Using VidiU with older technology Sony EVI-D70

We will be upgrading to the new VidiU system soon. However, we have these Sony SDI cameras and AVDH-1 video distribution amps that only support the SDI format. I suspect that there are many of us out there that have this set up. So even though this new streaming system supports HDMI, we will never achieve very good video quality when we are using these lower end video signals. So my question and gripe here is why require the upgrade to the VidiU if it will not improve your webcast quality? The best data rate we will achieve will be 500Kbps. And video quality coming from these 1980s CCD technology Sony cameras is terrible. If the GSC wants us to use this new system then I feel they should be offering a full package solution. Meaning HDMI all the way from the input source to the end source!
The other gripe is just 6 months ago we spent time and money to upgrade our system with the "new" AVDH-1 distribution boxes at both our buildings. Now with this new system they will be just about OBS.
And yes I understand that high end PTZ cameras and video distribution/converter boxes are not cheap. But if we are going to be serious about this streaming video technology change then we need to spend the money on good equipment.

Thoughts? Solutions?

Just because the VidiU is HD-capable doesn't demand that the rest of the system must be.

They did a partial upgrade to the system in our stake center. They'll be supplying a VidiU and have just installed a AVDH-1.

I should clarify. Yes I know the VidiU can support SD video. We currently have a webcast solution with the "communicator" computer. It works fine, but the video quality is very poor when you compare it to what people are used to viewing today on HD systems. It is SD at 700Kbs bandwidth. So my point is spending money on upgrades is fine but at this point, for us it does not buy us much since the bottleneck is our Sony SD cameras. Which I suspect will be the case with anyone upgrading. Perhaps someone can suggest cost effective HD cameras and video distribution amps...

Maybe not for your situation, but for some, switching to a HD camera creates a problem with in-building video distribution.

@ russel, yes it does for us too. Thus my concerns and frustrations with changing to this new technology, when we have RF cabling all throughout both our buildings! and HDMI cabling is out of the question for long runs, and audio latency. Again, I'm not sure of the whole benefits of this upgrade if your only getting partial components updated, there seems very little benefit from it. The video image at the other end will still be cruddy looking SD resolution. I would like to see a whole package deal put together by the powers to be in SLC that provides the best quality for everyone. IMO if the church is going to be serious about this going forward then we need to have Pro quality solutions installed. Not Consumer products. My stake pres has asked me to find a solution. However, I would like to see this (my solution) harmonized with what SLC is planning.

I think the plan is to "future proof" the encoder. I understand there is a plan to move the meetinghouse to digital distribution, but it will be done when each meetinghouse reaches it's "referb" date. It won't be a general roll out like Internet was done.

davidscott59 wrote:@ russel, yes it does for us too. Thus my concerns and frustrations with changing to this new technology, when we have RF cabling all throughout both our buildings! and HDMI cabling is out of the question for long runs, and audio latency. Again, I'm not sure of the whole benefits of this upgrade if your only getting partial components updated, there seems very little benefit from it. The video image at the other end will still be cruddy looking SD resolution. I would like to see a whole package deal put together by the powers to be in SLC that provides the best quality for everyone. IMO if the church is going to be serious about this going forward then we need to have Pro quality solutions installed. Not Consumer products. My stake pres has asked me to find a solution. However, I would like to see this (my solution) harmonized with what SLC is planning.

I don't know much about how buildings are wired for video, so this might not be relevant. But it seems that if your current solutions works with SD, and using HD is problematic, then you could use Open Broadcaster with a mid-grade laptop for encoding instead of the VidiU. Would that fit better into your current setup?

With the recent announcement by the Presiding Bishopric that the VidiU Encoder is available FREE to all interested stakes, the transition is painless. Simply purchase the $50 "Composite to HDMI Converter" from the Church's store (or MonoPrice) and the VidiU will work with any stake's EVI-D70 composite/SD camera systems. This is a small price to pay for a a more reliable system with webcast diagnostics and the future ability to do HD.

If you want to upgrade to HD webcasting, add a camcorder for $200. To inject the camcorder's HDMI video into the bldg's composite/rf system, add HDMI Splitter($30) and HDMI to Composite Converter($50) and plug it into the camera input in the overflow area.

Finally, Teradek sells a $100 HD video mixing/webcasting program (LIVE:AIR) for the iPad that connects over wifi to one or more camcorders via their VidiU (mini) Encoders. Buying a second camcorder and VidiU lets you approach a more professional webcast with a variety of views and the ability to do pan/tilt/zoom offline. If several stakes pooled/shared their respective camcorders and VidiUs, the expense is minimized!

justincy wrote:I don't know much about how buildings are wired for video, so this might not be relevant. But it seems that if your current solutions works with SD, and using HD is problematic, then you could use Open Broadcaster with a mid-grade laptop for encoding instead of the VidiU. Would that fit better into your current setup?

For our last conference broadcast, we used a VidiU box and it worked well. Everything else was SD.

Part of your decision should factor in the instructions all FM Groups have received to provide the VidiU unit to the stake.

