Technology Use Options for ANW Conference by Allan Buckingham, March 2018 Introduction The pace of technological change continues to accelerate making it possible to spend as much time learning about what s new, as actually using current technology. This makes any report like this a snapshot in time, and potentially out of date as soon as it s read. It can become out of date for multiple reasons; because new technology has emerged that renders something else obsolete; because promising, emerging technology doesn t get wide pick up and goes out of fashion before it comes of age; because a larger company fears possible disruption and buys a smaller one and absorbs parts, but not the whole. For those and other reasons picking individual technology is much like picking stocks. There are a few major players you can likely count on to carry on, but they may not be the most responsive, or the best value, but they are likely to be consistent. There are also newer players that may offer more innovation, and value, but may not be the best long-term play. You ll also get some big players entering a field in an attempt to play along, and ultimately win, only to give up when things don t go their way. With all that in mind my goal was therefore to not only look at the snapshot of current technology but consider long term trends both in technology and how often and how comfortable people are in using it. I also considered transferability of skills and technology between people and places recognizing that, especially in the near term, there is likely to be sharing of technology, and that people with relatively little experience using something, may need to be teaching someone else how to use it. Useful Terms Network Network capacity Bandwidth LTE cell data Upload Download Megabyte (MB, Mb, M) Gigabyte (GB) ISP Fibre Fixed Wireless DSL Pixel Online Meeting Streaming Capture device A connection of computers. This can be either local, or using the internet The amount of data that can be sent over a network. Similar to bandwidth The amount of data the can be transmitted in a fixed period of time Long Term Evolution. The current top level (speed) of cellular networks. Transmitting date, like email or video, over a cellular network Sending data from your device to another device, including the internet Receiving data to your device from another one, including the internet One million bytes of data, a byte being the smallest measurement possible One thousand megabytes Internet Service Provider, the company that connects you to the internet A way of creating cables that allows for very, very fast data speeds Uses similar technology to cellular data, but is fixed and not mobile Digital Subscriber Line, a way of sending data over telephone lines The smallest unit of programmable colour on a screen A meeting conducted with at least one member joining using the internet Sending video and/or audio over the internet A device that turns a regular video signal into something understandable by a computer
Local Network Capacities I looked at 31 communities throughout the Conference in order to get a snapshot of the various network capacities that will be encountered. Network capacity and its cost will be a large limiting factor in the reasonableness of available options. There s no point in acquiring expensive, high quality equipment, if the local network capacity can t support it. Equally, attempting an interactive video worship when the available speed isn t there will lead to more frustration than community creation. The 31 communities surveyed can be seen on the above map. There is a fairly large diversity of service and cost, though each community researched does have at least one internet provider as well as LTE cell data coverage. This does provide some options, but as you can see in the chart, in smaller communities, available speeds and costs will make live video interaction more difficult.
Commonly used numbers for live-streaming video are: 426 x 240 pixels Also known as 240p, recommended bitrate = 500 Kbps 640 x 360 AKA 360p, recommended bitrate = 1 Mbps 854 x 480 480p, recommended bitrate = 3 Mbps 1280 x 720 720p, recommended bitrate = 5 Mbps 1920 x 1080 1080p, recommended bitrate = 8 Mbps In commonly used terms 480p is Standard Definition, 720p is High Definition, and 1080p is Full High Definition, though the use of those last two do get confused and mixed up. Common practice when streaming is to have an actual upload speed of twice your projected need to ensure quality. The speeds quoted in the chart are the ones advertised by the providers and are thus up to that number. Often actual speeds are 25% lower, and can easily be 50% lower, especially for cable connections that actually share the infrastructure so if your neighbour is using a lot of bandwidth, there is less available for you to use. I couldn t find any reliable or broad data on actual numbers unfortunately. The cellular coverage column is there to indicate another way to connect to the internet. LTE speeds are approximately 25MB/s down and 5-15MB/s up depending on the location.
