[AG-TECH] Remore controlled cameras

Fred Dech fdech at uchicago.edu
Thu Oct 28 14:46:38 CDT 2004

i just watched inSORS install a node and their current software still
allows for remote camera control.  i personally never allow it and don't
like it.  but in certain situations (e.g., where one node-op is managing
two different nodes simultaneously as David discribes) it should be very

Canon also provides an SDK for their serial control protocol.  i can't
remember if it is C, C++ or what.  their default controller application
works, but has some annoying issues.  the inSORS control interface is
much more user friendly.  i assume that they built it from Canon's SDK.
i don't plan on writing another controller. i can live with the default
Canon app. when not running inSORS-hooked AG.
but someone out there may find it fun to give the SDK a try...


On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 12:15PM, David McNabb said:
> (At least our early version of) the inSORS software came
> with a feature to allow remote sites to control your cameras.
> This was very cool and great fun to play with.  If people got
> out of control, you just turned off the allow-remote-control
> feature and went back to controlling your cameras yourself.
> I never saw a "real" meeting case where it led to chaos,
> though I did not ever use it in a meeting with more than a
> few inSORS nodes present.  I have seen cases where the
> remote node did not have a node op or local participant
> with spare time to tweak cameras, so getting them to turn
> on remote camera control was extremely useful.
> IMHO, a serial port based camera-controller for evi's and
> vcc4's would be a very welcome addition to AGTk, either
> with remote-node control of local cameras or without.
>   --David
> David McNabb
> Project Lead, UMAGI
> UM Access Grid Initiative
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Maryland
> College Park, MD, USA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Naylor <richard.naylor at citylink.co.nz>
> To: Ulrich Schwenn <schwenn at rzg.mpg.de>
> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:18:37 +1300
> Subject: Re: [AG-TECH] Remore controlled cameras
> At 07:08 AM 10/28/2004 +0200, Ulrich Schwenn wrote:
> >Richard,
> >
> > do you really mean remote, i.e. any (a) or at least one
> > (b) participating node should be allowed to control
> > your camera(s)?.  Case (a) would lead to chaos,
> > because n different people will have n different
> > views makes n! possibilities, thus (b) will never
> > assure an optimal position.
> > Case (b) could be useful, if you can trust
> > somebody and dont have the time or manpower
> > do do it on your own site.
> > If you just mean remote but in your room, this is of
> > course useful, but then you can use the standard
> > RS.232 control of your Sony. 
> > If you have an audience, where people might feel
> > supervised by external remote control it could
> > become interesting for the unions.
> > So better keep camera control under your control.
> Yes chaos = case A, but I wondered if anyone
> actually tried it.
> I agree under a restricted access the remote control
> has many possibilities.
> rich

More information about the ag-tech mailing list