Chromacam usability

This started popping up at random yesterday. Why can't GoTo get anything right? GoToMeeting is not open (hasn't been for months) and I did not activate ChromaCam. This is super annoying. Chroma Cam is junk software and I am not sure why GoTo thinks it is ok. I have tried to delete chroma cam, but it says it cannot because it is in use. This looks and feels like malware. 

I had one client who was using GoToMeeting for Public Hearings, and now that the Executive Order permitting this is expiring I no longer need to use G2M.  The client is stuck with the balance of the contract, and we had to switch to another platform due to several features being limiting with G2M.

Hopefully, these can be resolved along with the Chromacam integration problems at some point.

ChromaCam is a very poor integration.  It does not work well and often crashes requiring me to restart meetings. AshC When will you realize this does not actually work. Attendees regret installing it and have to deal with the issues as well. Attendees expect this feature to work.

I had an opportunity to test the ChromaCam today, and it was actually for a (vendor's) 3rd-party conferencing App.  I mention this because it appears that it is the ChromaCam App itself, rather than a dependency with GoToMeeting.  The App did not appear to be pulling excessive CPU on my laptop, and it was impacted by the symptoms I had seen previously.  The audio was acceptable, but the video (self-view) was delayed by almost 1 second.  And this was on a 1-to-1 video call, where the previous experience with a G2M of a dozen or so people also appeared to have local audio/video artifacts impacting the remote attendees.  I did upgrade my internet service late last week but have not held a G2M since that took place.  Since the ChromaCam tool is still in Beta-testing, I'm wondering if it is overloaded with "testing hooks"?

That sounds like it's working a little bit better, but I recommend hosting some test broadcasts with all the materials and webcams you plan to incorporate, while recording to the cloud to ensure the playback quality is as expected.

I had to reinstall ChromaCam to test this, and I'm not clear on what the results are telling me.  When ChromaCam is in Preview (no meeting), it is using over 13% CPU.  However, when I start it meeting and select it for Video input (using Meet Now - no participants), it uses less than 1%.  In my work as a meeting facilitator, I need to be confident that the A/V quality is consistent on the cloud recording.  When the A/V starts breaking up during a meeting, I need to take steps to correct the problem.

gwtechllc  The number of participants should not matter for local processing power demands.

I had not checked this specifically, although I did not notice other symptoms of an overtaxed processor.  In order to facilitate testing, would you suppose that a G2M would need to have a similar number of participants (a dozen)?  I just want to clarify the use case.  Thanks for the reply.

gwtechllc  This is more of a local processing issue than bandwidth, unless you're using Chromacam to share video backgrounds or similar, thereby increasing the video f/s demand.  Have you checked your local processing behavior to make sure it is not approaching to 80-100%?