# House Video Many HD Screens & Long Runs



## DarthFader (Mar 7, 2011)

I think I've read all the older threads that address some of these issues, but it seems like the technology is changing pretty quickly so maybe someone has some new ideas.

Our 1400 seat theater formerly had video fed to CRT monitors via composite video. The camera was an inexpensive color security camera mounted at FOH. The quality was not great and of course the 4/3 aspect ration is wrong for all things theater, but it served well enough to keep tardy patrons in touch with the show till they could be seated and allow our theater volunteers to keep an eye on the production.

During a remodeling all the CRT monitors disappeared and were replaced with 46" LCD flat screens. There are now eight flat screens, currently attached only to a digital signage system showing upcoming events and theater promotional video etc. This is wonderful, but we need the old capability back while the show is actually playing on stage. 

The screens (all TV/Monitors) are connected via RG6 coax and have 16/9 HD signage images delivered on digital channel 60.1. So far so good.

The box that gets the signage video onto a digital channel is not horribly expensive so I intend to purchase another one to distribute show video on an additional channel, say 50.1 for example. Any TV could then choose to view either the signage or the show. The boxs accept either a VGA signal or a 720p component video signal. 

Converting the old 4/3 aspect 300 line security camera results in very poor quality and nasty geometric distortion so the problem is how to get an HD 16/9 signal in either format into the box. My internet research has been unsuccessful in that I find that the few folks that actually build hd cameras (720p component) consider "reasonably priced" is 5-$9000.00. That's a budget buster.

Although there seem to be a few camcorders out there that can record and playback 720p video they don't seem to be happy to be used as cameras. Either shutting down after a while, or flashing some type of "no tape" message over the picture. A lot of them can only deliver a SD composite video output while they are recording. 

IP cameras in 720p resolutions are much cheaper, but come with some unknown amount of latency. I've considered an IP camera feeding a dedicated computer supplying VGA to the distribution box, but the manufacturers I've talked to rave about the quality, but can't seem to address the amount of latency that would exist. the most technical thing I can get from them is, "it should be real good." I'm sure we could live with a little bit of latency, but there is also live audio from the stage distributed to the theater and too much latency could be really annoying. Audio distribution directly to the TVs themselves isn't practical mostly because of their pitiful audio performance.

Does anyone have any experience to share?

Jerry


----------



## museav (Mar 7, 2011)

Jerry, I'll start with that you might want to rethink your plan of using a second channel unless you also have a way to control all the displays so that you can remotely change channels and verify that they've changed. I guess that one factor in what does make the most sense would be whether all the flat panels would always be showing the same thing or whether you may have times that some would display the live video while others would display the digital signage programming.

If all displays would show the same image then it may be easier and less expensive to simply put a video switcher before the existing modulator and select whether the modulator gets the signage or show signal. To address the latter situation with what you already have, one option seems to be to do what you planned with a second modulator, but instead of having it dedicated to show video, have it to dedicated to the monitors that would display the show video. In other words, instead of a signage channel and a show channel have a signage display channel to which all the signage only displays would be tuned and a signage/show channel to which all the displays that could show either would be tuned. Then put a small 2x2 or similar router in front of the modulators so that you can select what video signal goes to each modulator.

It sounds like what you are looking for is an 'industrial' or commercial/professional camera, not necessarily broadcast quality but a dedicated camera. That is quite a jump in price.

As far as the timing sync between audio and video, if the display locations are remote and would incur some natural delay anyways, have you considered inserting a simple delay on the related audio feed?


----------



## cpf (Mar 7, 2011)

Also, these people are late, no need to waste too much money on giving them 720p video to watch for 3 minutes before they can get in. Besides, unless you buy a really really nice camera or get someone to distract the LD while you ungel all the lights, the picture is going to be too grainy to appreciate what's happening. The theatre I'm at had this same idea and went out and got a Sony EVI-HD1 ($3000+) and boy, you have never seen high-ISO noise this crisp and clear.


----------



## DarthFader (Mar 7, 2011)

museav said:


> Jerry, I'll start with that you might want to rethink your plan of using a second channel unless you also have a way to control all the displays so that you can remotely change channels and verify that they've changed. I guess that one factor in what does make the most sense would be whether all the flat panels would always be showing the same thing or whether you may have times that some would display the live video while others would display the digital signage programming.
> 
> If all displays would show the same image then it may be easier and less expensive to simply put a video switcher before the existing modulator and select whether the modulator gets the signage or show signal. To address the latter situation with what you already have, one option seems to be to do what you planned with a second modulator, but instead of having it dedicated to show video, have it to dedicated to the monitors that would display the show video. In other words, instead of a signage channel and a show channel have a signage display channel to which all the signage only displays would be tuned and a signage/show channel to which all the displays that could show either would be tuned. Then put a small 2x2 or similar router in front of the modulators so that you can select what video signal goes to each modulator.
> 
> ...


 
My solution to the channel issue is keeping control of all the remotes. 
For the sake of simplicity I'm willing to let my trusted front of house manager make the decision what TVs show which feed during the show.

The downside of the switcher is that the closest cable route to where the digital signage computer and modulator are located is about 300' and one floor down. I'd have to run component video or VGA to that location and then go there before the show to switch it. The additional HD modulator would just live in the booth and a single RF coax would make the 300' run. 

