# Vaddio Gear Opinions (Automated Camera/Video Mixing)



## Chris Chapman (Nov 18, 2012)

In our venue we are running a cobbled together 90's/80's era conglomeration of production video cameras, mixers, etc. to shoot our live events. It generally is a 4 camera shoot for our concerts for example.

We're starting to explore an upgrade path that includes servo controlled cameras to replace student operators, and move toward a 21st Century solution that includes integrated streaming.

I know that many houses of worship run systems like this, and Vaddio seems to be a leader in the field. Anyone have any experience with these systems (pro/con) and their installations?


----------



## ruinexplorer (Nov 19, 2012)

I've looked at the Vaddio gear at trade shows, but never used it in an installation. I do like their gear from what I've seen. As for going with a total PTZ solution, that depends on what you need. Personally, I find that a good cameraman will do much better on a tripod mounted camera than any finely tuned PTZ system. On the other hand, if you don't have the good camera operators, then the ease of pre-programming the controller will allow you to easily train someone to operate the PTZ camera. In one of my former churches, we had gone from broadcast cameras to PTZ cameras for two reasons; to make it easier for operators and to free up the space required for the tripod and operator. Instead, it only required one person to sit next to the sound console with a small set-up, which also allowed the sound operator to use presets if no camera volunteer was available. We could easily trade off on the quality of the tripod mounted camera/operator since we did not record, we were only using it for CCTV. Now, if there was a wedding or other event, we went back to regular cameras.

Having a hybrid system is nice. That way you can get some closer, less obtrusive cameras for certain shots while having the fluidity and control of a traditional camera. It really depends on what you intend to accomplish.


----------



## museav (Nov 20, 2012)

Just specified a Vaddio system into a large church project, however, for a number of reasons, while I am using the Vaddio cameras and camera control I am not using their switcher. I've also used Vaddio, Sony and Panasonic in the past and all of them with success.

I don't know your situation but the comment that the intent "to replace student operators" could be a concern if that means students would then not gain useful experience operating cameras. I agree with ruinexplorer that a hybrid system is often a preferred solution if you have the resources and the physical space. For example, while the project I mentioned has a four camera PTZF system that is operated from the FOH booth specified, there is also conduit and boxes for multiple additional manned camera locations as well as conduit from FOH to support a future video production space.

As I got caught by this change partway through design, some of the new packaged camera systems are moving to both video and control over UTP/STP, it's all CAT cable out to the camera with the conversion to video (composite, component or SD/HD-SDI) occurring at an interface device back at the control room or operator's position.


----------



## Fox3586 (Nov 25, 2012)

museav said:


> Just specified a Vaddio system into a large church project, however, for a number of reasons, while I am using the Vaddio cameras and camera control I am not using their switcher. I've also used Vaddio, Sony and Panasonic in the past and all of them with success.
> 
> I don't know your situation but the comment that the intent "to replace student operators" could be a concern if that means students would then not gain useful experience operating cameras. I agree with ruinexplorer that a hybrid system is often a preferred solution if you have the resources and the physical space. For example, while the project I mentioned has a four camera PTZF system that is operated from the FOH booth specified, there is also conduit and boxes for multiple additional manned camera locations as well as conduit from FOH to support a future video production space.
> 
> As I got caught by this change partway through design, some of the new packaged camera systems are moving to both video and control over UTP/STP, it's all CAT cable out to the camera with the conversion to video (composite, component or SD/HD-SDI) occurring at an interface device back at the control room or operator's position.



Museav, what switcher did you use? Why was it preferred over the vaddio switcher?


----------



## museav (Nov 25, 2012)

Fox3586 said:


> Museav, what switcher did you use? Why was it preferred over the vaddio switcher?


In that particular case it was the Panasonic AG-HMX100 and the main reason was for the mix of I/O and the resolutions supported. I needed to address multiple HD-SDI camera and DVI/HDMI computer/graphics inputs as well as both HD-SDI and DVI/HDMI Program outputs and doing so with external converters would have been more complex and more expensive.

This is actually a common situation I'm encountering where my Client's goals involve elements of what would traditionally be both production and presentation systems. And while many production oriented products may have DVI or HDMI I/O and some presentation oriented products have SDI connections, once you start looking at the details that implementation is often rather limited, at least without having an associated impact on the price.


----------

