LSP & Smart String Controllers

[mmulvenna]

So I could take a single 128 node SS (call it SS#1), and say I determine that I can install them onto a mini megatree as up1,down1,up2,down2 segments.

In that example, I could lay them up in LSP SS1-up1 (1-32 RGB channels)., SS1-down1 (33-64 RGB channels), SS1-up2, and SS1-down2 ... and then LSP could
treat each of those segment (SS controller segments) like individual 32 channel/node RGB strings  (96 channels) ?

Yep, with the correction below pretty cool huh....  or create 4 different layers and do the same thing with only one controller defined

controller 1 would be 1-96
controller2 would be 97-192 etc



Making a video to show it and will post later

[dmoore]

So I could take a single 128 node SS (call it SS#1), and say I determine that I can install them onto a mini megatree as up1,down1,up2,down2 segments.

In that example, I could lay them up in LSP SS1-up1 (1-32 RGB channels)., SS1-down1 (33-64 RGB channels), SS1-up2, and SS1-down2 ... and then LSP could
treat each of those segment (SS controller segments) like individual 32 channel/node RGB strings  (96 channels) ?

That is a possible method that would work fine – to break the “physical” SS controller into four LSP controllers.  Yes… here is the math at the DMX channel level:
 
Controller 1:  1-96 DMX Channels
Controller 2:  97-192 DMX Channels
Controller 3: 193-288 DMX Channels
Controller 4: 289-384 DMX Channels

On issue you should be aware of with a solution like that (unrelated to LSP) is that when you come back down from the second string, if you have more than ~3.5 gap between them at the bottom, you’ll lose a few pixels.  So, within LSP you would need to cut out, say, 3-12 channels between the 2nd and 3rd string.  I’d think losing four pixels (12 DMX channels) would work best since then you’d maintain your even count of pixels going up and down each string (124 total, 31 pixels per vertical run).  Also setting each “string” of the megatree on a separate controller would make manual programming easier.


Of course you could also splice in a jumper.

[taybrynn]

Thanks, I'm really loving those possibilities.  Loosing 4 pixels would be fine.

[mmulvenna]

Video is uploading will post soon in about 40 minutes when it is uploaded.

[mmulvenna]

Here is the video You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login that I made using the current release of LightSHowPro.

It shows 1 physiclal smart string controller of 128 nodes configured as 4 logical controllers in LSP using the example given by taybrynn in his post above

nodes 1-32  are installed as "Upstring 1"
nodes 33-64 are installed as "Downstring 1 "
nodes 64-96 are installed as "Upstring 2"
nodes 97-128 are installed as "Downstring 2"

The example shows how you only need to configure the SSC as "node based" and not "hybrid" or "String Base".
LSP will handle the "Hybrid" of "String base" as shown in the video

Hope that helps some.

[taybrynn]

Thank you!!  That is great.  Thanks for show how easy it is to do in LSP.

[mmulvenna]

Thank you!!  That is great.  Thanks for show how easy it is to do in LSP.

Anytime, always glad to help. As I am retired I have lots of time to make videos like that so feel free to ask.
Also make sure to check out the videos that are posted in The Tips and Tricks in LSP which should help reduce with the learning curve.

[dmoore]

Here is the video You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login that I made using the current release of LightSHowPro.

You know, I now see a second reason why to break them into separate controllers - as shown in the video, it goes:

Bottom to Top 1:  1-96 DMX channels
Top to Bottom 1:  97-192 DMX channels
Bottom to Top 2:  193-288 DMX channels
Top to bottom 2: 289-384 DMX channels

Be aware that in the video it shows in the visualizer that "bottom to top 1" is being drawn top to bottom as is "Bottom to top 2".  You will need to match the direction of the controller output (which matters in pixels) in the “real world” to what is reflected in the visualizer.  Using this up, then down solution, while it reduces controllers, it will make manual sequencing a bit more complicated (unless some hardware macro was created or change in sequencing software occurred).  So, say you want to make your entire tree go from red to green, top to bottom and you were not using transitions, you would need to know that string 1 bottom to top would be sequenced backwards – that is it would start out (on the timing grid) with green fading into red but on the string 1 top to bottom, you would need to have red fading into green since it would be going from the top down.

With transitions, assuming you’ve drawn your pixels in the proper direction that matches the physical DMX channel layout, is really a no-brainer but if you are sequencing manually, it would require some mental gymnastics to keep all that in mind.  I’d argue that this is where auto-sequencing really comes to the rescue but for those manually manipulating these it would seem the sequencing software could have a “reverse” channel order (not sure if LSP has this…heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if it already does…).  Of course most pixel controllers have a reverse but it applies to the entire string or output, not part-way through the string  - so pixels 1-32 (up) are channels 1-96 and pixels 33-64 (down) are channels 192-97.

