[-empyre-] RE: empyre Digest, Vol 15, Issue 3

[cadadosis@terra.com.mx]

>Hola

Es interesante este punto, ya que las posibilidades del envio de datos para
la interación entre el audio y video  a tiempo real, la cual considero poco
explorada y compleja. Realice un proyecto en el cual tenía las mismas espectativas,
sin embargo tube que utilizar Max MSP para poder enviar los datos a una
gráfica visual realizada con flash  a partir de los datos arrojados por
el sonido del stream.
Sin embargo el servidor solo recive estos datos en paquetes, asi que la
señal enviada al server para la creación de la grafíca tiene un delay de
una hora.
El objeto que utilice para este patch es nottcp. Las gráficas son creadas
a partir de los datos capturados por Max y leeidos por php que envia los
datos a Flash.Pero el stream de audio es enviado por shoutcast, asi que
en este caso no pude conjuntar en tiempo real del sonido y la imagen simultaneamente.
Desafortunadamente esto me ha causado muchos problemas, es muy inestable
mandarlo por una ruta al serve
Tal vez con php y pd encuentres herramientas que te ayuden con esta tarea.
Este proyecto se dearrollo en una residencia en ZKM en el mes de agosto.

http://mkn.zkm.de/radial/index.html
Se llevarán a cabo en el mes de abril algunas presentaciones de este proyecto
en vivo desde el festival de Version 04 en Chicago.
http://submissions.versionfest.org/
 Sol Medio




-- Mensaje Original --
>From: empyre-request@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>Subject: empyre Digest, Vol 15, Issue 3
>To: empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>Reply-To: empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>Date: Sat,  3 Apr 2004 12:03:03 +1000 (EST)
>
>
>Send empyre mailing list submissions to
>	empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/empyre
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	empyre-request@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	empyre-owner@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of empyre digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: intro (Alan Sondheim)
>   2. Re: intro (Brendan Howell)
>   3. RE: intro (patrick lichty)
>   4. Re: intro (tobias c. van Veen)
>   5. Re: intro (jan hendrik brueggemeier)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 18:20:54 -0500 (EST)
>From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim@panix.com>
>Subject: Re: [-empyre-] intro
>To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
>Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.58.0404011815240.24801@panix3.panix.com>
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>
>
>Just a question here - I'm following this discussion with great interest.
>
>At West Virginia University recently, I was able to see Internet II
>streaming/projection - what fascinated me was the six simultaneous
>projected images, all of which had close to the quality of NTSC, all of
>which were in real time. This was from one lab to another, and the
>connection was kept open for sufficient time for mutual interaction
>partying, etc. The communality/community that was in/formation was
>fascinating.
>
>What is the spread at this point of I2? Wouldn't this create enough
>bandwidth to forget the web entirely? I imagine DSL/cable/satellite will
>take over in another decade or so, maybe 12 years for I2 - and this would
>change the issues entirely.
>
>In other words, are we in a temporary bottleneck, perhaps nothing more?
>
>- Alan
>
>http://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/.nikuko
>http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt
>Trace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm
>finger sondheim@panix.com
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 14:58:43 +0200
>From: Brendan Howell <mute@netaxs.com>
>Subject: Re: [-empyre-] intro
>To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
>Message-ID: <78D1A31C-84A5-11D8-84C8-00039359896C@netaxs.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
>Maybe this is starting to get too technical and off topic but bear with

>me here.  I would say that most of the problems with streaming
>technologies are more political.  see below.
>
>On 1. Apr 2004, at 22:02 Uhr, Henry Warwick wrote:
>>
>>> This is interesting to me because the 'web' seems to
>>> be a rather hostile
>>> environment for streaming.
>>
>> It's not the "web" that's the problem, it's a few
>> things (yay! now we get to the meat of the story...)
>> that are based on what I noted above:
>>
>> 1. packets, i.e., IP
>> 2. the straw, aka bandwidth restraints
>>
>> As long as a everything is transmitted in packets and
>> each packet has to be numbered, noted, delivered,
>> spoken for, and requested; and each packet has to be
>> crammed through a delivery system of questionable
>> strength and reliability, streaming is going to be a
>> problem. Period.
>>
>
><snip>
>
>> There is no true "broadcasting" in a radio sense,
>> because of these technical constraints. These
>> constraints were imposed for Very Good Reasons (to
>> insure data integrity).
>>
>
>Actually, there are three types of messages that you can send on
>networks: unicast, broadcast and multicast.  Unicast is the norm.  It's

>like a normal telephone conversation except that it's two computers
>sending packets of data back and forth.  Broadcast sends one packet
>that is received by all computers but only in the local area network.

