logo

Live Production Software Forums


Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
greggibson  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, March 8, 2022 12:34:09 AM(UTC)
greggibson

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/23/2020(UTC)
Posts: 105
United States
Location: Washington, DC

Thanks: 21 times
Was thanked: 16 time(s) in 11 post(s)
My understanding is the Zoom SDK has been overhauled and now includes the raw video and audio feeds so that it is possible to integrate isolated audio and video from individual participants in Zoom into third party applications. It would be huge if Zoom could be integrated directly into vMix, through vMixCall or otherwise.

I know the idea behind vmixCall is that its supposed to be easier with the end user not having to download anything. In practice, it's actually more complicated due to unfamiliarity with the interface. Nearly everyone has used Zoom at this point and many corporations with firewalls that block unfamiliar apps like vMixCall are open to Zoom.

Other apps, like Cinnamaker, are doing this and it seems like a natural progression for vMix and vMixCall.

Please +1.

Greg Gibson
thanks 2 users thanked greggibson for this useful post.
jpetrie on 3/10/2022(UTC), Guycochran on 3/12/2022(UTC)
richardgatarski  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, March 8, 2022 12:51:59 AM(UTC)
richardgatarski

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/18/2014(UTC)
Posts: 1,697
Location: Stockholm

Thanks: 127 times
Was thanked: 271 time(s) in 227 post(s)
Greg, why two topics with the same request? Please remove one.
greggibson  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, March 8, 2022 12:53:42 AM(UTC)
greggibson

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/23/2020(UTC)
Posts: 105
United States
Location: Washington, DC

Thanks: 21 times
Was thanked: 16 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Originally Posted by: richardgatarski Go to Quoted Post
Greg, why two topics with the same request? Please remove one.


They are different requests. One is vMixCall, one is vMixSocial.

WaltG12  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, March 9, 2022 2:24:02 PM(UTC)
WaltG12

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/4/2021(UTC)
Posts: 120
United States

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 19 time(s) in 19 post(s)
I've thought about this. Then I thought about it some more.

And I can't come up with a way that would allow this to work and make sense.

I think you'd better off asking someone like ZEN to see if they can use the SDK to make a simple, and inexpensive, NDI app that'll give you the raw Zoom feeds.

Otherwise, as I said, I don't see a way this would work. It'd require vMix to build a completely separate "Zoom" input (which I promise you isn't as easy as it sounds), and, then, the whole thing would be at Zoom's whim. They could take it away just as quickly as they gave it.

As for integrating it into vMix Call, they're completely separate things. Reading your post, I can't visualize a way to reconcile the two.

A third party program that's brought into vMix using existing implementations (NDI, virtual camera, etc.) would be a lot easier as a standalone and make a lot more sense.

I also have to ask: assuming you're correct & it's giving you the raw video, at what resolution is it giving you that video?
richardgatarski  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, March 9, 2022 5:31:14 PM(UTC)
richardgatarski

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/18/2014(UTC)
Posts: 1,697
Location: Stockholm

Thanks: 127 times
Was thanked: 271 time(s) in 227 post(s)
Originally Posted by: greggibson Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: richardgatarski Go to Quoted Post
Greg, why two topics with the same request? Please remove one.
They are different requests. One is vMixCall, one is vMixSocial.


I really apologize, did misread the title.

I mostly agree with WaltG12, in particular that vMix Call is a different thing and cannon really be integrated with Zoom.

There are already alternatives available, like Zoom Rooms with NDI out and ZoomISO (by Liminal).

Then we have the problem om resource use. Zoom takes a heavy toll on multiple feeds from Zoom. Skype rooms are limited to 3 NDI outputs, and ZoomISO I believe suggests a max of 5 per computer (HD). Those figures are without vMix running on the same PC...

greggibson  
#6 Posted : Thursday, March 10, 2022 6:19:27 AM(UTC)
greggibson

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/23/2020(UTC)
Posts: 105
United States
Location: Washington, DC

Thanks: 21 times
Was thanked: 16 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Originally Posted by: richardgatarski Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: greggibson Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: richardgatarski Go to Quoted Post
Greg, why two topics with the same request? Please remove one.
They are different requests. One is vMixCall, one is vMixSocial.


