# Go Pro streaming



## Pie4Weebl (Jun 5, 2013)

Hey guys,
I'm on the road with a band who mounts a Go Pro on a mic stand by the drummer and I toss it on the screen for his big solo. We use hdmi snd geffen ethernet boxes to get it to foh. It is great in concept, but we have constant issues with it dropping signal mid concert. Does anyone have suggestions or recommendations for another camera for me to use?


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jun 5, 2013)

I have not yet tried it, but when I was looking to do something similar, I found this camera. The production where I was going to use it went with a different direction on the design, so I didn't even purchase the camera. 

On the other hand, are you positive that it is the camera that is dropping out?


----------



## dvsDave (Jun 5, 2013)

What's the length of the run? I'm assuming it's a direct connection and not routed through any other devices? 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta


----------



## headoned (Jun 6, 2013)

Iv had all sorts of problems with HDMI over cat 5 the sync always drops out. 
Maybe try a DHCP stripper? so there is no handshaking issues.


----------



## museav (Jun 6, 2013)

Pie4Weebl said:


> Hey guys,
> I'm on the road with a band who mounts a Go Pro on a mic stand by the drummer and I toss it on the screen for his big solo. We use hdmi snd geffen ethernet boxes to get it to foh.?


Ethernet or HDMI over CAT/UTP? What is it going into at the FOH end? If this is an I-mag application and especially one with a drummer, I would want a low latency signal path as any delay in the projected image is going to be obvious.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jun 6, 2013)

The guys at b&h told us they have heard of the same issue with the go pros and recommended us another camera to try.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jun 7, 2013)

ruinexplorer said:


> I have not yet tried it, but when I was looking to do something similar, I found this camera. The production where I was going to use it went with a different direction on the design, so I didn't even purchase the camera.
> 
> On the other hand, are you positive that it is the camera that is dropping out?



We overnighted one of those to us, and its working wondefully.... once we got the settings right. Thanks for the recommendation!


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jun 8, 2013)

Cool. Let me know how it holds up. I'm certain that I will end up purchasing one in the future. I was even considering going with the Peerless-AV wireless HDMI to go along with it (I couldn't run cables to where I needed the camera). I know that the wireless system was designed for digital signage in noisy bandwidth areas. Since we went in a different direction, I never got the demo model to try out. I did have the sales rep drop by to talk to me about it (she was here for NAB anyhow).


----------



## museav (Jun 8, 2013)

ruinexplorer said:


> Cool. Let me know how it holds up. I'm certain that I will end up purchasing one in the future. I was even considering going with the Peerless-AV wireless HDMI to go along with it (I couldn't run cables to where I needed the camera). I know that the wireless system was designed for digital signage in noisy bandwidth areas. Since we went in a different direction, I never got the demo model to try out. I did have the sales rep drop by to talk to me about it (she was here for NAB anyhow).


Which model(s) were you considering? I noted that the different models seem to vary from 100' to 130' to 350' in range but with corresponding latencies of <1ms, <30ms and 1 sec. Have to question a <30ms latency being described as "Instant real-time transmission of Full HD media".


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jun 11, 2013)

I was looking at hds200 because the application I was going to use it for, the 30ms latency would not have been an issue. I was more concerned with the shorter range of the HDS-WHDI100. Again, the project took a turn, so I never actually demoed either product. Of course, the Peerless systems are designed mainly with the idea of digital signage applications in mind, not IMAG. My application had no dialogue, so the <30ms would have been acceptable latency.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jul 12, 2013)

ruinexplorer said:


> Cool. Let me know how it holds up. I'm certain that I will end up purchasing one in the future. I was even considering going with the Peerless-AV wireless HDMI to go along with it (I couldn't run cables to where I needed the camera). I know that the wireless system was designed for digital signage in noisy bandwidth areas. Since we went in a different direction, I never got the demo model to try out. I did have the sales rep drop by to talk to me about it (she was here for NAB anyhow).



