Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Communications Input Devices Networking

Persistent Home Videoconferencing Solution? 253

Posted by timothy
from the needs-big-red-off-button-too dept.
An anonymous reader writes "I'm moving very soon for work, and will be several hundred miles away from my young family for six to nine months. Obviously I'll travel back as often as possible, and there's always Skype and XBLA video, but the whole 'now it's time to talk to dad' thing seems ... a little weak. I was wondering the Slashdot community could help me come up with a more persistent solution. Ideally what I want is an always-on connection between a pc/monitor/camera/speakers in my old kitchen and my new kitchen, so if we're in the kitchens, we can see each other and interact semi-normally. (We're a kitchen-focused family.) Most solutions I can find time out pretty quick, or require some knowledge on the part of the users, and the tech-savvy people are only going to be in one kitchen, to put it politely!" (Read on for a few more details.)
"I do have a reasonable number of Windows PCs and Macs (and game consoles), but no alt. OS machines, so something for retail OSes would be better — I haven't tested the PS3 camera for long durations, but I know the conferencing quality with a PS3 is pretty good, and that could be an option too. Any camera recommendations would be good. We have sweet access at our house, but it will need to be wireless to the kitchen from the router."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Persistent Home Videoconferencing Solution?

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Creepy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Xacid (560407) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @11:55AM (#33403520) Journal

    I'll have to disagree about your creepy statement (but I do appreciate still offering your advice).

    Dads being gone, especially with little ones can have pretty large effects. I think it'd be kind of cool to still be able to have that "hey dad guess what!?" pop out of the middle of no where. It's those unscheduled moments that are going to win with a good set up.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 28, 2010 @12:01PM (#33403558)

    quit your job, or move your family with you.

  • by gman003 (1693318) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @12:09PM (#33403610)

    I'm pretty sure that was his first idea, but for whatever reason, was unfeasible.

  • by conner_bw (120497) * on Saturday August 28, 2010 @12:15PM (#33403642) Homepage Journal

    Is your wife tech savvy?

    If you follow a nerdy slashdot suggestion and something breaks, can your wife fix the problem?

    I would say just use iChat on two Macs. Keep it simple.

    It's not what you asked, but maybe you should reconsider what you are asking.

  • Re:Creepy (Score:4, Insightful)

    by iksbob (947407) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @12:37PM (#33403794)

    He's not talking about following them around with the camera, or surveilling the whole house. He's talking about setting up a two-way link between two terminals in fixed, public (in the context of the home) locations. If someone doesn't want to be observed, simply don't stand in front of the terminal.

  • Faux Portal (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Idiomatick (976696) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @01:12PM (#33404006)
    I would use projectors not screens. Set up a whole wall of the room (or a large bordered portion) to act as a window.

    The goal is to have it close enough to something that people are comfortable with allowing for some suspension of disbelief. Working towards that end have the camera in each room in a similar position to make it as close as possible to acting like a window. Stick a pointless frame/trim on the wall to encourage the illusion. Continuous lines and such when standing and looking into the 'window' from the most common position are important. Similar rooms would help as well. Or common elements ... little things like cameras being the same height off the table are important to make it feel continuous.

    It would not be the same thing as a window of course because of the lack of 3d. One thing you could do though to partially alleviate this would be to use head tracking to determine how close you are to the camera and as you move closer have it zoom to match the right field of view that you would expect. This would help add some realism. Another thing you could do would involve 3d sound recording + reproduction which is doable. It makes the connection feel more real if they can hear you move across the room.

    More expensive the better pretty much. Costly internet connection helps a lot. Good camera and microphones would be good. Good projector would be very important. Fancy business telepresence stuff probably is good and expensive too.

    I'm sure a good driven programmer/engineer could set this up and get it working smoothly with under 20k and a month or so ...... But it'd be pretty damn cool!
  • Re:Creepy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sjames (1099) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @01:30PM (#33404120) Homepage

    It's only weird when it's one way. The key is to make sure that when you can see someone on the screen, they can also see you on their screen. If the screens are big enough, it's almost like a window.

  • Words of support (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Shoten (260439) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @01:32PM (#33404132)

    I'll be honest; I don't know the solution to your problem. But I've been reading the replies, and between people giving you career advice (without any concept of what your job is, how much you love it, how hard it may be to change it, etc.), disregarding the flamingly, ass-poundingly obvious (normal IM won't work because you have to be close to the laptop, it times out on its own, etc.), or simply telling you that what you're asking about is creepy, I can see you have your work cut out for you.

    Hang in there, man...and remember, this very thing that you are doing, this clear and persistent description and communication of a need, is what drives innovation in the IT and consumer electronics industries. Go for it, and keep it up until you get what you want!

  • Re:Creepy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ddillman (267710) <.dgdillman. .at. .gmail.com.> on Saturday August 28, 2010 @01:39PM (#33404164) Journal
    I think we should give the OP the benefit of the doubt and assume he's got his family onboard with the idea. Assuming so, do (all of you expressing negative opinions of the OP's idea) have anything constructive to add, or are (all of you) just into expressing your opinion regardless of whether it solves the problem as requested?
  • by Ironhandx (1762146) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @01:40PM (#33404174)

    It can very easily be unfeasible, especially in todays market, and he already said he was young. Quitting a job for any reason at a young age without another job to move into is risky in the best of circumstances, and we aren't exactly living in the best of circumstances. Its risky for anyone, but particularly for someone that may not have the experience to be even looked at for a lot of other jobs.

    In the choice between "Leaving my family for 6 months" or "Staying and forcing my family to live in poverty for the next 10+ years because I just didn't want to go" is there really a choice? If you actually do see a choice there I hope you never have dependents, and don't have them now.

  • by asills (230118) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @02:14PM (#33404374)

    Actually Scott Hanselman has a better option using Skype and a dedicated PC he uses to talk to his family at home.

    http://www.hanselman.com/blog/SkypingTheWifeFoolproofVideoConferencingWithYourFamilyWhileOnTheRoad.aspx [hanselman.com]

    Doesn't take much to set up and would probably get one most of the way there.

  • by brusk (135896) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @03:40PM (#33404880)
    How exactly would you write that law? What about people who go to work on research stations in Antarctica, who go to sea on merchant ships, who are loggers in the backwoods? There are lots (or at least a certain number) of jobs in places where you might not want or be able to raise a family. That's just how the world works; you can create policies favorable to families, but you can't change these realities.
  • by b1scuit (795301) on Saturday August 28, 2010 @04:06PM (#33404996)
    There are a ton of things that /could/ be, but that doesn't matter. We don't know /what/ his options were, and it could have been as simple as take this job or lose the house. Stop imaging up options for this guy. He had a specific problem he wanted a solution for, not some vague moral dilemma about taking an out of state job and how terrible of a person would be because of it.

Sinners can repent, but stupid is forever.

Working...