Many Internet Service Providers also limit how much data can be transferred based on the plan, which will affect the over all cost. A rough estimation of the amount of data used is as follows: 360p = 0.008 gigabytes per minute / 0.472 gigabytes per hour 480p = 0.011 gigabytes per minute / 0.687 gigabytes per hour 720p = 0.015 gigabytes per minute / 0.9 gigabytes per hour 1080p = 0.02 gigabytes per minute / 1.2 gigabytes per hour Some Useful Links Locations served by what ISPs - https://www.ic.gc.ca/app/sitt/bbmap/hm.html?lang=eng Test your internet speed - http://www.speedtest.net/ Local Personnel Technology Capacities A Stats Canada social survey from 2016 on Canadians at work and at home shows continued growth in use of the internet and technology amongst all sectors of Canadian society. This includes a 15% jump in internet use amongst those over 65 between 2013 and 2016. This still has less than 60% using the internet daily compared to almost 100% of those under 45. The increase is in large part attributed to more intuitive, easy to use technology hitting the marketplace. Easier to use technology, and more technology use are both trends that are expected to continue. With increased use also comes increased comfort, though it s not necessarily a linear progression. My experience offering a worship resource that is technology based is that
many congregations state a lack of comfort with technology (in general not specifically) as the main reason to not purchase, even after a demonstration of the simplicity of the technology involved. In the live-streaming project undertaken by Foothills Presbytery at Crossfield United Church we were dealing with a community of around 3000 people less than an hour from Calgary. There are around 55 people involved in the life of that community of faith, and about 20 generally on a Sunday. One of the challenges encountered was finding people who felt comfortable enough with technology as a whole, to be willing to learn what was involved. By only having one person willing to learn, when they were absent, nothing could happen. It also became evident early on that though none of the steps involved in the process were in themselves difficult, combining so many new things together added immensely to the perceived level of difficulty and the capacity to troubleshoot if something wasn t working as expected. The project attempted to provide a strong final product, but in doing so increased the complexity beyond the capacity of the local people. There would have been benefit in evaluating the capacities and needs of all involved parties before implementing any live-streaming solution. Attempting to offer a great end product ultimately isn t important if there ends up being nothing at all. That said, offering an easy to provide product that no one is interested in isn t beneficial either. It is my belief that with technological penetration continuing to increase and technology becoming easier to use, the willingness and capacity of United Church people to use new technology within the life of the church will also continue to increase. It is important however to only attempt to use technology that fits with the local community s comfort and capacity. That then needs to be evaluated against the desired outcome and its likely success. Needs and outcomes are likely be different for a meeting, than for worship. Available Meeting Technology and Options As the number an frequency of online meetings increases, so too does the technology available to make them happen. This inevitably creates opportunities and challenges. The opportunities come from the continued innovation in what we can do, and how it is done. The challenges come in deciding what platform and technology makes sense now, and will still make sense in a year, or more. I would group the available software into two broad categories, consumer and commercial. Consumer meeting or conversation software includes things like Skype, Google Hangouts, FaceTime, WhatsApp. Commercial software would be things like Adobe Connect, WebEx, and Zoom. Consumer communication software was usually designed primarily for one on one conversation, though many have added multi user options later. It is generally relatively simple for all users to use, is free or inexpensive, and more likely to already be used by church folks in their personal lives. Commercial software is designed specifically to host meetings with multiple video connections and is designed with features often used in meetings like screen sharing, whiteboarding and/or annotating, and polling/voting. Commercial meeting software generally requires a host, who has more options than attendees. Recent evolutions of commercial meeting software have become a lot more user friendly for attendees as well as hosts. Commercial software always has a cost structure, though many have some kind of free version/trial, either for 30 days, for limited meeting lengths or with limited features.
