Notes from Sura/ViDe

[Thomas D. Uram]

Terry Disz wrote:

> Tom,
>
>  
>
> I am not sure what you mean. Last time I saw the VIDE folks, the vast 
> majority were doing h.323 systems delivering a single h.261 encoded 
> stream, the same codec we use.
>
Polycom and Radvision are doing h.263.  Todd Needham from Microsoft 
showed me their conference xp client doing 640x480 using windows media 
codecs.  The telesuite people are doing h.264.  I've been under the 
impression that the h323 folks were generally using h263; maybe that's 
not true.

> So, in terms of video pixels delivered to the user, we far outpace 
> those systems. As far as individual streams - can't we improve our 
> h.261 streams to look as good as the ones delivered by the commercial 
> vendors?
>
I've heard you guys talk about better quality h261 encoders from 
commercial sources, but the resolution is still lower, right?

>  If some are using h.263 or something approaching NTSC, can you tell 
> how many people are using this?
>
I have no idea.

>  What does pushing on HD and DV mean? Is there a roadmap from them for 
> getting these in use? What do the vendors say about that?
>
Internet2 and ResearchChannel were demonstrating HD and DV, respectively 
(or more accurately, showcasing it).  I expect their slides to show up 
on the conference website before long, and hopefully they'll answer 
these questions.

>  I see Bob and Ivan have already addressed our options for better 
> video, but I am just wondering how much better, how soon, how many of 
> our users would upgrade facilities to obtain it - which I understand 
> is a different question than advertising that we can deliver high 
> quality video.
>
>  
>
> I am wondering if anyone has any pointers to show how much better the 
> video conferencing experience is with varying quality video streams 
> and varying numbers of streams?
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Terry
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov [mailto:owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov] *On 
> Behalf Of *Thomas D. Uram
> *Sent:* Friday, March 26, 2004 7:51 AM
> *To:* Rick Stevens
> *Cc:* ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> *Subject:* Re: Notes from Sura/ViDe
>
>  
>
> I mean in terms of resolution.  NTSC is more common, and they 
> are--like us--pushing on HD and DV. 
>
> Rick Stevens wrote:
>
>what do yo umean outpaces ours ?
>
> 
>
>On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, Thomas D. Uram wrote:
>
> 
>
>  
>
>>Here are some notes from the Sura/ViDe conference.  Overall I think 
>>
>>these people are concerned with a different set of requirements than we 
>>
>>are, particularly casual one-to-one media-only conferencing.  They are 
>>
>>becoming more interested in data collaboration, which brings them closer 
>>
>>to us.  Their video generally outpaces ours, which requires us to play 
>>
>>catch-up.
>>
>> 
>>
>>I missed a couple of promising sessions because they coincided with the 
>>
>>AG/Multicast session:
>>
>> 
>>
>>    Digital Video in Library and Archives
>>
>>    Extreme Video
>>
>> 
>>
>>I expect slides will be available online before long at:
>>
>> 
>>
>>    http://www.vide.net/conferences/spr2004/program.shtml
>>
>> 
>>
>>Tom
>>
>> 
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
> 
>
> 
>
>  
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/ag-dev/attachments/20040328/4e73996f/attachment.htm>