I'd expect people to have the camera on in a discussion they are actively participating in. If it's an all hands meeting or something I don't think it's fair to make people sit there on camera.

Edit: I guess I should add though, I have never encountered a problem with the former situation, ie never been in a small discussion where anything is weird or we miss something because someone's camera is off. I have been in the latter situation, where people were told they have to sit and watch hours of administrative or "vision" type presentations and keep their camera on.

There hopefully is software that can emulate a very attentive image of yourself. I think if rules get stricter the demand would increase. Perhaps at some point it can even emulate clothing, some facial movements and make yourself clap in longer pauses.

I don't like being on camera and I'd wager many (if not most) people don't. We do it because we have to, not because we want to.

And I don't have to because I don't work with clients or take roles in which me being on camera for more than 5 minutes during the entire duration of the role is a requirement.

Between voice and screen sharing, we can handle all business without monitoring each other's 2-dimensional faces.

Perhaps I'm vain, but I like to be on the camera during meetings. It's that one little extra iota of personalization. So I'm speaking to my team's faces, and vice versa, instead of just speaking to coloured circles with letters in them.

I don't begrudge others to have their cameras on, but if someone else has it on, I'll turn mine on.

For me, it depends on the meeting. For discussions with the same people I talk to every day, when none of us prefer camera, we typically don’t. In a 1:1, I do. In a meeting with another team, I do. I find having my camera on to be taxing, and I’m not always exactly looking fresh and clean and shaved for work. Often wearing the same clothes I wore yesterday. Often sitting in a messy office. The focus is on work, not optics during conversations generally.

It can help with creating the “I’m a person not an entity on a computer” perception. I went remote only with Covid and I occasionally turn my camera on but I’m well familiar with my team, we meet up and have lunch occasionally, so they know me well. If you’re a newer addition I’d say it’s a good idea but you don’t really need to feel compelled after that point unless you want to.

If you are in a small meeting where you are an active participant (daily standup, sprint planning/retrospective, design meetings and basically any activity that involves your direct team) then it is only polite to have your camera on. That said asking people to turn on their camera is also impolite and not something I would argue for.

If you are in an all hands type of meeting or some other very large meeting where you are just listening passively (while doing other work in the background) then it is okay to have the camera turned off.

I always have my camera on for the former type of meetings but only occasionally for the later. That seems to be an unwritten convention based on what I've observed... at-least at the company where I work.

> That said asking people to turn on their camera is also impolite and not something I would argue for.

What's the best way to decline if someone requests you turn your camera?

The question title is different than the post.

Should you turn your camera on?

It’s up to you. Generally I think people like to see that each other’s expressions.

Should you stipulate someone else turn their camera on?

Etiquette not withstanding, only if you made it a requirement in the job description.

I run an agency. My guidance is camera on for first calls with someone, off every other time. Screenshare should be on 98% of the time anyway.

I like being on camera in fact I run it often when I am at the office alone to use as a mirror because otherwise my hair might be poofed up with static electricity and then I go out and scare people without trying.

My trouble is that webcams don’t last long for me, my laptops have defective USB 3.0 ports. I think someday I want to set up a mini tv studio at home but never get around to it.

Personally, for weekly all-hands meetings, I turn camera on. It's my own way of "being there" or being "visually present" at least once each week.

For most other chats, or daily stand ups, camera off. But, on that matter, I would encourage you to have a decent photo in lieu of the default user avatar.

In general I feel like we need richer and more informal ways of communicating than camera-conscious fatigue inducing video chat.

If the goal is to “build rapport” or “read subtleties in body language” - it seems other ways of interacting or opening up “extra channels” of info might be less stressful. And this could be a ripe place for experimentation.

Some things that have developed to close this gap:

- richer and richer emoji usage in chat?!?

- ad hoc audio features like slacks huddles. No pressure to appear on camera and no awkward pressure to fill a 30 min block.

- just general shitposting!?

- team metaverse style in browser games!?

These are initial, lame ideas. But they I think are all trying to solve this problem unconsciously.

Random longbet: in 10 years being on a video call with camera on, looking nice, paying attention, with the perfect office in the background will seem like stiff formalwear.

I go along with what the other people are doing. If most of them have cameras on, that's what I do to - if they're off, I'm off too. I'm non-judgmental about anyone's preferences one way or the other and accept people for who they are. Times that I tend to turn my camera on, regardless of what anyone else is doing is when I meet a person for the first time or need to interact with customers or other organizations outside of where I'm working.

I've been remote for quite some time now. For run of the mill discussions with 2-3 people, I generally keep my camera off and would be annoyed if someone asked me to turn it on. I've also set an expectation that for impromptu discussion I'll be wherever I want to be and dressed however I want to be dressed.