I really apologize, did misread the title.

I mostly agree with WaltG12, in particular that vMix Call is a different thing and cannon really be integrated with Zoom.

There are already alternatives available, like Zoom Rooms with NDI out and ZoomISO (by Liminal).

Then we have the problem om resource use. Zoom takes a heavy toll on multiple feeds from Zoom. Skype rooms are limited to 3 NDI outputs, and ZoomISO I believe suggests a max of 5 per computer (HD). Those figures are without vMix running on the same PC...



I use Zoom Room NDI and/or Zoom ISO almost daily. I have produced over 450 virtual events over the past 18 months, so I have extensive experience using all of these tools.

We used to use vMixCall almost exclusively because, like many, we felt it was easier to use since all an end user needed is a URL to login. This is a fallacy and misinformation. We found that vMixCall is actually more complicated for end users because of unfamiliarity with the interface and some of the limitations of WebRTC. We also ran into issues with high level C-Suite VIPs connecting over restrictive firewalls. We also frequently ran into Chrome quirkiness not letting end users select external cameras and microphones.

Once Zoom Room NDI became available we stopped using vMixCall almost entirely and went to Zoom exclusively because it is far easier and more familiar for an end user. At this point, nearly everyone who does any virtual conferencing has downloaded Zoom and is familiar with interface, so it's simply not true that vMixCall is easier to use because it doesn't require any download

We had to spend considerable time educating end users on how to manage the vMixCall interface and wasted a lot of time with people who couldn't connect but sat at their computer thinking they were connected simply because they saw their return video feed on screen. We also heard a lot of "why aren't we just using Zoom for this" comments.

Additionally, for those end users with 1080 cameras, I bring them in and broadcast them out at 1080 with Room NDI. Oh, and let's not forget Room NDI also includes isolated audio for each pinned participant.

So yes, I am familiar with all the remote contribution tools available to virtual producers, including Room NDI and Zoom ISO.

My point is that like it or not, Zoom is the defacto standard for virtual conferencing. Why not integrate that into vMix if the tools are available? The point of my post is that those tools ARE now available - so why not take leverage them here in vMix. Many people have asked for a stand alone vMixCall app that works similar to Zoom. So now the ability exists to integrate the Zoom tools into your own software and you don't have to re-invent the wheel to do so.

Using third party tools takes more resources and equipment to integrate further increasing costs. Imagine a vMix where you didn't need 2-3 extra computers to do Zoom pins for remote contributors. I would gladly pay additional for this type of one stop shopping.

I also want to make it clear that I do like vMixCall and don't want it to go away. I'd just like to see it improved. But even improving it isn't going to make it more familiar to people who don't use it regularly, as they do with Zoom.


greg
thanks 1 user thanked greggibson for this useful post.
jpetrie on 3/10/2022(UTC)
jpetrie  
#7 Posted : Thursday, March 10, 2022 9:44:04 AM(UTC)
jpetrie

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/27/2021(UTC)
Posts: 39
Man
United States

Thanks: 46 times
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
+1
WaltG12  
#8 Posted : Friday, March 11, 2022 12:55:59 PM(UTC)
WaltG12

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/4/2021(UTC)
Posts: 120
United States

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 19 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Originally Posted by: greggibson Go to Quoted Post
My point is that like it or not, Zoom is the defacto standard for virtual conferencing. Why not integrate that into vMix if the tools are available?


Because, as I'm pretty sure I mentioned, there's no guarantee that it'll still be available in 6 months/1 year/whenever.