I went through the same process of trying to figure out what it would take to bring HD video to our stake conference. Our stake center is limited to 2MB upload bandwidth, so we can't even get close to sending an HD stream out. Instead, I've tried to focus on getting the cleanest 480i SD signal that I can. We have one decent PTZ camera and I borrowed another. Cleaned up a bunch of cabling and now we're getting a pretty good picture. Of course it's not as sharp as 1080p, but nice clean 480i can look pretty good.

At 480i, you are getting DVD quality video. My thing is this, why should I be able to see how well my stake president shaved his face? I currently am using the Sony EVI-D70 came and the picture at the computer or even a tablet receiving the broadcast is good ro great. I use PVC, by the way. However my problem is that from the computer to the in house video distrubtion system to the projector, I lose picture quality. I know that there is noise on the line and other stuff. We are looking at different ways of getting the video to the video distrubtion system and to the projector so that we get the best picture we can.

Based on reading this, I think the biggest thing we need to be focusing on isn't so much the quality of the picture, but to make sure that the sound is the best because I can do the best video, but if the sound isn't there, then there is no need to do the broadcast. Sound doesn't take bandwdith, but video does. I try to make sure that the sound is the best.

Just my 2 cents worth
Terry

The best and only feasible solution for old buildings I've found so far, as I've previously posted, is the HDMI over coax extender from Sewell Direct. I haven't gotten an HD camera yet though; I was hoping the church would come out with a standard. If there were even a way to send full 480 signals over coax it would be a significant improvement though.

I must say though that I have nothing but problems with aspect ratio compatibility, both at church and at home. We got the HDMI over coax solution so we could display PC-based content in the cultural hall. I initially tried a VGA to composite converter but had aspect ratio issues. Hopefully the webcast will work fine; I don't know why this is so difficult.

craiggsmith wrote:The best and only feasible solution for old buildings I've found so far, as I've previously posted, is the HDMI over coax extender from Sewell Direct. I haven't gotten an HD camera yet though; I was hoping the church would come out with a standard. If there were even a way to send full 480 signals over coax it would be a significant improvement though.

I run SDI signal to an HDMI converter over RG-59 at 1080P, picture perfect.

rolandc wrote:I run SDI signal to an HDMI converter over RG-59 at 1080P, picture perfect.

So please clarify for me as I'm not really a video guy -- I hear SD and SDI and it seems they are two different things. My understanding is that SDI is a professional standard that can handle HD signals, and the equipment is quite expensive. Whereas SD is simply standard def.

Also, how far are you running it?

craiggsmith wrote:So please clarify for me as I'm not really a video guy -- I hear SD and SDI and it seems they are two different things.

They are.

SD is the video we all know and love from the 80's.

SDI is a digital signal that can be carried over the same single coax wiring. It could be most any resolution of video - including 4K. This simplifes the task of getting digital video from point A to point B without having to run all new wiring.

Thanks. So now I see a whole bunch of converters for reasonable prices, but when I looked into this before all I saw were very expensive ones. Rats. It seems that is the way to go. It would be nice if the church had some recommendations; it seems time to take the HD plunge. Not that we need HD video, but we need consistent aspect ratios and the ability to send computer presentations throughout the building. And somewhat better video would be nice, although maybe the new service is better.

How long have you been using your equipment? Mine is very sensitive to connections. I redid all of them, and returned some cheap connectors. And one of the cables I had a professional in my ward make stopped working after the first time.

craiggsmith wrote:it seems time to take the HD plunge. Not that we need HD video, but we need consistent aspect ratios and the ability to send computer presentations throughout the building. And somewhat better video would be nice, although maybe the new service is better.

We just got a new chapel complete with screen and projector. Without double checking, I think both were SD aspect ratio (4:3). And yes, I believe conference is broadcast in 16:9, which makes it letter boxed. While the playback looked a tad fuzzy, the names when they were put on the screen seemed to be nice and crisp.

craiggsmith wrote:How long have you been using your equipment?

For webcasting? I haven't gotten it yet. I suspect November will be my first run. But I haven't got the VidU yet.

russellhltn wrote:

craiggsmith wrote:How long have you been using your equipment? ...

For webcasting? I haven't gotten it yet. I suspect November will be my first run. But I haven't got the VidU yet.

Sorry, meant to direct that part to rolandc!

First let me say the "recommended" camera is the Sony D80, run through the Atlona converter produces a very nice picture.

Our camera is about three months old and its about 250' cable run.

russellhltn wrote:We just got a new chapel complete with screen and projector. Without double checking, I think both were SD aspect ratio (4:3). And yes, I believe conference is broadcast in 16:9, which makes it letter boxed.

It's funny, when I worked for the church all the conference rooms had 16:9 screens but 4:3 projectors. Except one room had a 16:9 projector but a 4:3 screen.

rolandc wrote:First let me say the "recommended" camera is the Sony D80, run through the Atlona converter produces a very nice picture.

We have a D70 so I don't think we'll bother with a D80. The picture has never been very good at the remote sites but I think mostly due to the stream processing. We'll see how the new system looks soon. I'm anxious to get rid of aspect ratio issues though.