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Scott,
On Jul 24, 2015, at 6:55 PM, Scott O. Bradner <sob(_at_)sobco(_dot_)com>
wrote:
and a always-paying-attention operator (for each room) to know when to
switch - potentially adding significantly
to the cost
No doubt, but I we may gone too far by eliminating a camera operator in
the room. We pay for it in quality. I suggest spending a few hours
watching a recording session and see what you think.
fwiw - standing in a place where you can be seen by the camera so that
the remote experience is better
without having to dedicate a camera operator to each room seems a very
very small price to pay
I agree.
Bob
Scott
On Jul 24, 2015, at 12:48 PM, Bob Hinden
<bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Jul 24, 2015, at 12:33 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 24/07/2015 22:23, Adrian Farrel wrote:
...
A proposal...
Could Meetecho please just zoom out.
Alternative proposal...
Make the pink box a guide for speakers who want to be in frame, but
stop telling
us that we MUST stand in the box.
Also, we *really* need a repeater screen so that the person speaking
can see
the slides without eyes in the back of his/her head. Speaking
coherently about
a slide that I cannot see is beyond my powers.
While we are talking about making remote participation better.
I watched a recorded working group session last night. Currently the
video is only of the slides and a small view of the speaker.
Unfortunately, when someone comes to the microphone, you don’t get to see
them speak. It would be much better if one could see them when they talk.
This might require panning the main camera, or a second camera (and I guess
a second “pink square”).
Bob
Brian