About

Frequently Asked Questions

Why doesn't dev.Objective() record sessions and make them available online?

Whilst this was a goal for us in the early years of the conference, it soon became clear that providing a professional set of session recordings would just be too expensive to justify.

Consider the basic cost and logistics:

  • At least one camera operator / recordist in each of five rooms for all three days (70 sessions)
  • Editing 70 hours of recordings to sync up presentation slides and audio (a substantial task)
  • Provide well-organized online access to the finished recordings

All of that additional cost - professional bids run in the region of $30K for this - would have to be factored into the price of the conference. That would mean increasing the ticket price by over $100. Is it worth over $100 to every attendee to have recordings be available after the event?

One possible way to offset that cost would be to charge for access to the recordings which places a number of extra constraints on how the videos could be made available (hosting site requires access control, paywall, e-commerce functionality, tied into dev.Objective() accounts on the back end).

Given some of comments we hear from attendees (and potential attendees), additional costs - either on the ticket price or for access to the recordings themselves - is going to deter many, and we'll be in a worse position in regards to covering the cost of recordings.

In addition to cost factors - which are substantial - there is also the issue of capturing the live stream of slides / demos for each presenter, which means that either we force speakers to run software on their machine to assist with the capture or we have to tie into the overall A/V system. Both approaches add complexity and the former can be catastrophic for speakers - some conferences have attempted to use Adobe Connect, for example, and even with expert staff on hand for every session, this has caused crashes and interfered with a speaker's ability to run demos - as well as eating into the setup time for each session. With the latter approach - hooking into the overall A/V system - you are generally tied to one vendor for both live A/V and recording, editing, and often hosting too. This precludes any ideas about getting volunteers to record sessions cheaply, or using "A/V on the side" community member companies - unless they can undertake the entire A/V service.

But XYZ small, cheap conference manages to do this - why can't you?

Small, cheap conferences have fewer tracks and therefore need fewer people to deal with recordings and have greatly reduced editing demands due to fewer sessions. The much lower costs behind such conferences allow organizers more flexibility in terms of creative funding allocation to support small, cheap A/V operations too. Finally, attendees at small, cheap conferences also have much lower expectations over the quality of the end product and will accept a basic video of the presenter / projection screen posted to Vimeo!

Well ABC large, expensive conference manages to do this - and you're an "enterprise" conference so why can't you?

Those conferences have a lot more money coming in from sponsorship! They have several large companies paying tens of thousands of dollars. They will often find a sponsor who will cover the entire A/V cost, including recordings, editing, etc - which, as seen above, can easily be tens of thousands of dollars value on its own. dev.Objective() has a small number of sponsors at reasonable levels of contribution so that's just not possible.