If you’re considering live-streaming at your church, YouTube and Facebook immediately spring to mind as options. Perhaps you’ve even opened one of those apps to start a live-stream. Maybe you don’t even know of other options or why you’d want to move. To get more news about moonlive, you can visit official website.

That’s the purpose of this article, to talk about the pluses and minuses of each, and maybe introduce you to options that could be better for your church.A big advantage of this app is that you probably already have it. In both the iOS and Android versions, you can get started just by clicking on the camera icon in the top of the app, giving permission to the app to use the camera, and then tapping “Go live.”

Another advantage is that it’s a free app. Some of the others in this list have one-time or even monthly charges, or they might require equipment that you may or may not want to or be able to buy.

Since YouTube is already a popular site, there is an advantage to being live there. The algorithm likes live-streaming and you might get a fair amount of traffic that you wouldn’t normally get.
2-Facebook

Adding a live-video is pretty simple, as well. Just create a new post (on your profile, page, or in a group) and click on the live video icon. Then, it’s just a matter of naming it and starting.

Like YouTube there are issues with their enforcement of copyright claims, which you might face despite having a license or even despite the fact that you’re not using copyright content (several churches recently had their countdown videos claimed by a large international sports organization, through an algorithmic mistake). Both Facebook and YouTube make live-streaming easy, but do so at the cost of features, too. You won’t be cutting between real (or virtual) camera angles or even putting in lower thirds and full-screen graphics with these two. Your live-stream is mostly relegated to what your smart phone can shoot and, in most cases, that might be beautiful video within a limited focal length, but without the ability to zoom.

3-Mevo

Unlike YouTube and Facebook, it’s not limited to your phone’s camera, but uses an external camera that you control with the app. The camera boasts 4k resolution, but you’re not likely going to be live-streaming in 4k. Instead, you’ll be showing different parts of the frame at different times to simulate using multiple cameras, when you only have one.

The original Mevo was designed with the small producer in mind and so the focal length was wider than churches with medium to large worship spaces could use … unless they moved the Mevo closer to the front of the room, something many are hard-pressed to do.While paid services have their cost as a disadvantage, some of the problems with YouTube and Facebook are missing. They don’t make as much money from ads, so they are less motivated to placate advertisers and since they’re a much smaller service, they don’t have as much trouble with big media companies breathing down their necks, claiming copyright infringement (when none exists).

4-Teradek apps

Next, we have an app (or two) from Teradek. As you might know, Teradek makes hardware encoders like the Vidiu and Cube. What you might not know is that the Vidiu can be both an encoder and a capture device that can enable any camera to joined by an app called Live: Air Action on a virtual network of other cameras onsite. With Live: Air Action you can have multiple cameras that you can switch to, using a switcher-like interface. You can also go to prerecorded videos and even add lower thirds and other graphical elements, while live-streaming to YouTube, Facebook, or any RTMP server.