[taybrynn]

Great observations.  It would be nice if each controller could just reverse the (top to bottom) channel order shown/used (for a controller), so that channels 1->32 could also be listed as 32->1 .  Then as long as you broke up the string into 4 controller and flipped a couple of them, it would all work out (via. the software) .

Also, I noticed that when I collapse each of those 4 controllers, that I would think I could apply effects to those 4, like I could to 4 different channels.  But in LSP, its not working that way.  When I try to say create a chase across those 4 as the controller level, it just put the chase into the first channels of the first controller, not the range of 4 controllers selected.  Very unpredictable behavior.

Again, when I collapse the 4 controllers, to show as 4 lines (like channel) ... and while if I put an on event on all 4, it works for all 4 ... but I try so do a solid color chase across all four (like spinning the green on a megatree, across 4 sections) ... it doesn't work the same way, just puts chases into the first (n) channels on the first controller, even though they are all collapsed. 

[mmulvenna]

Here is the video You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login that I made using the current release of LightSHowPro.

You know, I now see a second reason why to break them into separate controllers - as shown in the video, it goes:

Bottom to Top 1:  1-96 DMX channels
Top to Bottom 1:  97-192 DMX channels
Bottom to Top 2:  193-288 DMX channels
Top to bottom 2: 289-384 DMX channels

Be aware that in the video it shows in the visualizer that "bottom to top 1" is being drawn top to bottom as is "Bottom to top 2".  You will need to match the direction of the controller output (which matters in pixels) in the “real world” to what is reflected in the visualizer.  Using this up, then down solution, while it reduces controllers, it will make manual sequencing a bit more complicated (unless some hardware macro was created or change in sequencing software occurred).  So, say you want to make your entire tree go from red to green, top to bottom and you were not using transitions, you would need to know that string 1 bottom to top would be sequenced backwards – that is it would start out (on the timing grid) with green fading into red but on the string 1 top to bottom, you would need to have red fading into green since it would be going from the top down.

With transitions, assuming you’ve drawn your pixels in the proper direction that matches the physical DMX channel layout, is really a no-brainer but if you are sequencing manually, it would require some mental gymnastics to keep all that in mind.  I’d argue that this is where auto-sequencing really comes to the rescue but for those manually manipulating these it would seem the sequencing software could have a “reverse” channel order (not sure if LSP has this…heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if it already does…).  Of course most pixel controllers have a reverse but it applies to the entire string or output, not part-way through the string  - so pixels 1-32 (up) are channels 1-96 and pixels 33-64 (down) are channels 192-97.

David is absolutely correct and I apologize for not pointing that out. All you need to do is check the "Reverse order" check box when you draw the element.

[dmoore]

Also, I noticed that when I collapse each of those 4 controllers, that I would think I could apply effects to those 4, like I could to 4 different channels.  But in LSP, its not working that way.  When I try to say create a chase across those 4 as the controller level, it just put the chase into the first channels of the first controller, not the range of 4 controllers selected.  Very unpredictable behavior.

Again, when I collapse the 4 controllers, to show as 4 lines (like channel) ... and while if I put an on event on all 4, it works for all 4 ... but I try so do a solid color chase across all four (like spinning the green on a megatree, across 4 sections) ... it doesn't work the same way, just puts chases into the first (n) channels on the first controller, even though they are all collapsed.  

Are you trying what Mike did in his video (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login) starting at 6:00?  You shouldn’t have any problem applying effects to the entire controller.  Now if you apply a chase across four collapsed controllers, it is not going to make the chase occur across all four controllers – this is where and object oriented sequencing application would apply (such as with transitions).  So, this isn’t unpredictable behavior – it’s just not the behavior are expecting from it – I’m sure it will predictable do that each time you apply the effect.  Now if you apply a fade across all four collapsed controllers, you will be fine since there is no controller to controller relationship like there is with a chase.

[mmulvenna]

Great observations.  It would be nice if each controller could just reverse the (top to bottom) channel order shown/used (for a controller), so that channels 1->32 could also be listed as 32->1 .  Then as long as you broke up the string into 4 controller and flipped a couple of them, it would all work out (via. the software) .

Also, I noticed that when I collapse each of those 4 controllers, that I would think I could apply effects to those 4, like I could to 4 different channels.  But in LSP, its not working that way.  When I try to say create a chase across those 4 as the controller level, it just put the chase into the first channels of the first controller, not the range of 4 controllers selected.  Very unpredictable behavior.

