“Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video

at UH West O‘ahu”Eric Flower and Stacey Sawa

University of Hawai‘i-West O‘ahu

flower@hawaii.edussawa@hawaii.edu

StreamingVideoOnTheNet.com

ED-MEDIA 2003, HONOLULU

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 2/32

Table of Contents• Streaming video

Slides 3 - 10

• Purpose of the study Slides 11 - 14

• Production and distribution Slides 15 - 22

• Results Slides 23 - 32

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 3/32Stacey Sawa Photo

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 4/32

Internet Streaming• An Internet data transfer technique that

allows the user to see and hear audio and video files without lengthy download times

• The host or source “streams” small packets of information over the Internet to the user, who can access the content as it is received

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 5/32

Software We Used• We used apps from RealNetworks.com

to encode and serve our classroom-based streaming video RealProducer (now Helix Producer) to

capture and encode video RealServer (now Helix Universal Server) to

distribute the video RealPlayer and RealOne Player to view

streaming video

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 6/32

Streaming Video Process

Capture withRealProducer

Encode withRealProducer

Distribute with RealServer, view with RealPlayer/

RealOne

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 7/32

Production System

MixerSplitter

Videotape backup Video

monitor

Encoding PC

Audio capture

Videocapture

Audio monitor

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 8/32

Distribution System

ITS StreamingServer

RealPlayer/RealOne Clients

Chat session

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 9/32

Equipment Cart

Click here to see our equipment list

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 10/32

Video Was Delivered Directlyto the Student’s Desktop

• We did not broadcast to studios or computer labs where students would have to gather to participate—delivery was directly to the student’s desktop

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 11/32

Purpose of the Study: 1• To identify levels of preparation and

support (equipment, software, staffing, facilities, infrastructure, etc.) necessary to produce and distribute live classroom-based Internet streaming video at low cost to students at home or in their offices

• Remote students would offer their comments and questions through a simultaneous live chat session

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 12/32

Purpose of the Study: 2• To see if we could broaden access to

classes by offering them over the Internet

• To find out how much teaching methods needed to change to be successful in this environment

• To make archived files available to students for viewing on demand

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 13/32

Purpose of the Study: 3• To see if we could improve class content

and teaching methods by reviewing archived files

• To see if we could improve administrative decisions by reviewing archived files

• To gauge student response to instructional delivery to the desktop at home or in an office

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 14/32

Purpose of the Study: 4• To see if classes could be broadcast

from any campus classroom location and not be tied to a studio; if successful, more classes could be offered to remote students

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 15/32Eric Flower Photo

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 16/32

Video Encoding Rates• RealProducer can encode video files for

streaming to any combination of the following clients: 28.8Kbps or 56Kbps for dial-up modems 64Kbps for single or 128Kbps for dual ISDN

lines 150Kbps for local area networks 256Kbps, 384Kbps, or 512Kbps for faster

LANs, cable connections, and digital subscriber lines (DSL)

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 17/32

Encoding Rates and File Size

• Triple stream video files encoded at 56Kbps, 150Kbps, and 256Kbps use 3.9 megabytes of storage per minute Stream to the viewer at the highest reliable

connection, typically 34, 150, or 225Kbps This multistream provides a good balance of

sound and picture quality and targets dial-up, LANs, and broadband

In the future we may encode at 56, 150, and 384Kbps for playback at 34, 150, and 350Kbps

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 18/32

Connections: LAN/Broadband• Local Area Network (LAN) and broadband

connections (cable, DSL) are clearly better Video encoded at 256Kbps is received at

225Kbps Video encoded at 384Kbps is received at

350Kbps Video encoded at 512Kbps is received at

450Kbps• Sound and video are both good

Acceptable for motion, detail, and close-up work

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 19/32

Connections: 56K Dial-up 1• Streaming video encoded for 56Kbps

dial-up modems is received at 34Kbps Sound is good Picture is not nearly as good as 150, 225, or

350Kbps streams Video is choppy and there may be frequent

rebuffering if there is network congestion• More like a slide show than a motion picture

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 20/32

Connections: 56K Dial-up 2• May not be acceptable for classes or

demos involving motion, detail, or close-up work

• May be acceptable for discussion-based classes with little movement

• May be acceptable for large image PowerPoint presentations with little or no animation

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 21/32

Connections: 28.8K Dial-up• 28.8K modem connection is problematic• Should be used as a streaming video

transmission speed in limited circumstances Little motion in presentation No need for detail or close-up work No need for synchronization of sound and

video

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 22/32Stacey Sawa Photo

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 23/32

Results: 1• It’s possible to create

and distribute good quality narrow bandwidth (<512Kbps) Internet streaming video with limited staff at low cost when using software from RealNetworks.com and off the shelf (Radio Shack) hardware

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 24/32

Results: 2• Instructor’s teaching style and course

content must be amenable to this delivery method if it is to be successful

• Instructors don’t need to change their classroom methods very much to succeed with Internet streaming video broadcasting; long periods of training appear to be unnecessary

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 25/32

Results: 3• Preparation, rehearsal, and timely

distribution of supporting material are critical to successful streaming video presentations

• Instructors found reviewing archived streaming video files to be a valuable tool for improving class content and teaching methods

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 26/32

Results: 4• Faculty workload increases in this

environment, but not nearly as much as in an asynchronous text or multimedia-based online teaching environment

• Time spent on preparation and production is less with streaming video, though post-production work may be more, depending on the faculty member’s decisions on how much to do after class

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 27/32

Results: 5• Student response to viewing classroom

presentations (both live and archived) was generally favorable; the faster the Internet connection, the better the student experience

• Student response to live classes was generally good, even from those with relatively slow 56Kbps dial-up connections

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 28/32

Results: 6• Students want more classes offered via

streaming video if they have access to fast connections like Oceanic Cable’s RoadRunner service

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 29/32

Results: 7• Students thought viewing archived

streaming video class files on demand (asynchronously) was as effective from an instructional viewpoint as participating in the live class (synchronously), provided they could then interact with the instructor via e-mail, chat, or videoconferencing Asynchronous delivery with a scheduled

online class meeting component could increase access

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 30/32

Results: 8• Archived files could be viewed when

network traffic was low, or, archived files could be distributed on CDs which would eliminate delivery problems associated with slow network connections or network congestion—this could be a boon to less developed areas with weak infrastructures

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 31/32

Results: 9• It’s possible to broadcast streaming

video to or from any UH West O‘ahu classroom or conference room

• Network improvements made in Spring 2002 dramatically increased network bandwidth into and out of the UH West O‘ahu campus with concomitant improvements in streaming video delivery quality and viewer satisfaction

E. Flower, “Low Cost Narrow Bandwidth Classroom-based Streaming Video” 32/32

Results 10: Bandwidth is Critical

• Network bandwidth is the critical variable in streaming video viewer satisfaction Faster connections support notably better

viewer experiences No amount of preparation can overcome

problems associated with a slow connection or network congestion

• Viewers will blame you or the technologyif their picture is bad

Thanks for watching!

Eric Flower and Stacey SawaUniversity of Hawai‘i-West O‘ahu