VidBlaster's Mike Versteeg is at it again!

Mike Versteeg, the creator of VidBlaster, is doing it again! He's opened the door in the VidBlaster forum for suggestions from users on the next feature for VidBlaster. Read more here.

Last time he did this, VidBlaster got a new VVD (virtual video device/camera). In less than two weeks he went from "Give me your suggestions" to "Here's a beta release, tell me what you think." Pretty awesome!

Now me, I'm pulling for slow motion replay for sports. Currently VidBlaster offers a 30-second, rolling, full motion replay which is very cool (considering the cost of other replay "systems" starts at about $10K US). But, I'm holding out for slo-mo!

Hey Tom,

Im hoping for more HD Optimization, Even with a i7 2600 I am experiencing really high CPU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andrewzarian

Hey Tom,

Im hoping for more HD Optimization, Even with a i7 2600 I am experiencing really high CPU.

---

I agree. The only reason I do not use Vidblaster anymore is because it uses a high amount of CPU. If this issue gets fixed I will happily use Vidblaster once again.

Mike Versteeg announced today that he will be developing Slo-Mo Instant Replay for VidBlaster. For the folks in the sports broadcasting field, this is a game changer! Follow the progress of this new feature at www.forum.vidblaster.com.

Want to peek behind the scenes and read the discussions on how the new VidBlaster smo-motion replay is being developed? http://forum.vidblaster.com/showthread.php?t=1556

Im hoping the next thing we can start working on is CPU optimization.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andrewzarian

Im hoping the next thing we can start working on is CPU optimization.

---

(IMHO) If he can do that, than he is worse than I thought as far as a business man. I wonder how many people jumped ship (to Wirecast) because there was no Slow motion, or no 'new VVD' ??? I think I read that a few jumped ship because of CPU load. What do you guys think is more important for him (as a business man) to work on? :-)

Slow Motion and VVD are important, but I agree with Andrew. It is a resource hog and I think several people don't try it because they can't get it to work with their systems. So in some ways he may lose customers to those features not existing, but in other ways he is losing new customers because they can run Wirecast on a lesser machine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BradShoemaker

Slow Motion and VVD are important, but I agree with Andrew. It is a resource hog and I think several people don't try it because they can't get it to work with their systems. So in some ways he may lose customers to those features not existing, but in other ways he is losing new customers because they can run Wirecast on a lesser machine.

---

I mentioned these two features because I was under the impression that WC did not have them either :-)

As the cost ratio of PC hardware (cost vs. power) continues to drop,
VidBlaster's CPU use will become less and less of an issue. I'm not
suggesting we wouldn't want it to become more efficient in its use of
resources, but that CPUs will catch up, and folks will inevitably
upgrade their systems as more powerful and less expensive options emerge.

And... Slo-mo Instant Replay will bring a flood of new users into the
marketplace, from small colleges and semi-pro sports teams to local high
schools & sports clubs. Its not that these new users were on the
fence asking themselves: "Should I chose Wirecast or VidBlaster?" No,
this will be a whole new class of users that will be drawn into the live
streaming software market and choose VidBlaster because of this
feature. Plus, compared what it costs today to purchase a live slo-mo
instant replay system, VidBlaster will be clearly more cost effective.

This is a game changer, folks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomSinclair

Plus, compared what it costs today to purchase a live slo-mo
instant replay system, VidBlaster will be clearly more cost effective.
This is a game changer, folks.

---

I cannot argue with you Tom. You have been in this a lot longer than me, and you know your stuff :-) I guess I shouldn't have started this thread without having all the facts.
Onward....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amnon

I guess I shouldn't have started this thread without having all the facts.
Onward....

---

That's exactly what this forum is meant to be, in my honest opinion anyway.

A little useful debate, ultimate clarification of facts and well informed opinions will help us all out in the end.

Amnon: You are too kind. And, I could be wrong.

Not sure if this was intended, but Mike let slip that he was going to be working on the new Slo-Mo Instant Replay system for the next two weeks. Does that mean we will have a beta to play with by mid June???

WOW!

Want a peek behind the scenes at VidBlaster's new replay system in development?

http://forum.vidblaster.com/showthre...2336#post22336

Shhhhh. Don't tell anyone I told you!

The latest rumor is that a beta will be released Friday. Could this be possible?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomSinclair

As the cost ratio of PC hardware (cost vs. power) continues to drop,
VidBlaster's CPU use will become less and less of an issue. I'm not
suggesting we wouldn't want it to become more efficient in its use of
resources, but that CPUs will catch up, and folks will inevitably
upgrade their systems as more powerful and less expensive options emerge.