And there's no guarantee that they won't tweak something in it in that same time frame that would require the code in vMix to be tweaked as well.

There's a reason that there's no "[Popular program] Input" in vMix beyond NDI or the browser.

They talked about it, with regard to Social, in the Fun Time Live show from October that I just posted elsewhere. Designing an element of your software around the whims of the developers at a third party can be a massive PITA. They made the very clear point that they don't love going through the process with Social--there's no way they're going to go through that with the main program, especially when NDI, etc. already exists to accomplish the same ends.

That's the crux of this: they're not going to add an Input option that requires a third party to not remove or change their SDK/API for it to not break. It's just not going to happen. Ever.

Originally Posted by: greggibson Go to Quoted Post
Using third party tools takes more resources and equipment to integrate further increasing costs. Imagine a vMix where you didn't need 2-3 extra computers to do Zoom pins for remote contributors. I would gladly pay additional for this type of one stop shopping.


If you'd "gladly pay" for it, then why is your issue with third party tools that they increase costs?

Seems kind of weird to go from "Third party programs increase costs by requiring additional equipment/processing power to achieve this functionality, and, thus, are less than ideal" to "I'd gladly pay more for this functionality".
greggibson  
#9 Posted : Saturday, March 12, 2022 1:47:34 AM(UTC)
greggibson

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/23/2020(UTC)
Posts: 105
United States
Location: Washington, DC

Thanks: 21 times
Was thanked: 16 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Originally Posted by: WaltG12 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: greggibson Go to Quoted Post
My point is that like it or not, Zoom is the defacto standard for virtual conferencing. Why not integrate that into vMix if the tools are available?


Because, as I'm pretty sure I mentioned, there's no guarantee that it'll still be available in 6 months/1 year/whenever.

And there's no guarantee that they won't tweak something in it in that same time frame that would require the code in vMix to be tweaked as well.

There's a reason that there's no "[Popular program] Input" in vMix beyond NDI or the browser.

They talked about it, with regard to Social, in the Fun Time Live show from October that I just posted elsewhere. Designing an element of your software around the whims of the developers at a third party can be a massive PITA. They made the very clear point that they don't love going through the process with Social--there's no way they're going to go through that with the main program, especially when NDI, etc. already exists to accomplish the same ends.

That's the crux of this: they're not going to add an Input option that requires a third party to not remove or change their SDK/API for it to not break. It's just not going to happen. Ever.

Originally Posted by: greggibson Go to Quoted Post
Using third party tools takes more resources and equipment to integrate further increasing costs. Imagine a vMix where you didn't need 2-3 extra computers to do Zoom pins for remote contributors. I would gladly pay additional for this type of one stop shopping.


If you'd "gladly pay" for it, then why is your issue with third party tools that they increase costs?

Seems kind of weird to go from "Third party programs increase costs by requiring additional equipment/processing power to achieve this functionality, and, thus, are less than ideal" to "I'd gladly pay more for this functionality".


There is nothing "weird" about being willing to pay additional for a software update that will save you money in the long run. It's called good business. Purchasing a software update is generally a lot less expensive than buying hardware.

There is already precedent for vMix building in third party APIs and SDKs including Facebook streaming and vMix Social. It's up to the vMix team to determine if the effort is worthwhile. As an end user who incorporates all of these tools - including Zoom ISO and ROOM NDI - every single day, I know this request would be a huge benefit for my workflow and I have to imagine many others as well. Personally I would rather see my other request - which is to integrate Zoom chat/Q&A into vMix Social, happen first because no third party tools exist that can do that.

This is just a simple feature request. +1 it or don't but really calling me "weird" is quite unnecessary.

greg
paco3346  
#10 Posted : Saturday, March 12, 2022 2:16:17 AM(UTC)
paco3346

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/10/2015(UTC)
Posts: 81
United States

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Even if the vMix team wanted to build this integration I don't know that it's feasible.

