User`s guide

5.4 Response
Since the partial upgrading of the videoconferencing system, more use has been made of it. Recently,
the weekly computer science seminars have been displayed to the other campus via the video wall.
A number of meetings have also taken place over the video wall.
The response to the videoconferenced seminars has generally been good. At least one minor
problem has been identified when videoconferencing the seminars. The seminars at Clayton are not
held at the opposite end of the room to the video wall. This means that there are no people at
the video wall end of the room, and thus the motion detector sends commands to the projector
to switch itself off. This leaves the presenter with no view of the audience at Caulfield. If the
videoconferencing reciprocity software had been installed, it could have been disabled during this
time, and those problems wouldn’t have occurred.
The camera used for the videoconferenced seminars was a typical video camera sitting on a tripod,
not the camera set in the video wall. This has been controlled by hand to follow the presenter, to
zoom in on him/her when he/she is speaking, and to zoom out when he/she is referring to a slide.
This is a simple instance of how the camera control could be used in a meeting or group discussion.
There have also been occasions where the infra-red tunnelling application would have been useful.
In one case, a guest speaker was talking to a staff member over the video wall. The staff member
remarked that if infra-red data could be transmitted through the video wall, then they could swap
contact details using their PalmPilots.
Informal conversation among various members of staff and students regarding the new features
has been positive. Students in particular are interested in the new features, which have generated
interest in the video wall. Some students have also taken part in discussions over the video wall.
Several suggestions have been made, some of which have been incorporated in Section 6.2 below.
26