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
spinfold  
#1 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2024 8:18:19 PM(UTC)
spinfold

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/23/2022(UTC)
Posts: 76
United Kingdom
Location: Milton Keynes

Thanks: 9 times
Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Thanks so much for adding the new ZoomSelectParticipantByName shortcut in v27.0.0.75 along with the mute and unmute functionality.

Is it possible to also add ZoomSelectParticipantByIndex (and add the index number to the Zoom Manager for easy reference)? That way you could scroll through on two Streamdeck buttons (number up/number down) or have a numberpad for entry rather than a full name.

The other things that would complete Zoom integration for me and make it fully usable in our productions:

1) The API providing status of mute/unmute of vmix send - so that Streamdeck feedback can be shown on the mute/unmute buttons

2) The camera/microphone status of Zoom inputs being made available in the API so that we can easily see if someone has turned off their camera or mic and do something with that information (different Streamdeck button colours, for example)

3) The ability to automatically get Zoom input names into titles for lower thirds

4) If there could somehow be a list in the API of everyone connected to Zoom, their name and index number then this could be referenced outside of vMix, either on Streamdeck or a custom web page where contributors can be viewed and managed.

5) The ability to change audio and video source going into the Zoom meeting after the meeting has been started - the normal Zoom app had this functionality (eg change which mic is being used).
WaltG12  
#2 Posted : Sunday, April 28, 2024 7:23:01 AM(UTC)
WaltG12

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/4/2021(UTC)
Posts: 201
United States

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 24 post(s)
It’s generally considered best practice to sign on to existing requests with a +1, and, if you have more to add by way of use or reason, additional information.

That’s how interest is generally monitored.

2 of which are mine, which you can find here:

https://forums.vmix.com/...-as-a-Data-Source-option

https://forums.vmix.com/...nt-attributes-to-API-XML

It’s also, to my understanding, considered best practice to use a separate thread for each request to allow for easier finding and monitoring.

I’d originally requested, as you did, adding the full list of participants to the API.

After thinking about it, I deleted it and replaced it with the 2 above requests, which make more sense logicially and productively.

If it’s a data source option, you can easily convert it to the API without needing to bog down the API with large meetings.

As for “index”, while it would certainly make it easier for scripting, from what’s been said before, the system is set up to use names exclusively. That’s why the unique name requirement is in place.

I’ve been asking for it since within a couple of hours of the beta’s first release, in various forms. It was suggested to me at that time by another user that name selection would very possibly be the compromise used.

So while that would be nice, I wouldn’t hold my breath. It can, however, by easily simulated with the Data Source suggestion.

Number 5 has been explicitly ruled not possible, again, from the very outset of the beta. Your best option is to set it to set it to a separate output and run a mix on that output using the output input.

If you don’t have additional outputs, I highly recommend upgrading, but, absent that, you can sacrifice your main out and use the Fullscreen in conjunction with something like OBS to simulate additional outputs.
clafarge  
#3 Posted : Sunday, April 28, 2024 8:10:59 AM(UTC)
clafarge

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/27/2017(UTC)
Posts: 92
Man
United States
Location: Greater St Louis Area

Thanks: 67 times
Was thanked: 20 time(s) in 13 post(s)
For 5, I use "Bus B" (or C , or f... you know ;) ) and can add/remove channels from that bus, and use an otherwise unused Input (or Mix, as Walt suggests, above), which can have layers added/removed as needed for messaging or program return.
spinfold  
#4 Posted : Sunday, April 28, 2024 4:28:35 PM(UTC)
spinfold

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/23/2022(UTC)
Posts: 76
United Kingdom
Location: Milton Keynes

Thanks: 9 times
Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Originally Posted by: clafarge Go to Quoted Post
For 5, I use "Bus B" (or C , or f... you know ;) ) and can add/remove channels from that bus, and use an otherwise unused Input (or Mix, as Walt suggests, above), which can have layers added/removed as needed for messaging or program return.


Yes, this is the workaround for now but unfortunately takes up a whole audio bus to do. It also is completely the opposite way round we do all our other automation logic, including for vMixCalls. And, it's much more complicated to setup and keep track of the automation this way.
WaltG12  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, April 30, 2024 5:08:44 AM(UTC)
WaltG12

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/4/2021(UTC)
Posts: 201
United States

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 24 post(s)
As I mentioned, it was explicitly ruled not possible during the beta phase.

I don’t know why it’s a restriction, but it is.

But I’ve also yet to see a good explanation of why it’s necessary, because I think a lot of people overlook are hybrid workflows.

Yes, you can’t have a Zoom participant in the green room while another is in production.

But, you can have a vMix Caller in production while a Zoom participant or Zoom participants are in the green room.

In those workflows, it would make sense to be able to transfer the entire meeting between production and green room, output and bus.

As it stands now, that is where the current system falls apart.

And there are certainly times when a hybrid production makes sense.

Say, for example, I’m interviewing an author about his new book, then, after the break, I’m bringing in 2 guests from a Broadway show, with their publicist sitting in.

It makes sense to bring in the Broadway group as a Zoom, so I don’t have to work out return feeds, etc.—they can all see/hear each other right off the bat by virtua of Zoom, my only responsibility is getting them into the production.

But it doesn’t make sense to put the author in that Zoom, because it would make it difficult for the Broadway group to talk before they go on, because they’d be in his ear while he’s in production.

So it makes way more sense to have the solo author on vMix Call and have the Broadway guests on Zoom.

But, unlike a vMix Call, there is no easy workflow for moving a Zoom meeting (emphasizing that to make it clear that I’m not expecting to put individual Zoom guests on separate return feeds) from green room to production.

And that is a workflow I’d like to see support for, so, +1.

I would also, again, encourage you and anyone else looking for these features to add your +1 and explanations to the previous threads on those ideas, two of which are mine and linked above.
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.