The Zoom Meeting SDK is a free to use SDK but it limits raw video feeds to 420p. (Edit: I misread the docs. This is not true.)

The Zoom Video SDK is a paid service that's charged by the minute by the software vendor, not the end user. As such, I highly doubt StudioCoast Pty would take on that cost (or perhaps they could pass it off to us as the end user with a small markup. But- I know how hesitant people in the vMix world get about having to pay extra for things, especially if it were by the minute.)
liminal_andy  
#11 Posted : Saturday, March 12, 2022 2:41:07 AM(UTC)
liminal_andy

Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/8/2021(UTC)
Posts: 5
United States
Location: Washington, D.C.

Was thanked: 36 time(s) in 3 post(s)
If vMix wants to integrate more directly with Zoom, I am happy to personally facilitate that process. I made the offer as Liminal's CEO, and I stand by that now that I run Events Engineering at Zoom. Greg is right that there has been a lot of progress in Zoom's SDKs recently that have enabled folks to "log in" their apps to a Zoom meeting/webinar and interact with audio, video, and data. The VideoSDK is also available as a whitelabled approach for utilizing the transport technology behind Zoom without the concept of meetings / webinars. Many ways to imagine how either could work well in vMix.

Anyway, if the vMix team wants to learn more, I'm always a message away.
thanks 4 users thanked liminal_andy for this useful post.
greggibson on 3/12/2022(UTC), Guycochran on 3/12/2022(UTC), jpetrie on 3/12/2022(UTC), sinc747 on 9/9/2022(UTC)
greggibson  
#12 Posted : Saturday, March 12, 2022 2:51:03 AM(UTC)
greggibson

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/23/2020(UTC)
Posts: 105
United States
Location: Washington, DC

Thanks: 21 times
Was thanked: 16 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Originally Posted by: paco3346 Go to Quoted Post
Even if the vMix team wanted to build this integration I don't know that it's feasible.

The Zoom Meeting SDK is a free to use SDK but it limits raw video feeds to 420p. (Edit: I misread the docs. This is not true.)

The Zoom Video SDK is a paid service that's charged by the minute by the software vendor, not the end user. As such, I highly doubt StudioCoast Pty would take on that cost (or perhaps they could pass it off to us as the end user with a small markup. But- I know how hesitant people in the vMix world get about having to pay extra for things, especially if it were by the minute.)


Supporting vMixCall incurs monthly recurring fees to StudioCoast Pty as well in maintaining the servers required for authentication, so there is precedence for this as well.


greg
greggibson  
#13 Posted : Saturday, March 12, 2022 3:03:49 AM(UTC)
greggibson

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/23/2020(UTC)
Posts: 105
United States
Location: Washington, DC

Thanks: 21 times
Was thanked: 16 time(s) in 11 post(s)
BTW "Liminal_Andy" who posted above is the creator of Zoom ISO and he now works for Zoom so I would say he has a pretty good handle on the capabilities in the SDK. His point that the Zoom transport technology can be used outside of the concept of Webinars and Meetings is an important distinction. It means the raw audio and video data is accessible outside of the Zoom established structure.

greg
thanks 1 user thanked greggibson for this useful post.
sinc747 on 9/9/2022(UTC)
mavik  
#14 Posted : Saturday, March 12, 2022 7:09:06 AM(UTC)
mavik

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 4/23/2017(UTC)
Posts: 911
Man
Location: Germany

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 137 time(s) in 121 post(s)
Zoom has added NDI. Isn't it much easier to just use NDI as I/O. Same as with MS Teams.
sinc747  
#15 Posted : Friday, September 9, 2022 7:47:35 AM(UTC)
sinc747

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/2/2013(UTC)
Posts: 984
Man
United States
Location: Fairhope, Alabama USA

Thanks: 498 times
Was thanked: 191 time(s) in 157 post(s)
+1

Take Andy up on his offer. A win/win for both companies!

- Tom
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.