>If broadcasts were allowed to the whole internet one prankster could
>quickly bring the whole internet to a standstill.
>   Now multicast was designed for applications like streaming video and

>audio.  It's based on a sort of subscription model.  The users
>subscribe to the multicast address and no matter how many users
>subscribe to it, the computer at the source only has to send out one
>stream of data.  The routers in the network then send the packets
>further along in the network and only make duplicate packets when the
>network forks.  This is lots more efficient and it solves the economic

>problem for the guy who wants to share his videos but only has a 128k
>connection.
>   Now this is where it gets political.  The problem is that multicast

>is rather complicated to implement and it requires that all of the
>routers are configured in a similar way.  This is fine within one
>organization but most providers are not interested in working out
>agreements with other firms and organizations.  It would not make more

>money for them and in fact might hurt their bottom line when big web
>casting companies suddenly no longer need to buy huge amounts of
>bandwidth.
>
>> The only thing that will change this is to scrap IP
>> and packets and (somehow) get to a direct superhigh
>> frequency "channelling" protocol that permits millions
>> if not billions of channels all of it streaming at
>> once or on instant demand. How such a system would
>> work, I have no idea, but logically in order to insure
>> interactivity it would require each reciever to be a
>> broadcaster - to eliminate the heirarchy of
>> Host/Client. Otherwise, you need a "manager" which
>> will have to handle the data and insure its
>> transmission and then you're back to packets and IP.
>> Also the health effects of such a system blasting that
>> much radiation through wireless networks - well -
>> it'll keep the pigeon population down...
>>
>
>I don't think IP is really a problem.  I think multicast protocols give

>you most of what you're looking for.  It's an issue where vested
>interests do not want to relinquish control and the profitable status
>quo.
>
>> QuickTime? (everywhere, cheap, and well done - but
>> quality is not the best.)
>>
>> Real? (Boooo - ugly and the client they provide is
>> EVIL)
>>
>> Windows Media? (Quality is great, but it's a product
>> of the Borg...)
>>
>
>I have had to deal with all 3 professionally and in artistic contests.

>Basically I agree, they all stink more or less although I find
>Quicktime the least distasteful (you can use open codecs and the free
>Darwin streaming server).  I'm curious about what kind of experiences
>other people have had with Open-Source based video and audio streaming

>software.
>
>I used to run an Icecast server at a company I worked for and I was
>pretty pleased with it.  The only problems were bandwidth sensitivity
>(it cuts out the audio more often on slow or congested connections) and

>lack of bandwidth scaling (no way to cut the audio quality down for
>slower connections).
>
>What are some of the solutions for video streaming?  I'm impressed with