Commercial software can also feature options that focus on the speaker in the large window while showing other participants in a smaller window. When it comes to hardware, any computer less than 10 years old is technically capable of an online meeting, though some older operating systems may not be compatible with newer software. Any platform you would consider would also allow people to join from a tablet or phone, though often with a more limited feature set. Other than a computer, a camera, microphone and speakers/headphones are required, or at least strongly suggested. Meetings can be conducted with each individual in a different location and/or on a separate device, or with some members in a meeting room. When done individually people using a laptop will benefit from a built-in camera, speakers, and microphone. Generally headphones are preferred to using the speakers, to reduce the chances of feedback, and a microphone, either as part of a headset, or separate, ensures others can hear the participant better. Desktop users may have a built-in camera or may need to invest in an external one. There are many options available, and different price points, and for most folks form factor and price will be the most important factors in choosing a webcam. The quality is generally similar, and not that relevant to a meeting environment. Some webcams come with built-in mics, which are usually adequate, though headphones are generally recommended. If some meeting participants will be gathering in a common location, it s important to consider how things will be viewed by those who are remote. Many of us have likely experienced an online meeting where we are unable to see some of the participants in a conference room. When possible, it can be beneficial to have each meeting participant on their own computer, so everyone is on the same playing field. Though this is not always desired, or possible (due to bandwidth limitations). In those situations, it is recommended to consider a commercial meeting camera. There are many companies that produce cameras designed for meetings, and they come in various price points. Factors to consider are the size and configuration of the space, if there will be someone dedicated to the meeting technology ensuring participants can always be seen and heard, plus how the audio for the meeting will be captured. Companies you may be familiar with like Logitech, and those you might not be, like HuddleCam, make cameras specifically designed for conference rooms. Many of these, like the HuddleCam 3XA with Audio (US$650), offer Pan, Tilt, and Zoom functions to enable everyone in the room to be seen. This does require someone to be on top of operating the camera. Many, like the HuddleCam 3XA also come with built in microphones to reduce the number of devices needed for a meeting. Cameras like the Logitech Meet Up ($1200) offer a wide field of view and could work well in a small room, but those in the back will be smaller and harder to see, especially in a larger room. It does offer some ability to pan, tilt and zoom, though as always with that feature, someone does need to be controlling it.
Regular consumer webcams can also be used, but in general you will not be able to see everyone in the room, unless you use two or more webcams in the room, and those not in the conference room will feel annoyed and left out. Two or more cameras in one room is an option, though how well it works will be affected by available bandwidth, and the availability of multiple computers to connect them to. There are also portable meeting cameras that are small in form factor and built for moving around. They generally come with a built in 360 degree microphone to capture audio and built in speakers as well. These can range in price but would be in the $400-$800 range depending on features which can include a wide-angle lens or Pan, Tilt, Zoom functionality. A recent comer to the meeting camera game is OWL Labs with their Meeting Owl ($1100) camera solution. While I haven t see one of these live, I am very impressed with the concept as it as features I ve been looking for for years. It includes 360 degree microphones, speakers, and a 360 degree camera, so remote participants can see everyone at the table at the same time. The Meeting Owl displays the full 360 degree view of the room at the top also automatically focuses on the person, or people speaking. This gives some of the benefits of everyone being on their own computer as far as remote participants are concerned, while letting those in the same place gather in the same room. Being a new technology, I cannot guarantee it will stick around and receive support needed, but it looks very promising to solve some of the problems of online meetings. When selecting meeting software, I would recommend the Conference, or Region(s), look at selecting commercial software to conduct and facilitate its meetings, while allowing/encouraging folks not interacting directly with the Conference/Region(s) to use whatever software they are comfortable with that meets their needs. It is worth recognizing that whatever software is chosen will likely end up getting more use by others as they become more familiar with it, providing it has reasonably low barriers to entry. For hardware, I suggest when reasonable to have each individual on their own device as that puts everyone on the same playing field. If conference or meeting rooms will be used I would suggest investing in something like the Meeting Owl that automates the task of picking who is on camera while also giving a view of everyone in the room. More details on hardware and software options will be provided bellow in the Software and Hardware Rundown section.
