Is Jigsaw Trimming the Edges of Webcam Feed or Changing the Resolution?

Have more questions? Submit a request


In some cases, you may notice that Jigsaw is cropping the camera feed or the depth is not what you expect, and would like to know if this is expected.


This is expected for wide or high-end resolution feeds, as the limit was introduced in Jigsaw v5.40 to reduce the overall bandwidth consumption. This makes it easier for students, attendees with mobile devices, and those with less bandwidth to have a better experience.

Our current maximum supported resolution is 1024x768 with an aspect ratio of 4:3 (if using the Jigsaw "Highest" camera quality setting). If the ratio is larger than 4:3, the part that extends past that ratio will be automatically trimmed. Below is a list of currently supported camera resolutions (these are all using a 4:3 ratio):


So, if the User’s resolution is 1920x1080 with an aspect ratio of 16:9 (which is considered HD High Definition and is a cinema/movie aspect ratio), the 16:9 aspect ratio will be the reason the sides are getting cut off.

To mitigate the issue partially, we suggest increasing the camera quality from WebCam Settings menu to “high” (from the session Lading Page or from within the live session). This will force Jigsaw to the highest supported resolution (1024x768). 

Note: If the resolution is higher than 1024x768, it will still be shown at 1024x768, but the camera stream will still take more bandwidth. Ie if someone has an HD, 2K, or 4K camera, and leaves it at this quality, it will still not be seen by others at higher than 1024x768 - but it will use more bandwidth because the original stream isn't changed, only what is being shown to the other participants.

The best practice is to configure the camera settings and choose one of the Jigsaw-supported camera resolutions. This is not required but would decrease the amount of bandwidth the camera is using while in Jigsaw sessions, improving the session experience and traffic consumption.

Articles in this section

Was this article helpful?
0 out of 0 found this helpful