DiyLightAnimation
Hardware => Lynx Smart String => Topic started by: batdive on November 25, 2011,
-
RJ -
Hate to add more to your already full plate, but did you put out a Pixelnet plug in for Vix 2.5.x? I use 2.5.0.8 to run my show and just thought of this as I went to test a couple of sequences.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
-JS
-
If you install version 2, then the pixelnet plugin, then upgrade to 2.5 ... then it'll work. If you have 2.5 you can't install the plugin ... I think.
-
You mean have 2.1 set up with the pixel net plugin and run prepare?
-JS
-
If you install version 2, then the pixelnet plugin, then upgrade to 2.5 ... then it'll work. If you have 2.5 you can't install the plugin ... I think.
Yeah the prepare only upgrades the sequences and profile files. Still need a 2.5 specific plug in for PixelNet
-
Yeah I need a 2.5 plugin also.
Didn't want to bug RJ over Thanksgiving, i knew he was busy.
I am more than willing to do the work myself.
Just need access to the source,which I will gladly delete after making the upgrade if he wishes to keep it closed source.
-
I haven't used Vixen much, but pixelnet works on 2.5 for me ... and its the 2.0 plugin I'm using. Maybe I don't understand the problem well enough. Are you compiling?
-
Someone try this, no promises I do not even have 2.5 running on my machine to try.
RJ
-
Has anyone give this a try? Let me know if it works.
RJ
-
Has anyone give this a try? Let me know if it works.
RJ
Is there one for 3.0? I'm planning on starting sequencing some pixelnet elements tonight and i thought i'd just jump right into 3.0.
-Paul
-
Has anyone give this a try? Let me know if it works.
RJ
Is there one for 3.0? I'm planning on starting sequencing some pixelnet elements tonight and i thought i'd just jump right into 3.0.
-Paul
Too funny
3.0 is in beta and currently only supports Renard boards.
Rick R.
-
Is there one for 3.0? I'm planning on starting sequencing some pixelnet elements tonight and i thought i'd just jump right into 3.0.
-Paul
You have got to be kidding. Way to early for anything like that
-
Is there one for 3.0? I'm planning on starting sequencing some pixelnet elements tonight and i thought i'd just jump right into 3.0.
-Paul
You have got to be kidding. Way to early for anything like that
Depends on how close RJ and KC have been collaborating.. <pop..
-
Will try soon.
-
So it does appear to work, although techinically i just tested the DMX out of the hub, as my smart string are off for the night.
-
So it does appear to work, although techinically i just tested the DMX out of the hub, as my smart string are off for the night.
It is all the same data to the hub so that should be definitive enough.
I like the rest of the non renard developers had no info on vixen 3.0 till now so renard is all there is for it at the moment. If/when I get some time I will look at it, but the priority at the moment is getting the output working from Vixen 2 / LSP / LOR for the conductor so we can beta test it. Then I will go from there.
RJ
-
Wow thought I hit subscribe on this.
sorry RJ, just getting around to the forums for this week and saw your reply. Awesome work as always and greatly appreciated.
I'll through it on my display tomorrow when Im home and give it a run through DMX/Pixalnet and see if I have any issues.
Again thanks,
JS
-
RJ,
finally had a chance to do some testing.
I currently have 2 SS strands up first is Hybrid with 741/742/743 as the full strand channels and the other at 942/943/944.
The first strand works as programmed with the plug in, but the second is weird. It starts at channel 513/514/515 as the 3 hybrid channels and then uses the 516 to 741 for the individual nodes. So not sure why it changed channels with the 2.5 plug in.
Unfortunately I haven't had tons of time to test it as I broke one of my toes this weekend, so walking around is a little hmm painful =)
Hope that helps,
JS
EDIT: For clarification 2nd SS string does not work as programmed with the 2.5 plug in
-
Sorry to hear it hope it heals quick so you can enjoy christmas.
RJ
-
LOL thanks appreciate it, so do I :D
Any ideas on why the 2.5 plugin changes the SS output from 941-943 to 513-515 on my 2nd strand of SS strings?
They work as programmed with the 2.1 plugin and my first works as programmed with the 741 start ch but the 2nd has the above effect.
-JS