But there are times when it's helpful, and I think it's appropriate for more structured meetings. I think a blanket policy either way would be a mistake.

I work remotely and I've decided that ON is the right choice for me. I made this choice when I started joining a lot of calls where they had to be in English because of me. I figured camera on was a good way to show I was paying attention.

However one of the perks of being a male is that society only ever expects me to take a shower to be presentable. So I'm totally cool if a colleague wants to leave the camera off even if it's a 1 on 1.

I feel it is something that people need to decide for themselves, and everyone else should respect their decision. There are non-verbal cues that can be gained from cameras if you are in a small group. But there is no point on large groups. And we rarely turned them on for one-on-one calls.

The best approach is just to talk about it with your team, and choose your own culture.

Being remote only decreases the human aspect of work a lot and makes your perception of your colleagues as unidimensional (they are whatever you make out of the text they write in a PR or a document) and not having camera on makes all this even worse. It depersonalizes work relationships.

I think the culture in my team has evolved to be camera off. Part of that is fuelled by poor bandwidth for certain people. We turn it on for certain events, as it adds an awkwardness when everyone is both cam off and muted, and you can't tell if they're laughing at your jokes.

My team, and myself, turn it on for conversations where everyone is participating. So a small team huddle (3-5 people) has cameras on. Bunch of slides and a bigger audience? Cameras off. In reality, it is dictated by your team or organization culture.

I think you should for the same reason that I find it rude to wear sunglasses indoors. Basically if you want to engage with me I want you to be fully engaged: eyes, face, voice.

There are pros and cons to both. It shouldn't be a requirement but there are times when it makes sense. If you're having a bad hair day or maybe haven't showered or properly dressed, leaving the camera off is advised.

Our team of developers has been “cameras off” from the start, and thank $DEITY for that. We can’t always escape it when we have to get on a call with sales guys or executives though.

Much of communication is non-verbal. Why not increase the bandwidth of person-to-person communication?

This is commonly cited, but I wonder if anybody has studied how much communication happens by voice and screenshare, and whether there's a net loss compared to face-to-face.

I get all my work communication done through voice and shared files. Am I missing information that would otherwise be encoded in implicit facial expressions? Or in the absence of faces, is that being conveyed to me anyway, through voice and explicit verbal means?

There are many studies that look at communication comprehension and retention for where you can see the speaker's face vs. where you cannot.

The results are unsurprising. Being able to see the speaker's face improves comprehension. People rely so heavily on visual information to decode speech that there's a phenomenon known as the McGurk effect; if you set up an experimental rig so the brain receives visual information suggesting one sound but auditory information suggesting another, the visual information often takes priority over what was heard in decoding the speech.

(As someone hearing impaired, this is, pardon the pun, blindingly obvious to me. Sometimes, whether I can understand the words of a talking head on TV depends entirely on whether I look at them or not. But hearing people rely on lipreading too. From what I've read, usually far more than they're aware.)

I’ve never seen a good study. I’m sure you’ve seen that the old “70% of communication is nonverbal” canard is based on a game of telephone through a few articles and studies. But surely you’ve seen a person’s face communicate something different than what their voice is telling you? The more often you see someone’s face, the more you can pick up, too.

I only turn it on for my boss and some from the business side.

no it's stupid, i dont care about what you look like

lol, no. I have electrical tape over that

All hands: no Everything else: yes

It's rude otherwise. I don't like attention so much that I only have a few pictures of myself as a child, none as an adult. But you have to put your preferences aside when it comes to business and be professional.

We had someone join our team and in every team meeting they would have their camera turned off while the rest of us had it on. I felt like they weren't part of the team, I could barely remember their face from the interview. Far from the eyes, far from the heart. So when the probation review came I gave them a thumb down, turns out others had the same experience and that person was gone.

You wouldn't hide yourself in the toilet and eavesdrop a meeting if you were in the office. This isn't something that needs "adding to the contract". That's so far from common sense that it hurts me physically reading such comments.

There is a difference in sales teams and technical ones. I don't even have a camera at home and I think it will stay that way. If you have a problem with that please don't call me.

For external workers rules are a bit different, but within the company I don't really want to see people, waste of bandwidth. We have our pictures tied to our accounts anyway.

Team meetings with cams are mostly a waste of time, in productive ones someone is probably sharing their screen anyway.

I do like to work in my underpants from time to time but I understand that some people need to be professional. I believe some expectations are rude.

There's being professional and unprofessional in a business environment. Those are the only two choices you have.