And... Slo-mo Instant Replay will bring a flood of new users into the
marketplace, from small colleges and semi-pro sports teams to local high
schools & sports clubs. Its not that these new users were on the
fence asking themselves: "Should I chose Wirecast or VidBlaster?" No,
this will be a whole new class of users that will be drawn into the live
streaming software market and choose VidBlaster because of this
feature. Plus, compared what it costs today to purchase a live slo-mo
instant replay system, VidBlaster will be clearly more cost effective.

This is a game changer, folks.

---

Waiting for newer technology to solve a software issue is not really fixing the problem. They will add more features in future upgrades that could even make it worse by bogging down the processor further, even with faster CPU or whatever.

Don't see Slo-Mo feature in of itself as a game changer. A really neat feature to be sure. Broadcasting software is really for a niche market, let alone a niche feature primarily useful in sports. As a broadcaster I don't see where I would ever use such a feature, now or in the future.

Ah, my cool dude friend. You and I are probably from the same generation or close. You'd be amazed at the number of inquiries I still get about my sports broadcasting venture. They don't want to hire me, they want to do it themselves. High school. Junior High School. Little League, Club soccer, volleyball, and the list goes on and on.

It's not the existing internet broadcasters that will jump on the new VidBlaster, it's a whole new crop of broadcasters. All newbies, well, mostly.

Case in point: I was at a high school sports booster club meeting last week and after the meeting one of the geeky dads on the back row approached me and asked me if I was the sportscaster guy. Turned out he was a former TV broadcast engineer and was amazed at what we could do with a little PC and a few cameras. He's probably never watched an internet talk show like yours or mine (and probably never will), but he was tuned on by the thought that he could put his kid (a football player, go figure) on internet TV for his far-away family to watch.

It a new game. Played by new players.

BTW, software always pushes the limits of hardware, rarely the opposite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomSinclair

BTW, software always pushes the limits of hardware, rarely the opposite.

---

I usually find the exact opposite. I think its because of the natural progression of hardware gets developed first, then followed by software is written to support it. Microsoft for instance does not develop any PC's that their software runs on, as well as the multitude of third party hardware devices and software that follow. Obviously It took a long time to get operating systems to 64 bit, then software applications to suport multiple cores. Some still don't.

Linuxcooldude,

I am with you on this. Way to many programmers can get lazy and not work on optimisation of their code as they can afford to purchase the top of the line hardware and therefore think that all of their customers should to. The problem is that this line of thinking leads to shutting out whole markets for their software that would potentially use it but could not because it demanded to many resources. Just waiting around for the Intel/AMD gods to bless us with faster chips is not the answer because even if they do put out newer chips, many times they are still be quite expensive. Not everyone can afford the top of the line PC's. Vendors need to be aiming for the mid-range as that is where most users are. I know that desktop video is a demanding task for any computer to do but if other vendors are able to make it work well with less then it proves that it is possible.

I am really talking generally, not necessarily about the developer of vidblaster, which I've never used. In his case its a bit different. I think him being the only developer of the software its harder to implement things faster then a larger company with more resources and programmers. Then again if your software is popular and has many users where it justifies the extra expense of more manpower for faster development.

This reminds me of another simular case came up where an intern from Google talked about the graphic lag issue ( Like scrolling ) on the Android operating system was due to a realtime priority problem in the graphics system. Another full time programmer from Google tried to respond saying that eventually faster processors would also make this graphic lag a non-issue.

To fix this it would mean a rewriting of the Android operating system from the ground up.

Even this new Slo-Mo feature sounds like it could be more resource intensive, optimization would help, if that were really the problem.

I guess we just disagree. But that's okay. Diverse opinions make for progress and interesting discussions!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomSinclair

I guess we just disagree. But that's okay. Diverse opinions make for progress and interesting discussions!

---

You're right Tom but I experienced that this is impossible to do that in Vidblaster forum.

@ Spino - While I respect your right for you to offer your opinion, I question your sense of what-is-appropriate.

If I were to post on this forum (the IAIB Discussion Forum) criticisms of IAIB and promote my affiliation with a competing organization, I hope you would agree that I was not acting appropriately. It would be viewed as confrontational, antagonistic, and flat-out rude. It would show disrespect for Andrew Zarian, the founder of IAIB, and all IAIB members.

In the same way, I do not think it appropriate for you to go on the VidBlaster forum and promote Wirecast and your belief that it is superior software. I certainly would not go on the Telestream/Wirecast forum and promote VidBlaster. I have chosen to promote VidBlaster through my weekly internet broadcast (That VidBlaster Guy!). If you wish to discuss this in an open forum, I think here (IAIB) is good neutral ground.

