To webcam or not to webcam - that is the question?

Hi

One of the thoughts we had was that if we are audio streaming, why not look at streaming video of the venue.

Being able to see the Stavanger venue whilst listening to the audio stream may be fun, and also give depth to the online experience.

You will also be able to see the project team running around like looneys, and place bets on who wants to go for a break first, or how many cups of coffee I drink.

In theory there are many IP Webcams on the market, ranging from £30 to £3,000, and it really is hard to figure out what we would require.

Having researched this a bit, I figured we need a pan and tilt (Myself or the viewer can move the camera) without sound (because I can use the audio feed) and the ability for up to 30 simultaneous viewers.

A good quality range such as the Panasonic BC models will do the job, so why are we still debating?

Its about servers and cost.

Transmitting a videostream is a highly intensive process. The higher the frame rate, the better quality, the better the quality the higher the bandwidth needed, the more users allowed, the more bandwidth needed and so on and so forth.

For example transmitting at 30fps (30 frames per second) on an average resolution which means the picture is smooth requires a lot of processor power and hard disk space.

I looked at 6 simutaneous users at 16fps for 24 hours and the spec was as follows:

1TB hard disk space with a processor capable of delivering 3.6MHz speed.

It can be done, but I do have to think about the fact that the processor/server also needs to support audio streaming, recording of the audio stream, and the output to the overhead projector.

See the proposed server spec and be amazed, however we remain unsold on the IP webcam at this present time.