Available Worship Technology and Options When it comes to worship, there are many different ways technology can be used to supplement what happens locally as well as to share what goes on locally with others. Unlike a meeting situation where people often have less emotional attachments to how it is conducted, folks emotional attachment to the worship experience is often quite high. For this reason, when it comes to adding technology to worship I strongly suggest evaluating each situation asking at least the following questions: What are you hoping to gain by including technology in worship? What are the network capacities in all possibly involved locations? What are the technological comfort levels of the people in all possibly involved locations? What levels of change to their worship experience are all possibly involved parties open to? Once you have started to explore these questions, you ll start to be led towards different the styles that can be used to alter/enhance worship with technology. That in turn, working still with those questions, will lead you towards software and hardware solutions to explore. In my experience many people default to live-streaming as a way to bring worship to those that may struggle to find worship leadership. This can be a great option for some folks. You will find many people though who find this too much like watching church on TV, and it is not necessarily what they are after. To improve on that situation, it is possible to create worship that involves participants from multiple sites as is done with Trinity Untied in Thunder Bay, and is also done by many mega-churches with multiple sites. This also has the benefit of creating a connection between participating communities of faith. In order for this to work well, it involves a reasonable amount of bandwidth in all locations as well as people comfortable with the involved technology. It can also require a reasonable amount of patience from worshipers if things get out of sync, or there are technology issues. In an attempt to limit the friction with technology the worship resource I produce attempts to empower local leaders to lead most of the service, while providing a pre-recorded sermon. This allows things to be downloaded ahead of time, and depends less on the internet connection in the church for smooth worship. This format of pre-recording elements of a service for sharing could easily be copied by local clusters of communities of faith with each community taking an element each week, pre-recording it and sharing, while local folks lead the majority of the service. This would likely feel much like a traditional service, while reducing the burden of planning every element for the local lay leadership, and provide a connection to other communities of faith, much like a participatory live-stream. As you can see, how the above questions are answered, can lead to different paths to explore, even before we look at the actual technology involved. While I believe strongly that it s important to evaluate each individual situation to assess what the correct fit may be, I understand it may be more practical for a Conference/Region to generally recommend a single methodology that they would be more easily able to support. When it comes to technology I have learned that it is important to find a balance between what communities are able to use to create, and what the end viewers are willing to live with. Setting up a laptop or smartphone so it can view the whole front of the church and using the built-in mic can stream a worship service over WiFi and a low bandwidth connection can be done for free using Facebook or YouTube. This is technically simple, and very low cost. I, personally, would never watch something like that unless my kid was performing, and even then, I m not positive, but others might be fine with it. And
if that setup is all the creators can do, and the receivers are fine, then so be it. There are many steps between that example, and live, interactive, multi-site worship, and all of them can be reasonable depending on the circumstances. When it come to pre-recording, propping up a smartphone in a quite room can work just fine. Audio and video enhancements can also be made depending on capacities and desires. Especially when it comes to pre-recording, modern smartphones can easily and inexpensively be turned into very respectable recording devices. More information will be included in the next section which gives a rundown of available software and hardware for many meeting and worship situations. Software and Hardware Rundown Meeting Software As stated above I would recommend the Conference/Region(s) look at selecting commercial meeting software for their work, and encourage communities of faith, clusters and networks to use what fits for them, recognizing they will be likely to lean towards the platform used by the Conference/Region(s). With this in mind I would recommend looking primarily at two platforms. Adobe Connect (which is used by the National United Church of Canada), and Zoom (used sometimes by the United Church s Edge Network for ministry development). I m recommending considering Adobe Connect (https://www.adobe.com/products/adobeconnect.html) primarily because it s already being used by the General Council Office. It generally ranks in the middle of top 10 lists for meeting software, which is a decent place to be. It s on the pricier side of things, with the other established players like GoToMeeting and WebEx, depending on use, and is on the more complex side of usability. It does however have some useful features like breakout rooms, and event registration, again depending on the package level. Packages start at US$50/month for 25 meeting participants (computers connected) and US$130/month for 100 participants, though both have 30-day free trials. There may be savings to be had by working with the GCO as well. The other platform, or software, I d recommend considering is Zoom (https://zoom.us/). Zoom is being used by the United Church s Edge Network for ministry development as well and is generally ranked in the top 5 for meeting software. Zoom offers a simpler user interface than other platforms, and is more akin to Skype or Google Hangouts, though with many more features. Zoom is a newer company than Adobe or Cisco WebEx, but are considered established in the field. Zoom does feature a free personal version of the software that offers unlimited meetings, but limits meetings of 3 or more people to 40 minutes. They do encourage folks to just connect again if that works for them though. If you want to remove that limitation and ad some other admin features prices start at US$15/month for 100 participants (computers connected). All things being equal, I would suggest the Conference/Region(s) look at getting 2-5 Zoom Pro host licences, though it may be possible to get away with one. This would have the Conference/Region(s) using a platform this is simpler to use, and more accessible to the clusters, networks, and communities of faith it is dealing with should they be interested in using the same platform.