Again, when I collapse the 4 controllers, to show as 4 lines (like channel) ... and while if I put an on event on all 4, it works for all 4 ... but I try so do a solid color chase across all four (like spinning the green on a megatree, across 4 sections) ... it doesn't work the same way, just puts chases into the first (n) channels on the first controller, even though they are all collapsed.  

David is absolutely correct in his post about the viz drawing and I apologize for not pointing that out. All you need to do is check the "Reverse order" check box when you draw the element..

Also here is a video doing a chase across multiple collapsed controllers. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login The video is using very small channel counts so it could be that your chase issues is related to the number of channels.

EDIT: Just tried the chase with 4 128 channel controllers, collapsed them,put a chase across the controllers and it work the same as the above video shows. Not sure why it is not working for you? Can you make a video of the process?

[taybrynn]

Again, I really think that if I apply an ON, or FADE-UP, or FADE-DOWN across four collapsed controllers ... I don't see why its different when I do a CHAS across those four collapsed controllers.  The reason I collapsed them is because I wanted a different level of control over them.

If I wanted the chase to just go into the first 4 channels of the first collapsed controller (as its doing), I would have expanded it and selected that range and done the chase there.  Since I collapsed it and selected the 4 collapsed controllers, I find it illogical that it would chase only into the First 4 channel of controller1, when doing the same on other effects would apply to all channels within all four collapsed controllers.

I just think if we are limited to object oriented operations on all four collapsed controllers, then don't let me do a chase on the four, and produce such illogical results.

[mmulvenna]

Again, I really think that if I apply an ON, or FADE-UP, or FADE-DOWN across four collapsed controllers ... I don't see why its different when I do a CHAS across those four collapsed controllers.  The reason I collapsed them is because I wanted a different level of control over them.

If I wanted the chase to just go into the first 4 channels of the first collapsed controller (as its doing), I would have expanded it and selected that range and done the chase there.  Since I collapsed it and selected the 4 collapsed controllers, I find it illogical that it would chase only into the First 4 channel of controller1, when doing the same on other effects would apply to all channels within all four collapsed controllers.

I just think if we are limited to object oriented operations on all four collapsed controllers, then don't let me do a chase on the four, and produce such illogical results.

Sorry but my old brain still does understand as In the video It appears to me to be operating correctly. What am I missing that it is not working for you?

If I do an on or fade in the first "x" channels across 3 collapsed controllers, that efffect appears in all "x" channels in each controller, correct?

If I do the same thing with a chase across "x" channels across 4 collapsed controllers, the chase goes into the first " x" channels of controller 1 skips the remaining channels on controller 1, then proceeds to controller 2 picking up the chase where controller 1 left off.

Is it that you want to chase "string mode" from controller 1, to 2, to 3 and so on? Maybe that is what I am missing and if so, then that is one reason for using a "hybrid". You could then put the hybrid channels on a layer and chase across them.


Am I just rambling or does this make sense?

[taybrynn]

Sorry but my old brain still does understand as In the video It appears to me to be operating correctly. What am I missing that it is not working for you?

If I do an on or fade in the first "x" channels across 3 collapsed controllers, that effect appears in all "x" channels in each controller, correct?  YES, CORRECT, you FADE on the collapsed channel, and all channels in the collapsed controllers will fade exactly the same (like a 32 RGB channel paste into each of the four collapsed controllers)

If I do the same thing with a chase across "x" channels across 4 collapsed controllers, the chase goes into the first " x" channels of controller 1 skips the remaining channels on controller 1, then proceeds to controller 2 picking up the chase where controller 1 left off.  Again, I'm thinking I'm working at the collapsed level now, so anything I do should apply as if these were just 4 RGB channels, regardless of how many RGB channels are underneath each collapsed controller.

Is it that you want to chase "string mode" from controller 1, to 2, to 3 and so on? Maybe that is what I am missing and if so, then that is one reason for using a "hybrid". You could then put the hybrid channels on a layer and chase across them. YES, thats what I want to do.  To me, partitioning the SS CNTLR into 4 controllers in LSP (thank you very much, BTW)  allows these channels to be treated like 4 RGB channels (when collapsed).  So chasing into the first (x) channels isn't consistent with how I'd expect it to work, since when collapsed, I'm working at a totally different level of abstraction, then when they are expanded.


Am I just rambling or does this make sense?  no, you make perfect sense.  I just think that I'm trying to convey that by collapsing these controllers, yes, I expect them to work differently, because I want to sequence them just like 4 RGB channels, not try to read my mind and work one way during a chase and another way for a FADE or ON ... which already works as expected.  Thats why I'm saying its inconsistent.  Hopefully you can understand what I'm seeking here.