I don't know for a fact, but I suspect that is why the VidBlaster forum thread you posted on was closed. To quote one of my favorite Americanisms... "You pee'd in his corn flakes." I think Mike acted appropriately. It is his forum and VidBlaster is his product. If you don't like his attitude, don't visit his forum.

Ok Tom, I respect your opinion and I'm happy to discuss of this with you. It isn't the first time that Mike has this rude attitude with some users of the Vidblaster forum (not just with me and if you read another post in this section you can see that the opinions of some users are much worse than mine). Anyway I think that a forum is the right place to discuss about technical items and you know that in the Vidblaster forum there is a post about Vidblaster vs Wirecast. I wasn't rude, I just wrote my opinion and if you want know what I think, I must say that the salers must be ready to discuss with the customers or potential customers (Vidblaster is not free, people pay for that) trying to convince them that its product is better than others. Maybe Mike is working too much, probably he must let someone like you or Jan on the forum (exactly like Craigs make in Wirecast forum). Everytime Mike writes something has always a rude attitude and now he is offending me writing in a section where I can't replay (I'm not a licensed user).
Anyway, if you want, I'm ready to say why, in my opinion, Wirecast is much better than Vidblaster (Mike is one of the reasons but, of course, not the only one) and we can do that in the other appropriate post. Believe me, when people is kind with me, I'm much more kind with them.
P.S. I'm not a kid, I'm 62, I'm a product manager and I work in main Italian public television (RAI) from about 30 years.

Tom,

At the risk of peeing in your corn flakes, You can hardly be deemed impartial as you are a VB reseller therfore getting money from Mike V. I respect you very much but your opinion on this matter is not without bias. JMHO.

sorry Tom

@ William - A clarification is in order here. I do not receive money from Mike. It is exactly the opposite, Mike receives money from me. Big difference! I am free to sell any product I chose to anyone willing to be my customer.

I pride myself on over-the-top customer service. That's why each one of my customers gets my email and cell phone number so they can contact me when they need me. I answer emails & call on nights and weekends whenever I can.

BTW, I make no claim to be impartial. I am an active VidBlaster reseller, VidBlaster forum moderator, VidBlaster MVP and have even created a weekly live internet broadcast all about VidBlaster. I claim no impartiality. I am definitely a VidBlaster guy. In fact... I am "That VidBlaster Guy!"

Ok....I have said more that I should already....point is Mike V is a Dick@@@@. Fact not opinion....and i am no kid either.....been there done that.....

Ps: Tom, I have to say you sound silly trying to imply you dont make money from Mike.....lol...jeez....you sell his product for more than you pay for it....thats that....Please don't Deem me a fool just because i speak my mind.

This is my last post on this matter...Jeez , how do i get myself into this....

The news are that I've been banned in Vidblaster forum with no reason specified. Of course I know the "secret" reason, I just wrote that IN MY OPINION, Wirecast is better than Vidblaster.

I'm on Team Telestream on this one :)

Wirecast has WAY more compositing power than VidBlaster ever has (3D positioning is one that Spino has already pointed out). I also love the power that CoreImage gives it on the Macintosh version. Also I've never once seen someone be able to do proper lower thirds with VidBlaster? What's the issue?

Also the fact that VidBlaster seems to choke on any thing higher than 640x480 is very off-putting. I want to do full 720P video and Wirecast lets me do it with little resources.

I would like to express my opinion on this matter.

Tom is a guy that's on the up and up. Even thought he is a Vidblaster Reseller and Mod on the forum He is not a cheerleader by any means.

Lets put an end to the hostility. Its one thing to express your opinion and its another to start attacking fellow IAIB Members

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andrewzarian

I would like to express my opinion on this matter.

Tom is a guy that's on the up and up. Even thought he is a Vidblaster Reseller and Mod on the forum He is not a cheerleader by any means.

Lets put an end to the hostility. Its one thing to express your opinion and its another to start attacking fellow IAIB Members

---

I never attacked Tom, I respect him but probably I wasn't the target of your post.

Telestream seems to take a different approach on their forum.
Often times people talk about competing products and why they like them.
There's people who have said why they like VidBlaster, XSplit, Tricaster, interested in Livestream HD500, Blackmagic ATEM.
Telesteam's approach is that this allows them to see how people who have used Wirecast and compared it to other products feel about things. Then Telestream looks at how they can improve Wirecast.
One could say, rather than viewing commentary on other products as hostile, i suspect they see it as sort of a focus group.
In fact, seeing a number of posts explaining why people liked VidBlaster's Virtual Device out might have helped Telestream see the importance of the feature.