Subject: [vmeet] Video

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 23:36:16 +0200

Hi

I'm not so sure about the video requirements in section 4.1.2, especially this:

**Requirement 00-11**: Remote attendees need to be able to see local attendees at any mic in the meeting.

Although seeing the local attendees might be helpful to remote presenters, I think a video camera pointed at the mikes has a chilling effect on the participation by local attendees. Much as reality TV may lead us to think otherwise, most people don't want to make fools of themselves on camera, whereas doing so on audio only doesn't feel as bad.

I'm not too keen on a camera pointed at the presenter either, but I don't mind that too much.

Yoav

---

From: Henk Uijterwaal <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 11:04:53 +0100

On 06/01/2012 22:36, Yoav Nir wrote:
> Although seeing the local attendees might be helpful to remote presenters, I
> think a video camera pointed at the mikes has a chilling effect on the
> participation by local attendees. Much as reality TV may lead us to think
> otherwise, most people don't want to make fools of themselves on camera,
> whereas doing so on audio only doesn't feel as bad.
> 

My experience with other groups that it is pretty helpful to see
the speaker.  In a heated discussion, people forget to say their names
and it isn't always obvious who is speaking just from the voice alone,
being able to see who is speaking helps to follow the discussion.

I don't buy the argument that people won't speak up for the risk of
making a fool of themselves on camera.

Henk

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                           Email: henk(at)uijterwaal.nl
                                          http://www.uijterwaal.nl
                                          Phone: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There appears to have been a collective retreat from reality that day.
                                 (John Glanfield, on an engineering project)

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:52:17 -0500

> making a fool of themselves on camera.

Requiring remote participants to be on screen imposes significant
requirements on their
bandwidth and equipment, which not all participants will be able (or
willing) to meet all of the time. So,
doing this for remote participants is to me a SHOULD not a MUST.

Regards
Marshall

> _______________________________________________
> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html.
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet

---

From: Henk Uijterwaal <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:22:29 +0100

> doing this for remote participants is to me a SHOULD not a MUST.

I read the requirement differently...  There is one video stream, showing
whoever is speaking.  This is shown to the remote audience.  IMHO, this
helps a lot to follow the discussion.  I don't see a requirement for
the remote participants to send video if they are just listening or for
multiple video streams.

I agree that it is good to be able to switch video off whenever the
user feels like it.

Henk

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:27:12 -0500

> the remote participants to send video if they are just listening or for

But what if the remote participant is speaking ?

I think it would be useful to see them as well, but I don't think it
can be a requirement.

Marshall

---

From: Henk Uijterwaal <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 15:38:49 +0100

> I think it would be useful to see them as well, but I don't think it

If you have a list of participants, the tool can highlight the person
who is speaking by showing his name in a different font, color or such.
Most of the tools that I've seen do something like.

The problem is the case where multiple people share a microphone, as in
a physical meeting room.  Here video is a solution to see who is speaking.

Henk

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:42:39 -0800

> Most of the tools that I've seen do something like.

Showing a picture of the person would also be helpful.

Bob

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 11:55:45 -0500

> Showing a picture of the person would also be helpful.

A fairly long history with telepresence has convinced me that there is
utility in showing the person speaking,
beyond just the basics of ID. Body language and expressions do convey
information.

Regards
Marshall

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:13:00 -0800

On Jan 9, 2012, at 6:22 AM, Henk Uijterwaal wrote:

> I read the requirement differently...  

The wording in the -00 draft is a first guess. What we are trying to determine is what requirements are really needed. That wording was picked out of the air and was wrapped in many TODO notes indicating that the topic is wide open.

--Paul Hoffman

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:41:33 -0500

> I think it would be useful to see them as well, but I don't think it

It should be a requirement to support the ability to see the remote speaker.

Whether we can actually see the remote speaker is dependent on much 
more, such as if they don't have a webcam, are on a low-bandwidth 
connection, or just don't feel like showing off their fuzzy pajamas (or 
lack thereof).

     Tony Hansen
     [email-masked]

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:48:10 -0500

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Tony Hansen <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Whether we can actually see the remote speaker is dependent on much more,
> such as if they don't have a webcam, are on a low-bandwidth connection, or
> just don't feel like showing off their fuzzy pajamas (or lack thereof).
>

+1

Marshall