|
||||||
|
|
Go
![]() |
New
![]() |
Find
![]() |
Notify
![]() |
Tools
![]() |
Reply
![]() |
|
|
Jedi Master |
How does one stream video live from a Mac? A Windows PC?
- One Nation Under A Groove - |
||
|
Genius![]() |
If you are talking about something other than one on one with a chat program, then you need a streaming server, like the QuickTime Streaming server or Windows Media server or Real, etc. The QuickTime server is open source and so available for free.
=== Professor Hubert Farnsworth: “Nothing is impossible. Not if you can imagine it. That’s what being a scientist is all about.” Cubert J. Farnsworth: “No, that’s what being a magical elf is all about.” |
|||
|
|
Jedi Master |
So one just install the Server, a camcorder, and go?
- One Nation Under A Groove - |
|||
|
Genius![]() |
It's more complicated than that - more than you're going to get in a post on the iBBS. You'll need to red the docs for whatever server you choose.
=== Professor Hubert Farnsworth: “Nothing is impossible. Not if you can imagine it. That’s what being a scientist is all about.” Cubert J. Farnsworth: “No, that’s what being a magical elf is all about.” |
|||
|
Ambassador![]() |
I would also question the value of having it "live"?
I was excited about QT Streaming when it first came out and did some experiments streaming one of our SIG meetings LIVE. It worked, but it was a lot of work and BANDWIDTH for little in return. My thought is that if you can watch it live, then you could probably attend the meeting. Now of course for an event that is being streamed for those who are not in the area, then it makes sense, but again does it need to be LIVE? Even Apple got away from streaming Macworld keynotes "Live" because it was too expensive and too much effort for what? Those who were not in the audience in San Fran could see it a couple hours later streamed off the web. What would be the difference? So does it really need to be Live? ---- You can never go wrong by doing the right thing. 4 out of 3 people have trouble with fractions. There are three kinds of people, those who are good at math and those who aren't. There are two kinds of computer users: those who have lost data and those who are about to — backup your Mac! |
|||
|
|
Jedi Master |
Just my two cents here. I really appreciate having the MacGroup meetings on the CD of the Month, to which I subscribe, because I cannot get to every meeting.
As far as streaming goes in general, I can see the value of being "live" if you need two-way conferencing, but for content the ability to view it later is invaluable, and even more so if you have a "hard" copy because you can review easily if necessary, even without that internet connection. |
|||
|
|
Poobah |
There are various products to stream video live, depending what you mean by video.
Usually most people mean full VGA resolution at 30 fps. That's bandwidth intensive for most software applications and Internet connections. Many applications will reduce the frame rate and / or resolution. Audio is also a 2nd consideration, and "markup" or annotation is a 3rd aspect. A 4th category to consider is video source: computer screen or videocam, and switching between the two sources. If you want the whole enchilada, it's expensive, and there are only a couple products out there to accomplish it: Adobe Breeze and WebEx come to mind. Timbuktu may also offer something. Sometimes this capability is known as collaboration software or video conferencing (e.g., Pic Tel Corporation). I can connect you with an Ford IT expert, if you like. |
|||
|
|
Jedi Master |
The reason I say "Live" is because a family member is planning a large, multi-state raffle, and I thought it would be cool if anyone not in attendance could see it live (to keep things above board).
- One Nation Under A Groove - |
|||
|

