Member
I am SERIOUSLY thinking about volunteering my services to other Stakes (possibly through the FMG). I’ve read about so many botched attempts of Stakes struggling year after year, to do what we have successfully accomplished in our Stake because they lack resources and technical experience. It’s so sad. We are so fortunate to have a qualified technology committee and technical resources already in our Stake.
Other Stakes however, still poke and play around with silly poor quality, Mickey Mouse setups, and the results are depressing. Just last Monday, I found out that a neighboring Stake used cheap surveillance cameras to broadcast their conference to other buildings. Their CCTV cameras zoom capability was so poor and they had to place them in the Chapel (against handbook guidelines) to get close enough. The video quality was very poor, and they could not get their newly purchased $1,000 Meetinghouse Webcast unit’s settings worked out. I cringed when I heard this – and pleaded with them to call me next time. I would have been happy to help with their problems or make constructive suggestions, and warn them of potential difficulties!
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if a FMG in the area could have a few resources available and a few professionals called to offer assistance to help make a Stake’s special broadcasts (i.e. multi-building Stake Conference) run smoothly and seamlessly? I’m not saying that the FMG needs to be the only source (some Stakes are already set up adequately) but a Stake President or High Council representative could at least call for advice, recommendations or resources.
Imagine a FMG purchasing and sharing resources like a Meetinghouse Webcast unit, remotely controlled robotic like the Sony EVI-D70 camera, microphones and mixer for the choir, professional projector, large portable screen, etc. Perhaps they could offer technical support for video/audio reinforcement, or access to a conference call bridge for audio redundancy.
You get the idea.
Why must each Stake to duplicate purchasing expensive A/V or Streaming equipment (sometimes the wrong equipment) only get used two or three times a year! Most equipment becomes outdated after a few years anyway and the Stakes will eventually have to purchase upgrades all over again…
The costs of the FMG’s equipment/services could be offset by renting the equipment to various Stakes. And the Stake would most certainly spend less to rent from a FMG, rather than to purchase, maintain and replace it themselves.
Finally, the cost-to-use ratio of purchasing and loaning (or renting to a Stake) professional, commercial equipment would be, in my opinion, be so much more cost effective. Professional equipment doesn’t become outdated as quickly as consumer quality equipment. In addition, Stakes would enjoy professional quality, reliability, and professionalism that comes by using the right equipment for the right situation.
Other Stakes however, still poke and play around with silly poor quality, Mickey Mouse setups, and the results are depressing. Just last Monday, I found out that a neighboring Stake used cheap surveillance cameras to broadcast their conference to other buildings. Their CCTV cameras zoom capability was so poor and they had to place them in the Chapel (against handbook guidelines) to get close enough. The video quality was very poor, and they could not get their newly purchased $1,000 Meetinghouse Webcast unit’s settings worked out. I cringed when I heard this – and pleaded with them to call me next time. I would have been happy to help with their problems or make constructive suggestions, and warn them of potential difficulties!
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if a FMG in the area could have a few resources available and a few professionals called to offer assistance to help make a Stake’s special broadcasts (i.e. multi-building Stake Conference) run smoothly and seamlessly? I’m not saying that the FMG needs to be the only source (some Stakes are already set up adequately) but a Stake President or High Council representative could at least call for advice, recommendations or resources.
Imagine a FMG purchasing and sharing resources like a Meetinghouse Webcast unit, remotely controlled robotic like the Sony EVI-D70 camera, microphones and mixer for the choir, professional projector, large portable screen, etc. Perhaps they could offer technical support for video/audio reinforcement, or access to a conference call bridge for audio redundancy.
You get the idea.
Why must each Stake to duplicate purchasing expensive A/V or Streaming equipment (sometimes the wrong equipment) only get used two or three times a year! Most equipment becomes outdated after a few years anyway and the Stakes will eventually have to purchase upgrades all over again…
The costs of the FMG’s equipment/services could be offset by renting the equipment to various Stakes. And the Stake would most certainly spend less to rent from a FMG, rather than to purchase, maintain and replace it themselves.
Finally, the cost-to-use ratio of purchasing and loaning (or renting to a Stake) professional, commercial equipment would be, in my opinion, be so much more cost effective. Professional equipment doesn’t become outdated as quickly as consumer quality equipment. In addition, Stakes would enjoy professional quality, reliability, and professionalism that comes by using the right equipment for the right situation.