Meeting Hardware Recognizing the risk of sounding like a broken record I want to state again the simplest, cheapest, and in my view the most equal for all participants in an online meeting, way to set it up is to have everyone on their own device, even if they are in the same room. This does require locations with multiple connections to have enough bandwidth to handle multiple connections. If multiple people are going to be in a conference room, not on individual devices, I would suggest a camera with a wide-angle like the Logitech Meet Up ($1200, https://www.logitech.com/en-ca/product/meetup-conferencecam) or the HuddleCam Go (US$330, https://huddlecamhd.com/go/), over a pan, tilt, zoom camera that is more dependant on an operator, unless there is a plan for a dedicated operator. As indicated above, my first choice at the moment, though I have yet to see one in real life, would be the Meeting Owl ($1100, https://www.owllabs.com/meeting-owl). This camera has the benefits of both a wide angle camera, and a operated pan, tilt, zoom camera, and looks to provide a higher quality meeting experience. Until now I haven t touched much on audio, which is actually more important to a quality meeting than good video. There are various speakerphone solutions should a meeting room style be chosen, and builtin mics and speakers not be available in the camera used. Most software platforms also allow for audio to be transmitted over the internet with the video, or for regular phonelines to be used (generally with an additional cost). It s important not to overlook this aspect of an online meeting, even though most camera solutions I have suggested do account for it in some way. If using a conference room style with a single connection, it may be beneficial to enhance built in mics and speakers depending on the size of the room. If using a conference room with a single connection, I would recommend installing a large screen TV on one of the wider sides of the room if possible to reduce the distance between it and the others in the room. Worship Software As indicated before, when it comes to worship there are many more things in play. Depending on the solution desired different software, and hardware, will be desired. Streaming When it comes to basic streaming this can be done for free through Facebook or YouTube, or through paid services like Livestream (US$42/month), DaCast (US$19/month), or another of the paid streaming services. It is also possible to self stream with the proper advanced knowledge and tools. Basic streaming would be using one camera, that may or may not be being controlled, and audio, preferably coming from the church sound system. Advanced streaming can also use the above services but would also require video switching software. Video Switching Switching refers to the practice of changing, or switching between video sources like cameras or PowerPoint slides. There are many options available for this, including one directly from Livestream. Others include the open source OBS (https://obsproject.com/) and vmix (https://www.vmix.com/)
which has a SD free version and an HD version for US$60. Switching software allows for a more interesting viewing experience as perspectives/angles can change, and slides can be added. This does come however with added complexity. Multi-Site Depending on the desired features, desired look, and quality, multi-site services can be done using video chat software like Skype or Google Hangouts, or using meeting software like Adobe Connect or Zoom, or using switching software. Each congregation would project the active congregation when they are live, and either leave them there, or project something else when they are not. This can be done simply by just changing the program or minimizing windows on a single computer, or more professionally using switching software. Internet bandwidth will be a factor here in how delayed things are and will affect how in sync or not the audio is. How this is done is something that can annoy people in a worship setting and out of sync audio may be more noticeable/annoying in worship than it might be in a meeting. Editing Pre-Recorded Video When creating pre-recorded video, it can help it look more professional to edit the beginning and ending so they start and stop when you want, and even to fade in and out. There are many paid video editing programs, but for basic editing, a free program like OpenShot (http://www.openshot.org/) works well. If recording to a smartphone an app like the free Adobe