>VLC (Video Lan Client) and their open client and server but they don't

>really have any good tools for encoding or recording.  Is there a way
>to do streaming video for the masses without getting tangled up with
>Real, MS or Apple agendas?
>
>-Brendan
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 12:52:51 -0600
>From: "patrick lichty" <voyd@voyd.com>
>Subject: RE: [-empyre-] intro
>To: "'soft_skinned_space'" <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
>Message-ID: <014c01c418e3$b36b4110$0200a8c0@ATHENA>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
>Alan,
>
>Currently I am trying to organize some Access Grid events here at LSU,
>and I would love to talk about possibly seeing what could be cooked up.
>
>My main concern is that I am currently solidifying my position with the
>Life Sciences Deoartment, and it's hit and miss at times.  However, I am
>collaborating with University of Sao Paulo to try to organize something
>in May.
>
>Patrick Lichty
>Editor-In-Chief
>Intelligent Agent Magazine
>http://www.intelligentagent.com
>355 Seyburn Dr.
>Baton Rouge, LA 70808
>
>"It is better to die on your feet
>than to live on your knees."
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: empyre-bounces@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>[mailto:empyre-bounces@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] On Behalf Of Alan
>Sondheim
>Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 5:21 PM
>To: soft_skinned_space
>Subject: Re: [-empyre-] intro
>
>
>
>Just a question here - I'm following this discussion with great
>interest.
>
>At West Virginia University recently, I was able to see Internet II
>streaming/projection - what fascinated me was the six simultaneous
>projected images, all of which had close to the quality of NTSC, all of
>which were in real time. This was from one lab to another, and the
>connection was kept open for sufficient time for mutual interaction
>partying, etc. The communality/community that was in/formation was
>fascinating.
>
>What is the spread at this point of I2? Wouldn't this create enough
>bandwidth to forget the web entirely? I imagine DSL/cable/satellite will
>take over in another decade or so, maybe 12 years for I2 - and this
>would
>change the issues entirely.
>
>In other words, are we in a temporary bottleneck, perhaps nothing more?
>
>- Alan
>
>http://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/.nikuko
>http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt
>Trace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm
>finger sondheim@panix.com
>_______________________________________________
>empyre forum
>empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 14:29:09 -0500
>From: "tobias c. van Veen" <tobias@techno.ca>
>Subject: Re: [-empyre-] intro
>To: empyre <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
>Message-ID: <BC932935.10D52%tobias@techno.ca>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>hi everyone,
>
><tangent>
>
>Of note,
>
>http://tot.sat.qc.ca/
>
>
>There are several art centres worldwide (V-2, etc) that have the necessary
>bandwidth & it's becoming more common, also at many universities. However
>a
>large investment is required (along with time and software programming).
>Perhaps the financial and technological aspects will constitute the main
>bottleneck for direct IP, realtime interactivity ..
>
>I'm currently working on curation for digital happenings using such
>technology, with Montreal's SAT - http://www.sat.qc.ca . For the next
>question is one what _does_ with such technology other than to revel in
its
>apparent immediacy.
>
>best, tV
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Just a question here - I'm following this discussion with great interest.
>>
>> At West Virginia University recently, I was able to see Internet II
>> streaming/projection - what fascinated me was the six simultaneous
>> projected images, all of which had close to the quality of NTSC, all
of
>> which were in real time. This was from one lab to another, and the
>> connection was kept open for sufficient time for mutual interaction
>> partying, etc. The communality/community that was in/formation was
>> fascinating.
>>
>> What is the spread at this point of I2? Wouldn't this create enough
>> bandwidth to forget the web entirely? I imagine DSL/cable/satellite will
>> take over in another decade or so, maybe 12 years for I2 - and this would
>> change the issues entirely.
>>
>> In other words, are we in a temporary bottleneck, perhaps nothing more?
>>
>> - Alan
>>
>> http://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/.nikuko
>> http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt
>> Trace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm
>> finger sondheim@panix.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
>
>tobias c. van Veen -----------
>http://www.quadrantcrossing.org
>http://www.thisistheonlyart.com
>--- tobias@quadrantcrossing.org
>---McGill Communications------
>ICQ: 18766209 | AIM: thesaibot
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 22:30:39 +0200 (MET DST)
>From: jan hendrik brueggemeier <jan@pingfm.org>
>Subject: Re: [-empyre-] intro
>To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
>Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404022121110.29738@fossi>
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>hi there,
>
>> There is no true "broadcasting" in a radio sense,
>> because of these technical constraints.
>
>the problem of internet as a broadcasting-medium is that one has top pay
>for every single listener, the more you have the more you have to pay for
>them. i very much like the concept of peercast, which let  every listener
>become one relay (www.peercast.org). unfortunately this initiative didnt
>really make it to a be completely reliable software yet.. but to the
>brilliance of an idea will not procure its realization.
>aside that i think there are general infrastructural problems in
>distribute high bandwidth streams worldwide, but regarding that issue adam
>should posses more substantiated knowledge resulting out of his commitment
>in the open streaming alliance http://www.location1.org/ossa/ossa.html
..
>
>> > However, this kind of
>> > argument has never made much sense to artists hence
>> > many artists exploit
>> > this aesthetic within their work.
>> To SOME artists. I find it VERY irritating and
>> extremely undesireable.
>> If I am to use reduced frame rate and resolution, I want it to be
>> a Choice, not a Fait Accompli.
>
>in a way companero warwick is right, i mean personally i am one of THESE
>artists, who likes to produce under such conditions, but question is
>which features are more important to you. referring to the musicians
>form new-zealand i guess sometimes one does not really have a choice.
>i mean we still live in a time where an assistant of an electronic-store
>is instructed not to sell certain components to me, if he is suspicious
>that i will use the components to build a radio-transmitter.
>therefore on a society-level one impact of computerization of
>'broad'-casting is simply the legalisation of the device as such.
>on the other hand i believe that one only can enjoy certain freedoms when
>you are flying beyond the radar of the main-stream and to certain degree
>its lousy video-quality let streaming still be beyond the radar.
>otherways one would have to deal aside technical limitations with all kind
>of juridical ones as well, wich is already starting ..
>
>aesthetically it is funny to see that noise and distortion have become
>tv-ad/mainstream compatible but in a quite evacuted and discontinued way.
>
>jan
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>empyre mailing list
>empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
>End of empyre Digest, Vol 15, Issue 3
>*************************************


___________________________________________________________________________
Con Terra MAIL obtienes 6MB de espacio además de bloqueo ANTISPAM
http://terramail.terra.com.mx/TerraMail/
Acceso a Internet 3 x 1, desde ¡$179 pesos al mes!
http://www.terra.com.mx/acceso/suscribete/
Encuentra los mejores productos y precios increibles!!
Aprovecha nuestra promoción a 12 pagos sin intereses con Banamex y Bancomer
http://www.decompras.com/