Why No Intra-Ship Video Communication?

I've wondered ever since 1987, but have never posted the question for some reason:

Why are there no video communications within the Enterprise on TNG?

In the original series, we often saw video communication within the ship. Sometimes, we saw the cool little monitors, and sometimes we saw someone on a screen and wondered where the camera could be. However, that's a minor point, as we assume that cameras could be located anywhere in the 23rd Century, and might not even look like cameras as we know them.

For the TNG era approximately 85 years after the setting of Star Trek, Roddenberry and the rest of the creative team chose not to have video communications within the ship. They used video to communicate with another ship or planet, etc. But they only communicated via audio within the ship.

I don't recall ever reading anywhere why this decision was taken. Did they feel the 23rd Century monitors looked too awkward for the 24th Century, and couldn't think of a more advanced design? Or, was there another reason?

 

They had intraship video communications in TNG - with guests - and only if they approved.

They had IVC (to abbriviate it) in Voyager (Torres on her way to the sonic shower). It exists. I think it is a matter of privacy. Do you want video com while you´re about to pee (like in Spaceballs) ?

 

On a technical level, it probably wasn't worth the time and trouble to have video communications between characters for ship-board communications when nothing is really gained from it. It's just another step added into the filming and in the post-production work for what benefit? In the 60s such show-making techniques and story-telling devices was probably innovative and new and there was more time to fill for the show's hour. In the 80s? Hardly innovative show-making and less time to tell a story. If you can streamline it by just having an audio communication, then do it.

On an in-universe level we could probably make a similar argument that there's no benefit to a video communication when an audio communication can work just as well. Plus audio communications can happen anywhere in the ship, for a video communication you'd need to go an interface. But there's no point because, again, what do you get out of it?

On a related note, however, one does wonder why more away teams didn't have the video-recording devices like we see were used on a pre-show mission Geordi was on.

 

Yeah... overkill. However, I seem to recall Guinan being patched in through a video feed in one episode. There's probably been a select few other instances. I'm certain they've indicated it's possible, & fairly sure we've seen them do it.

 

Part of Okuda's strategy for the LCARS interface was to simplify essential data as expediently as possible, so the crew could get critical information at a glance. Graphics were not photographic but symbols designed for that clarity and removal of all extraneous information. It makes sense that simpler audio communications would suffice over video, particularly since everyone was connected all the time and the communication was actually pretty seamless.

The thing I always wondered about was how someone could break onto the bridge and start pushing unlabeled buttons to run the ship. Another thing I find quaint is the halting way they go about a verbal information search.

 

I remember one episode where Riker was on an away mission and he was trying to describe what he saw to Picard. I thought "Really? If you had a bodycam Picard could see exactly what you were talking about!"

 

I tend to think that starships in general are video-recording devices and can store images collected from a variety of sources--from its own optical scanners, to images from tricorders & similar devices, to even video logs from compatible computer systems. This was true even in TOS.

On actual away team missions, though, there may be an issue of expediency and more reliability with audio communications, especially over long ranges of more than a few thousand kilometers. In such a case, it would be a rare occasion of a limitation of 24th-Century technology, IMO.

 

Video feed is a pain in the arse. You would need to have both ends near a camera pickup for it to work so autio is much more convenient aka walk n talk.

 

Shouldn't be in the 24th century.

Why not build it into the communicator? Maybe use some fancy technology to track the wearer's eye movements and match the camera to that. You could also disable the video feed when you don't need it.

 

Too many away teams killed while taking "selfies" on mission.

 

In "Heart of Glory", we learned Geordi's VISOR could be equipped with something called a Visual Acuity Transmitter, capable of sending back images and breaking down within five minutes of activation. I suspect the reason we didn't see more of intra-ship video is in those days, each would have been an expensive matte shot. By ENT, they were able to do either live feed or replay from another part of the set onto an actual video monitor.

 

Given the we're talking about intra-ship communications and the communicators are attached to one's chest I'm not sure how its supposed to track one's eye movements.

 

You have to use your imagination! You are thinking in 21st century limitations.

How about some 24th century version of contact lenses that broadcasts whatever the person is looking at to the communicator which transmits it over the video/comm channel. It could even be a microscopic eye implant.

I'm sure someone can think of a dozen ways for it to happen.

 

Tricorders already track everything using invisible magic beams - why not eye movements, too? It's not as if such tracking would call for camera/visual-wavelength/line-of-sight technology specifically.

Also, all shows depicting the taking of pictures or recording of video or whatever suffer from occasional errors as regards viewpoint. But Trek at least has an excuse - future sensor technology could well record "all-round" visuals that can then be replayed from an arbitrary vantage point. And the recording need not involve a single lens anywhere (although we have on occasion seen devices that do feature lenses). For all we know, every Trek visual record is made using VISOR-style multispectral technology, and then played out in "false color", that is, visible light, for user benefit.

Ever since TOS, it would appear that visual records are routinely made of all landing party missions (Spock has video of the Guardian, McCoy has video of the Capellans honing their gardening skills, etc.), and the visual recording device routinely being used is the tricorder. It's just that this is not relayed to the mothership in realtime for some reason or another. Moreover, ship interiors are visually monitored, but that material isn't replayed in realtime to solve whodunnits! Are we perhaps dealing with some sort of a privacy regulation that hobbles Starfleet operations the same way the use of telepathy is hobbled?

Timo Saloniemi

 

The reasons it's a pain don't all have to do with technology. Some of them are just due to the logistics of communication. If it's a situation where seeing the other person is advantageous, like in-depth collaboration and discussion, it's generally better to just be there in person. And for the kind of communication that doesn't require anything more than the quick exchange of simple information, visuals are more data than is really needed and just serve to drag things down.

It's the same reason that we use email even though we have the option of a phone call.

 

Thanks for the interesting posts.

I don't think we can cite the bandwidth required in the 24th C. for video communications. It wasn't a concern in the 23rd C. and it's getting to be a non-issue now in some parts of the developed world.

I think the idea of privacy is a possibility, and I also think the idea that video feedback is just not needed in most cases could be a factor.

However, it sort of seemed like a step back to me. I guess if we did see intra-ship video or landing party (oops - away team) video on TNG, it would soon get tiresome and possibly interfere with the pacing and plot. Most audio communication was very succinct in TNG.

I don't recall reading a real-world explanation for the lack of it in TNG, but I haven't had a chance to browse through my books. It might be there and I've just forgotten about it.

I also miss the holographic images shown floating above the desk in Picard's ready room and the conference room during Seasons 1-2, but that was probably expensive to produce. Having to walk over to the wall in the conference room to push buttons and point to a screen seemed like a big step backwards.

 

I suspect it was all a part of TNG's "technology unchained" design ethic. The communicators were folded into the comm badges, and the comm badges were implied to create some kind of a personal link between the wearer and the ship's computer, which is why the comm badges are tied into the communication system on-board ship (no more needing to hit those little wall panels to talk to each other like in TOS, when now you just need to tap your left nipple instead).

 

With video communications both parties have to stop what they are doing and turn to their monitors to talk. Breaks up the flow of the action with no real benefit.
With TOS video phones were supposed to be 'the wave of the future'- even the Jetson's had then. Made the shows look futuristic...
Now that most cell phones can have this feature the only people I know using it is when they are visiting with somebody close to them who lives far away, not for common communications.

 

Agreed. FaceTime and Skype sounded like cool ideas, but how often does anyone use them? I don't.