Premiere Clip (Android and ios) can improve on the one that comes pre-installed, and let you do everything on a phone/tablet. Worship Hardware A simple one camera setup can work well for churches starting out with live-streaming, and is much less complicated, if not quite as engaging for the viewer. Webcams are the simplest way to do this, as they connect directly with USB, and don t need any convertors. Pan, tilt, zoom meeting cameras can work well in this situation as well, and can be great to give some different angels, without extra complication, though viewers will see the camera moving. Prices can vary dramatically depending on the features you are seeking. It is also possible to use regular cameras or camcorders and what s called a capture device. These range from $200-$600 and convert an regular HDMI signal to one a computer can read, and thus stream. In either case, for best results, it s important to add the churches sound system to the camera so good quality audio is being streamed. There are also direct camera to stream (internet) devices that start in the $600 range. From here you can add to the viewing experience, expense, and complexity, by adding more cameras, and switching software. Multi-site participants can be added from a basic one camera setup, or a multicamera one. Most switching software allows its output to be seen as a camera by video chat and meeting software making the addition of multiple cameras to a multi-site setup no more complicated than adding them to a single stream.
Streaming The most traditional way to live-stream is using a computer. A mid to high level computer is recommend to ensure a good and consistent stream. The quality of the computer does however depend on what all it is being asked to do. If you are switching and streaming from the same computer a more powerful one will be necessary. As mentioned above, if using a one camera setup, it is also possible to stream using a direct to stream device like the Teradek VidiU (US$700) or the proprietary Livestream Broadcaster Pro (US$600). If streaming from a computer, you will need to ensure the computer can read the camera signal. If not using a webcam, this means using a capture device, which essentially turns any camera into a webcam so it can then be accessed from whatever meeting or streaming software or service (like YouTube or Facebook) is being used. Pre-Recording Any device that captures video will work for this. That includes DLSR cameras, camcorders, GoPros, tablets, and smartphones. It is also important to capture the best quality audio you can. This is generally done using an external microphone. The could be done using the churches sound system plugged into the camera (an adaptor is necessary if using a smartphone or tablet), or a mic plugged directly into the recording device. Wired lapel microphones, including ones that connect to smartphones and tablets without adaptors, can be acquired for $30-$100. I tend to find the best value in the middle of the pack with the cheapest not sounding the best, and the most expensive not necessarily being worth the extra money. Once the video is recorded basic editing using software described above is recommended before sending it to the intended audience. Because video files are generally too large to email, it s recommended to upload them to a service like Dropbox or Google Drive, and sharing the link. These cloud storage services all have free versions that are more than adequate for sharing videos less than one hour in length. Conclusions As you may have concluded from this report there are many options to consider, and there is no one solution I would recommend for all situations. That being said, I would suggest picking one commercial meeting software to use and would recommend suggesting communities of faith wishing to use common elements in worship consider pre-recording them and sharing with each other to simplify the process and avoid dealing with bandwidth issues. I would also recommend the Conference/Region(s) consider having tech staff (permanent or on contract) available to help communities of faith determine and implement the correct solution for them as well as provide ongoing support. This is something the Edge Network has facilitated before, though I don t see that amongst their current offerings. At the March 3 rd, 2018 meeting of GCE however there was mention of exploring some shared services through the GCO including tech support, so that may be an alternative to finding your own staff or contractor.