Well the camera looks good, but the problem we seem to be having with these small cameras is the mini usb they use for charging doesn't like to stay in place during the concert, which causes the camera to black out. It very quickly got to the point where the connector wouldn't even want to stay connected while it was sitting off stage pre show, any ideas on something with a more solid connection type? The security camera we use on the other side of the stage may not look good, but at least its old fashioned DC plug stays in...

Also, I've been told running HD 200' over ethernet is a bad idea and am looking for fiber solutions...


----------



## sk8rsdad (Jul 12, 2013)

Pie4Weebl said:


> any ideas on something with a more solid connection type?



Maybe some Loctite 3888 or similar on the USB connector shell would help make the connection more permanent. It should be available through most electronics suppliers, perhaps Mouser.


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jul 12, 2013)

What I did for similar connections (have I mentioned I hate HDMI for professional applications?) was to put a zip tie mount on the unit so that the cable came along the unit and made a U-turn to the connection. I then would zip tie the cable which helped to keep a constant pressure at the connection. Granted with the round nature of the camera I recommended, this would be a bit more of a challenge. 

As for sending the signal 200' over Ethernet, that depends on the solution. It is definitely possible using the right equipment and cable. Fiber will obviously present no challenge for that distance, but it is a more expensive solution as well as being more fragile. If you need help sourcing the appropriate solution, there are a few of us who can definitely find one for you. As you said, being on a tour presents more challenges. One of those is sourcing repairs. Cat-x cable is generally easier to find in each city you stop in over sending out fiber to be repaired or replaced.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jul 19, 2013)

I'm looking at this for fiber:
MyCableMart.com

I like that it is one piece, which seems a little more fool proof than having the cable and two boxes to deal with. Any chance one of you guys have used it?

I'll give zip ties a shot, though I am interested in other solutions.


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jul 19, 2013)

I have used the DVI all in one fiber cables. I agree that it is nice to not need to worry about connecting to external boxes. However, when the connectors are damaged, that is usually all she wrote for that cable (can't always be repaired). On the other hand, if you have the external boxes, re-terminating fiber can be done in the field (when you get good at it) or you are simply replacing the fiber which is generally less than the full assembly. Definite pros and cons for either solution.


----------



## museav (Jul 20, 2013)

Pie4Weebl said:


> Also, I've been told running HD 200' over ethernet is a bad idea and am looking for fiber solutions...


I hate to bring this up again but it is a very important distinction, are you addressing streaming video as Ethernet data or running HD media over twisted pair cabling? Those are two very different things. Ethernet is Ethernet and therefore subject the the same guidelines and standard as for any data network, including the 100m maximum distance guideline. HD video or media over UTP/STP cable is quite different and the distances supported are very product dependent for both the transceivers and the cable

What is meant by "HD" may also be a factor as some products may have trouble with 1080p at a distance but be able to handle 720p or 1080i, which are still "HD", at that same distance.


Pie4Weebl said:


> I'm looking at this for fiber:
> MyCableMart.com


The don't mention the manufacturer, however it seems to be Rainbow Fish Fiber Optic, Inc.. The ATC and Simplay verification link actually take you to the specs for a 28AWG wired product. You also have to look closely at the little connection diagram or at the manufacturer's information to see that the receiver has to be connected to a USB port for power.

I agree with ruinexplorer that one risk with a device like that is that any damage requires replacing the entire device or sending it back to the manufacturer for repair.

I find What's a "Certifed" HDMI Cable? -- Blue Jeans Cable an intersting read regarding HDMI cable certification. Apparently only the first example of a product category needs to be certified with all related products then potentially being covered by that one certification. So a manufacturer could apparently get certification based on a 5' cable and then offer a cable with similar but lesser quality construction that is 500' long under the same certification.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jul 24, 2013)

sk8rsdad said:


> Maybe some Loctite 3888 or similar on the USB connector shell would help make the connection more permanent. It should be available through most electronics suppliers, perhaps Mouser.



I went to amazon it and it was $30 a bottle! Any ideas on something cheaper? With that would you put it inside the plug or connecting the back of the cable?


----------

