Re: Video Streaming Services - Status and Survey

["Jeff Duke" <jeff_d@embarqmail.com>]

I will check in here briefly,

I also have used all three services. The only thing I can add is that 
Livestream's studio does not have to be opened to broadcast. I can just 
start the FME and it starts broadcasting. This is good for me because I 
also 
use Manycam for copious amounts of video fx (yes, I am one of those). The 
cpu load is much less with Livestream than it is with Ustream because of 
this. Ustream, as Rainer said has to have it's own broadcast window open 
and 
connected with the FME before broadcasting. This was my least favorite 
thing 
about Ustream. I recently had an issue with Ustream not broadcasting 
stereo 
but this may have been a fluke.

The bandwidth limits with Livestream and the aspect ratio are it's biggest 
issue for some. It is not for me as I have never used anything higher than 
about 428 kbs total for audio/video broadcast. You have to consider the 
bandwidth of the audients connection also.

To get my channel "verified" on Livestream was very simple. Once done you 
can have unlimited viewers.

With Livestream you can upload your own videos and also sync with your 
Youtube account. It plays on "auto pilot" 24/7. This allows me to edit my 
sets much better than Ustream. Ustream doesn't allow uploads.

There have been some issues with Livestream reporting a "unable to find 
that 
url" when people click on the link to the shows. This is rare.

The studio with Livestream enables you to switch between other feeds and 
cameras. You can also have shared channels with collaborators which is 
nice. 
This may be the big thing for the next VSV fest! Ustream was a 
kluster(ahem) 
using their cohost feature. :)


best,

Jeff



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rainer Straschill" <moinsound@googlemail.com>
To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 6:15 AM
Subject: Video Streaming Services - Status and Survey


> Hi everyone,
>
> those video streaming things have been the #1 cool thing for me in 2009, 
> and I continue to do a bi-weekly performance series (first official 
> session this Saturday) and have done daily ones this past week since 
> Sunday. Also, Rick's festival has been transmitted nearly in full (and 
> archived online), so there's even a looping relationship here...on to 
>some 
> findings and a call for your inputs to these topics.
>
> My own experience:
> I have worked with three services in total: ustream.tv, justin.tv and 
> livestream.com. At least livestream also has a "premium" version with a 
> hefty price tag, but all of those offer "free" (meaning ad-financed, no 
> charges for viewer or presenter) accounts.
>
> What they have in common:
> They're free, allow you to record your shows and make them available for 
> posterity, and allow embedded players to be placed e.g. on your website 
> and viewing them does not require registration for the viewer. All of 
>them 
> allow you to transmit via a browser-based flash plugin or with the free 
> Adobe FME software.
>
> The lowdown on all three of them:
> a) ustream:
> This is the one where I started, and where I have the most experience 
> with.
> Nice:
> *   the system of announcing your own shows, following other people etc. 
> seems laid out fine. There also seems to be a large viewer crowd.
> *   there are some basic editing functions for your archived videos 
>which 
> are, as I might say, sufficient.
> Not nice:
> *   they have a service which allows cueing in other performers (called 
> "co-hosting"), drop in clips form youtube etc. Unfortunately, the last 
> time I checked (at the VSV festival in October), these functions were 
> flawed or didn't work at all.
> *   even when using the FME encoder, you still need to run the web 
>browser 
> plugin, which can be an issue for older computers (and "older" here 
>means 
> anything with a passmark below 900).
>
> b) justin:
> Nice:
> *   This is the simplest of the three. Set up your account, download the 
> xml file for the FME, fire up the FME.
> Not nice:
> *   Well...doesn't offer that many nifty features as the others do.
>
> c) livestream:
> This seems to be the most powerful one of the three in terms of features.
> Nice:
> *   A nifty wealth of features, including some configurable banners at 
>the 
> start of the video etc. There's the so-called "studio", which allows you 
> to also upload videos, create an on-demand playlist, define storyboards 
> for a live (or archived show), cue in other performers etc.
> Not Nice:
> *   There are some limitations to the free accounts. First one is you 
>need 
> to get your channel certified to be allowed to transmit to more than 40 
> viewers. This is not a big issue, as it's just filling out a form and 
> waiting for a day or so.
> *   More limitations for free accounts: the biggest is that you are 
> limited to a 500kbps stream bandwidth and 4:3 aspect ratio.
>
>
> Ok, now it's your turn. More observations to add? Other services which 
>do 
> something like that? Comments? Questions?
>
>
> Yours,
>
>             Rainer
>
> -- 
> http://moinlabs.de
> Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/moinlabs
>
>