1 / 33

Video

Video. October 29, 2007 SI 689. Today’s Class. Video set-up Connector Conference Room SI North Same set-up at both ends Two large flat panel displays Video Slides One camera – can be controlled from either site. Different Modes. Video-mediated communication Video conferencing rooms

braima
Download Presentation

Video

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Video October 29, 2007 SI 689

  2. Today’s Class • Video set-up • Connector Conference Room • SI North • Same set-up at both ends • Two large flat panel displays • Video • Slides • One camera – can be controlled from either site

  3. Different Modes • Video-mediated communication • Video conferencing rooms • Desktop video • Video for awareness • Video as data

  4. Video is not Video is not Video • Many different levels of quality • Frame rate • Graininess • Delay • Tiny window on screen vs. immersive wall-size display • Dedicated rooms vs. flexibility • Integration with other tools

  5. Egido (1988) Review • A CSCW “classic” • What did she find? • Limited use • Those who used it did not like it • Not a substitute for FTF • Travel increased rather than decreased • Video conferencing was applied to formal work as opposed to informal interactions • Efficiency had a cost – lots of preparation • Desktop preferred over meeting room (early speculation) • Difficult to do the needs assessment • Audio dominates video

  6. What’s True Today? • Lots of video conferencing centers • Elaboration of desktop conferencing as well • Many web-based conferencing & IM tools support it • What issues remain? • Technical difficulties, esp. in set-up • Quality of audio & video better, but still frustrating • Still has not cut back on travel -- but more ambitious things are being attempted • Thought to be killer app for Internet2 • A change since 9/11? • More from Erik later

  7. Best Somewhat Recent Source on Video-Mediated Communication

  8. VMC • Common finding (from dozens of lab tasks, going back to Chapanis) • Task performance • Audio better than e-mail or chat • Video no better than audio • Exception: negotiation tasks • Satisfaction • Video preferred to audio only • Olson, Olson & Meader, 1995 • Replicated this pattern of results w/ high quality video & audio

  9. Kraut et al., 1998 • 18-month study of the adoption of a video system • Video telephony systems • Two systems – Cruiser & MTS • Key concepts • Utility • Normative influences • Long-term adoption of Cruiser

  10. Nguyen & Canny, 2005 • MultiView • Spatial faithfulness • Mona Lisa effect • How did it work? • Did it work? • How will this scale?

  11. Video When Lack Common Ground • The longer the distance between people, the less common ground they have • Definition: what is assumed to be shared between two people who are communicating • If you don’t have natural common ground, you have to work at it, discover what each other knows in common and build from there.

  12. Veinott et al study • The less common ground you have, the more you need high bandwidth and rapid interaction for communication • Pairs of Native English speakers do not need video to communicate • Pairs of Non-native English speakers are much better when they have video as well as audio

  13. Results Audio plus Video Audio 731 sec. 700 sec. N=20 pairs 24 cm2 28 cm2 Native Speakers Non-native Speakers 875 sec. 639 sec. N=18 pairs 44 cm2 37 cm2

  14. Video as Data (Nardi et al., 1993) • Important addition to our thinking about communication • Mix of distance & proximal in same setting • Uses • coordination • education • remote access

  15. Video as Data – Other Examples?

  16. Is there more to the video story?

  17. A Paradox • Despite these shortcomings, video is now very heavily used • One research system hosts 1,800 meetings per month, averaging 3 hours and 10 sites per meeting • Bigger growth curves for commercial systems (Skype Video, Windows Messenger, etc.) • Millions of video conferences per day

  18. Increasing use • Increases in bandwidth to the home and in device integration is making video from the home feasible • Opens an new area where video has clear benefits that outweigh the difficulties • Friends • Family (grandchild factor) • Serving as a training ground for video at work?

  19. New forms of video • “Telepresence” systems aim to control enough variability to promise an excellent experience • Subjective reports are very good Cisco Telepresence, newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/2006/hd_102306.html HP Halo, www.hp.com/halo/factsheet.html

  20. Major changes in what “video” means • Display, camera and codec technology have seen big improvements over the past 5 years • State of the art in video conference systems now exceed typical home A/V setup in terms of size and resolution • Largely driven by adoption of HDTV technologies and manufacturing improvements in displays • Also see changes in studio technologies

  21. Source: Cees de Laat, UvA

  22. An Overview of Video R&D at SI

  23. The Connection Project • A project to prototype rich, interactive communication systems for the University of Michigan • Funded by UM Office of the Provost • First phase of the project focuses on two rooms at the School of Information

  24. West Hall SI North

  25. West Hall SI North

  26. Global Lambda Integrated FacilityWorld Map – August 2005 International Research & Education Network bandwidth, to be made available for scheduled application and middleware research experiments by August 2005. www.glif.is Visualization courtesy of Bob Patterson, NCSA/University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Data compilation by Maxine Brown, University of Illinois at Chicago. Earth texture from NASA.

  27. iGrid 2005: N-Way HD Videoconferencing • First ever demonstration of multipoint, uncompressed HD video conferencing, first multicast of uncompressed HD • Interactive video conference between iGrid, University of Washington (organizer) and University of Michigan • Additional video from University of Wisconsin - Madison and Keio University • ~1.5 Gbps per stream using UW/Research Channel iHD1500 system

  28. iGrid 2005: N-Way HD Videoconferencing • Demonstration featured one uncompressed HD stream broadcast from each site to iGrid, with two streams multicast from iGrid • At iGrid, 63” plasma displays made remote participants appear life size • Michigan endpoint located in UM Physics machine room and connected to Ultralight via MiLR

  29. Supercomputing 2005 WIDE (Japan) Seattle Seattle USC UWisc SC|05 UMich - SI UMich - Med SURFnet (Netherlands) aarnet (Australia)

  30. Video on Large Displays

  31. Reaction to This Experience

More Related