Even using a consumer videocam and spending a few hours on editing couldn't hurt. And perhaps streaming just isn't possible or even wanted.
Just my two small monetary units of thought on the subject. I might be willing to take a stab at a session or two... Judy On Mon, 22 May 2006, Stephen Barncard wrote: > The camera was mostly static (boring), the lighting on the subject > (what lighting?) was horrible and no provision was made to switch > between the direct feed to the projector and the camera. No room > camera to go to either. Pretty hard to watch. Finally the microphone > on the camera was used for the audio, rendering much of what was said > to an echo-y mush. Sorry, Dan, that's not the way it's done. Nobody > will watch (or listen) to that. The production values have to be at > least C-span quality. > > For anyone to actually sit through this, the production values have > to be at least good enough to see someone's face in a postage stamp > sized video. And one must still light the subject properly-even if > it's headed to the low-rez web, as it will result in smaller streams > sent due to the compression working less hard. > > If it's done well, and professionally, it could be an asset to the > Rev community. One guy with two cameras and a switcher could do it. > > It could be paid for with a small paypal fee from those who want to > watch. Surely there is some firm that would do this on spec. > > ps. > > I'll be happy to be able to just find a place to plug in my laptop > this year.And if you need help with audio (or video) deployment, let > me know.... _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
