Top 10 D3 Video?

[PaulNewman]

Very frustrating to anticipate a great game and get poor quality video.  There is the freezing and buffering, but some video also is just noticeably much clearer than others?  Is this a function of the provider, or the equipment used by each school, or what?  For the schools that have mediocre video quality what it is that they are lacking?  Anyway, thought it might be interesting to get opinions on those that are the best and those that are the worst. 

I watched some of Calvin vs. Kzoo last night (great game btw) and the Kzoo video was outstanding.  I caught some of Lynchburg vs Roanoke and Roanoke's camera is too far from the field but they had good graphics and 2 older gentlemen as commentators who were entertaining especially with their clearly Southern accents.  Wheaton (Ill) is great.  OWU is usually pretty good (although video was not available for Kenyon game).  Oberlin has good video.  I've heard RPI is great.  Most of the NESCACs are OK, although with Tufts you will get to a key part of the game and then keep getting taken back to the beginning of the game with no apparent way to get back LIVE. 

[madzillagd]

I believe there are 9 teams that are now all using Northeast Sports Network as their webcast company including Williams, Bowdoin, and Midd.  I would not be surprised if we see more schools going that route as this is becoming almost a requirement for schools to have.  For Williams I know it's a definite step up in quality over previous years where they didn't have a pro broadcaster, no screen graphics and the visual feed was not very good.  That being said, they still have had problems on occasion keeping the feed up and/or in one case they broadcast truck went to the wrong location. 

I think the main factor in these broadcasts is the bandwidth they have to get their signal out.  If the are functioning off a school network that isn't dedicated to such endeavor you're bound to have problems with so much data to push out.  I think with the broadcast companies, they are relying on their own equipment to do the heavy lifting so there's a much better chance of getting a consistent feed from a game.   

[KICKIN95]

I like the Loras broadcast as much for the commentary as the video feed.  The commentator for Loras does an exceptional job and you would be hard pressed to find a more unbiased commentary.  The camera used has more to do with the picture quality than anything.  The feed can be an issue if the provider doesn't provide enough ban width, but most of the time this isn't the case.  One of the MIAC schools ( I think Carleton) uses 2 cameras and one is an HD that is very impressive.  My biggest gripe about the video streaming is when a school (namely UW-Oshkosh) charges $8 to watch a DIII match.  It was bad enough paying for it, but to add insult to injury the feed, cameras, and commentary were probably the worst quality I have seen in 3 years.  DIII sports aren't supposed to be the big revenue generators like in the DI schools and to charge money let alone $8 is against everything DIII sports are about.  One other school I like to watch for their feed is Wheaton (IL), their cameras are pretty good and they have two commentators (that are extremely biased, but used to it after 6 years) but all in all it is a good feed to watch.

[repete]

Carleton's HD feed is the best I've seen in any d3 sport.  I can run it via Chromecast to the man cave big screen and it's decent. Some nice replays. Soccer is better than fb because the fb play by play guy is a horrible homer who thinks Rose "blooming" puns are Emmy Award-winning material.

[ldahoSoccer]

I like the Loras broadcast as much for the commentary as the video feed.  The commentator for Loras does an exceptional job and you would be hard pressed to find a more unbiased commentary.  The camera used has more to do with the picture quality than anything.  The feed can be an issue if the provider doesn't provide enough ban width, but most of the time this isn't the case.  One of the MIAC schools ( I think Carleton) uses 2 cameras and one is an HD that is very impressive.  My biggest gripe about the video streaming is when a school (namely UW-Oshkosh) charges $8 to watch a DIII match.  It was bad enough paying for it, but to add insult to injury the feed, cameras, and commentary were probably the worst quality I have seen in 3 years.  DIII sports aren't supposed to be the big revenue generators like in the DI schools and to charge money let alone $8 is against everything DIII sports are about.  One other school I like to watch for their feed is Wheaton (IL), their cameras are pretty good and they have two commentators (that are extremely biased, but used to it after 6 years) but all in all it is a good feed to watch.

The Loras commentator is very good.  As Kickin mentioned, one of his best attributes is his lack of bias.  Wheaton also does a great job, but the announcers are biased and do not possess an in depth knowledge of soccer.  I am not against charging for online broadcasts, but it should be above and beyond the norm.  On the other hand, you do not want to drive away your alumni base. 

Does anyone know the cost of an HD camera?

[GarbageGoals33]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+much+does+an+HD+video+camera+cost%3F+%20%23gogusties

See attached link. 

[KICKIN95]

I like the Loras broadcast as much for the commentary as the video feed.  The commentator for Loras does an exceptional job and you would be hard pressed to find a more unbiased commentary.  The camera used has more to do with the picture quality than anything.  The feed can be an issue if the provider doesn't provide enough ban width, but most of the time this isn't the case.  One of the MIAC schools ( I think Carleton) uses 2 cameras and one is an HD that is very impressive.  My biggest gripe about the video streaming is when a school (namely UW-Oshkosh) charges $8 to watch a DIII match.  It was bad enough paying for it, but to add insult to injury the feed, cameras, and commentary were probably the worst quality I have seen in 3 years.  DIII sports aren't supposed to be the big revenue generators like in the DI schools and to charge money let alone $8 is against everything DIII sports are about.  One other school I like to watch for their feed is Wheaton (IL), their cameras are pretty good and they have two commentators (that are extremely biased, but used to it after 6 years) but all in all it is a good feed to watch.

The Loras commentator is very good.  As Kickin mentioned, one of his best attributes is his lack of bias.  Wheaton also does a great job, but the announcers are biased and do not possess an in depth knowledge of soccer.  I am not against charging for online broadcasts, but it should be above and beyond the norm.  On the other hand, you do not want to drive away your alumni base. 

Does anyone know the cost of an HD camera?

$3500-$8000 for a decent camera that would work well in these circumstances.

[KICKIN95]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+much+does+an+HD+video+camera+cost%3F+%20%23gogusties

See attached link.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

[njf1003]

I might be slightly biased, but F&M's feeds are really good when they don't have football the same day!

[Sirius90]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+much+does+an+HD+video+camera+cost%3F+%20%23gogusties

See attached link.

Well played, sir. I now have a new tool in my internet box.