Yep, dedicated camera. Seems crazy that camcorders can be so cheap and a box camera that can't record is thousands of dollars more. 

...yes I have considered a delay. One set of screens is right outside the doors to the auditorium. I've always kept show audio away from that area because people opening the doors let undelayed sound in from the lobby that is not time aligned with what the last few rows are hearing. Spill from the house is usually enough for anyone standing there anyway. 

Your delay suggestion has got me thinking. If the IP camera latency was close to either the 35 or 79 ms delay arrays that I already have operating, then it could actually work to my advantage. It would cost nothing to pull that delayed audio out of my patch bay! That would let me use that less expensive camera technology. Wouldn't that be a happy coincidence? 

JC


----------



## DarthFader (Mar 7, 2011)

cpf said:


> Also, these people are late, no need to waste too much money on giving them 720p video to watch for 3 minutes before they can get in. Besides, unless you buy a really really nice camera or get someone to distract the LD while you ungel all the lights, the picture is going to be too grainy to appreciate what's happening. The theatre I'm at had this same idea and went out and got a Sony EVI-HD1 ($3000+) and boy, you have never seen high-ISO noise this crisp and clear.



Good point on the late folks. I'm actually equally if not more concerned for our volunteers who usher and operate concessions, and I'm glad to know that you aren't happy with the Sony. We actually were getting along well with the old color security camera till they took away all those composite video CRTs. I would hope to meet at least that level of performance, but maybe it won't. BTW, the only reason I am stuck on 720p is the modulators want that or VGA. They are economical, but picky.


----------



## cpf (Mar 7, 2011)

On the IP Camera delay front: in my experience the lag will be 100ms at the _very_ least, probably somewhere around 1/4 or 1/2 (ugh) of a second. It's easy to test and punch into a delay unit, but if you were to get an IP camera with built-in audio the sync would (with most cameras) be inherent. Just wire your program audio into the camera and back out of the PC viewing it.


----------



## SHARYNF (Mar 7, 2011)

cpf said:


> Also, these people are late, no need to waste too much money on giving them 720p video to watch for 3 minutes before they can get in. Besides, unless you buy a really really nice camera or get someone to distract the LD while you ungel all the lights, the picture is going to be too grainy to appreciate what's happening. The theatre I'm at had this same idea and went out and got a Sony EVI-HD1 ($3000+) and boy, you have never seen high-ISO noise this crisp and clear.



Are you using the visca software to remotely control the camera, you need to make sure you have control over the exposure settings, and make sure you are NOT USING THE DIGITAL ZOOM, both of these tend to work automatically, and can cause all kinds of grief unless they are remotely controlled 

Sharyn


----------



## cpf (Mar 7, 2011)

SHARYNF said:


> Are you using the visca software to remotely control the camera, you need to make sure you have control over the exposure settings, and make sure you are NOT USING THE DIGITAL ZOOM, both of these tend to work automatically, and can cause all kinds of grief unless they are remotely controlled
> 
> Sharyn


 
The issue isn't the zoom or the exposure, it's the sensor. I went in (with the remote) and made sure the aperture was fully open, it's just the CCD doesn't deal with low light that well (frankly I was surprised at how low quality the picture is in all situations).


----------



## SHARYNF (Mar 8, 2011)

cpf said:


> The issue isn't the zoom or the exposure, it's the sensor. I went in (with the remote) and made sure the aperture was fully open, it's just the CCD doesn't deal with low light that well (frankly I was surprised at how low quality the picture is in all situations).



My experience has been different, I have found that the sensor is fine it is typically if the system is on auto then the digital gain is kicking in an thus you see all the noise, or the shutter speed is too high and if for some reason the person setting the zoom has moved beyond the optical zoom range then again the digital zoom adds noise.



Using the remote to open up the aperture all the way adds a lot of gain as the electronic gain takes over from the mechanical. 

I would suggest that you play with the controls and reduce the aperture to the point where the noise disappears and the blacks turn "inky" black, also I tend to also reduce the shutter speed. If you are not panning the camera you should not have problems even at 1/30


Lens 10x optical Zoom, 40x with digital zoom, f = 3.4 to 33.9 mm, F 1.8 to F 2.1
Minimum illumination 15 lx (50 IRE, F1.8) which is low compared to some camcorders

Exposure control Auto / Manual / Priority AE / Exposure compensation / Bright does not give you a clear point where manual vs electronic takes over

Shutter speed 1/2 to 1/10,000 sec. 

Gain Auto / Manual (-3 to +18 dB) the +18 really brings out the problems

Just some thoughts and observations

Sharyn


----------



## museav (Mar 8, 2011)

Also keep in mind that the Sony EVIHD1 was developed as a videoconferencing camera and compared to it the 'professional' BRC series has a 6lx versus 15lx minimum illumination level, equal or greater gain and a wider optical zoom range.


----------



## cpf (Mar 8, 2011)

museav said:


> Also keep in mind that the Sony EVIHD1 was developed as a videoconferencing camera and compared to it the 'professional' BRC series has a 6lx versus 15lx minimum illumination level, equal or greater gain and a wider optical zoom range.


 
This has caused much pain, especially considering the camera isn't even hooked up to the VC system and we could really use a VC camera in that position...


Moral of the story: not any camera will cut it, make sure to scrutinize the specs or you might end up flushing money down the drain.


----------

