While I had a great time at TAM, I too have to agree with the others above that the A/V and presentation problems were serious, and most frustratingly, entirely avoidable. It's only fair to acknowledge that as far as conferences go TAM is necessarily at the low end of the budget scale in terms of staging, projection, audio and IMAG (the live speaker camera switching). However, some significant improvements can be made with no or minimal increased budget requirements.
Although this was my first TAM, it's clear that it started out as a much smaller show and has gradually grown in scope and scale to the size where it can't be effectively produced in the future using the same methods as in the past. In the beginning the attendees were deeply committed fans and supporters. Production problems and staging issues were not only forgiven but taken to be part of the charm. However, if TAM is to continue to grow, fewer attendees will be "family" and those newcomers will not be as forgiving.
For my part, I'm a strong supporter of skepticism and JREFs goals. I want everything JREF does to be as professional and effective as possible so that newcomers and the media will see how well organized our movement is. It's the same reason that any one of us would be sure to comb our hair and probably not wear shorts and a t-shirt if we got the chance to represent skepticism on TV. There's no doubt that the packaging does impact the credibility of the message. I want our skeptical message to have first rate packaging.
In a previous life, I produced many shows similar to (although larger) than TAM and from both sides (conference organizer & A/V consultant). Based on that experience, I'd say the biggest improvement would be to add a professional conference producer and an on-site stage manager to the team. Today TAM is run by a small, very hard working staff and many wonderful volunteers with great passion and commitment. However, TAM has grown up and needs the experience and specific skills that pros will bring. This is nothing against the great TAM team and volunteers, in fact a professional producer will make all that work go farther and count for more.
None of the problems that TAM is experiencing (ie laptop juggling, audio glitches, screen resizing, uneven stage flow, poor sight lines, feature-length audience questions, bad video playback, etc) are new. In fact, they are par for the course and techniques have been developed to eliminate or mitigate all of these problems. A good example of this is the TED Conference which I frequently attend. It is probably the gold standard in small conference production (~1000 people) and goes ludicrously beyond anything TAM needs to aspire to but it does show just how far the state of the art in conference production has advanced. I'm not making a comparison because TED spends well over a million dollars on their A/V alone, however I still think much can be learned from the best practices employed elsewhere.
For example, it's not a problem to get slides in advance if you inform the speaker in the first invitation letter that, due to the A/V system being used, no outside laptops can be connected and they must supply their slides and videos in advance. The key is getting their agreement long before they are at the point of having to take those extra few minutes to send the slides. If you wait to ask until a month or two before the conference, the chances of getting the slides are almost nil. Of course, speakers can later be informed that changes can be made up to the rehearsal time and the slides can be re-imported then. However, if a problem with importing occurs then the slides/videos sent a week in advance will be used. Coordinating all this requires someone whose job it is to diligently but politely hound all the presenters in the weeks leading up to the conference. 20% to 30% of speakers do their slides on the plane. By creating a situation in which they've agreed as part of accepting the invitation to supply at least a draft a week in advance, you'll find that 20% to 30% of your presentations are 50% better. Sad but true
. If TED can get Bill Clinton, the Dalai Lama and Bono to send their slides in advance - I'll bet we can too.
You may have noticed that strange "R" word in there. Yep, Rehearsal. No conference should ever let any speaker on stage who didn't do a technical rehearsal. That doesn't mean that they have to do their entire talk. What it means is that the morning session speakers show up after dinner the night before and each one does a tech run-through. For most speakers it takes ten minutes or so. The slides, videos, audio and projection are checked for everything that's going to be presented. Afternoon speakers do their run-through during lunch. That alone would have solved 95% of the TAM on-stage problems.
For example, the on-screen sizing problems were due to different sources having different resolutions. Those pro-grade projectors actually have settings that allow them to learn the resolution and scan rate of any computer source and memorize it into a preset. Then the technical director hits those presets when sources change in the show. It's easy but you have to connect each computer during rehearsal in order to grab the setting. More importantly you need to have a producer that will get the presenters to rehearse and a tech director who knows these settings exist. There are literally hundreds of little tricks like this and they add up to a show being top-notch.
An experienced producer or tech director will also be able to help you focus your budget where it will make the most difference. For example, adding on-stage FOH speakers would not have cost much and would have made a world of difference in being able to hear the speakers, and particularly the videos, better. For that size of audience the built-in ballroom speakers simply aren't enough without additional reinforcement.
I sincerely hope that none of the truly wonderful people organizing and volunteering to make TAM happen take any of my humble suggestions the wrong way. I respect and deeply appreciate the many hours of hard work you all devote to this. I'm just offering my experience to help make it even better. I'd be happy to review equipment lists, vendor budget breakdowns and technical plots for TAM 7 and offer suggestions on how to get the most bang for the limited bucks available.
I'm sitting here in the Vegas office of my employer, having just wrapped up the meetings I have here today and tomorrow. I fly back on Wednesday. The Mrs took a redeye home last night, along with a lot of other surpassingly awesome people.
