What should the next generation of sequencing software look like?

[WWNF911]

If I could setup a schedule for a show in GUI and then run it in a CLI mode than it would take less computing power (cpu, ram,etc) to run a show with lots going on.

The scheduler part of the problem should run with less system resources since it should not be displaying anything other than a update its running or not.

Got it! 

[tonyv2842]

These are all great ideas, I am still trying to get my head around how the end user would accomplish this by interacting with a UI. How would the show / sequence creator interact and "convey" their wishes to the software.  I know some of that has been discussed and alluded to already.  Also, what model would we use to create new "objects" to augment the "canned" ones that are already available.
What super efficient way can we come up with to "setup" all the channels and there capabilities without having to spell everything out to the smallest detail?

[mmulvenna]

The sequencing engine of the future


"I have these .......controllers, and they are controlling these ........lights with these ......objects use these ........songs with these .......videos, please build the show".

I for one do not want software that does that.

Does it need to be easier to sequence large channel counts, yes but there is nothing wrong with shows that have small channel counts under 500 channels. ( wow, I don't believe I said that, 500 used to be a LARGE show). Developers, don't forget the the users that want to stay in this environment.

I have seen lots of new videos this year using the new pixel based hardware and although the makers of these shows have put in tons of time sequencing them I personally think that the great shows of the future will be a combination of pleasant mix of rgb and still keeping the incans and LEDs that we have been using.  

Part of the fun of this hobby is putting your personal touches on the effects, getting upset when something doesn't work, worrying if the show will get completed on time, will it stay running, will my visitors like it. Lets not take this to the extreme of trying to compete with the Vegas Professionals. It's a hobby and supposed to be fun.


Just the ramblings of an old man

Mike

[rrowan]

I agree with Mike, I know for the next few years and possibly longer. The RGBs will be a enhance effect on a few objects in my yard while the rest will still be using the standard stuff. Of course my goal is to move over to LEDs when and where possible.

Cheers

Rick R.

[gjbankos]

Let me preface by saying I haven't read this entire thread in great detail...

I tend to break up my lights by instruments/vocals and I'll program the song by what I hear.  Maybe that's because I was a band geek in high school, but that is what I do.  I have a real tree out front that I'll put lights on that I tend to use as my "vocals".  I have some bushes in the front out by the sidwalk that I use as my percussion.  Brass/guitar/etc... tend to be my bushes right outside my house or my lights that outline my windows.  I think you catch my drift...

What I'd like to see is software that can recognize the vocals, drums, guitar/brass, etc... and turn on/off my lights accordingly.  I can fine tune and adjust as needed, but it would be cool if it would give me a "shell" of a sequence first.

[WWNF911]

What I'd like to see is software that can recognize the vocals, drums, guitar/brass, etc... and turn on/off my lights accordingly.  I can fine tune and adjust as needed, but it would be cool if it would give me a "shell" of a sequence first.

Software that does all your sequencing for you??

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Actually, with the help of the visualizer, Vixen will do just that. Of course you will have to guide/finish it up on your own.

Leon

[mmulvenna]

LSP will  create the timing marks for each of those categories also, you then need to add the efffects. Or you can you MIDI input,

assign effects to keys and create the effects and timing marks for your categories. With your musical background this would work very well for you.

[CaptKirk]

For me, I would say that the software shoud be able to do a large degree of auto-sequencing, but still allow manual tweaks OR complete manul creation depending on the person using it.  Do NOT go exclusively auto-sequencing, but being able to drag and drop a "canned" effect  or creating new ones (that could be saved as an available effect) would be nice.  There are elements of LSP (from the demos) that I like, but the fine control that Vixen currently has is nice also.

Make sure the "canned" sequences are able to be exported and imported so the community could share.  (Example: "Hey I have this neat Snata sleigh exploding into a fireball effect if you have a LED Triks array" typt thing).

Make sense?

[CB]

In terms of the visualizations just adding the ability to edit a mega tree because many of us rarely have the same string count, and arches are in the same boat.  I like to visual each object individually with each song edit and then try to work them in and out together to create the magic from the show.  The biggest problem with that is most of us are programming during spring and summer and if you are anythign like me remembering each song for the year is hard enough trying to remember what effect I did to each item in the inventory and each song...Ughhhh!

I actually work with BIM (3d modeling for building construction) and I have actually made 3d views of my house with elements used to identify where I will be placing them, I am sure I could take the next step and get the objects to animate with software but if I start going that far I might start to forget my kids names.

Corey

[taybrynn]

I'm really thinking it needs to be functional and not bogged down by the traditional sequencing and visualizer limitations.   A lot working at a high level and less done at individual display item level.  But you can mix and match as desired.

I'm thinking you start with a bunch of hardware with various capabilities.  You set those up once, and just maintain that collection in one place only.  This software must be able to handle various technologies, protocols and interfaces ... both commerical, DIY and standards based.  It must be easy to reconfigure the display from year to year and able to transition lots of items easily ... per item, per group, per controller, or from visualizer input.

Then you start creating groups of 'display items'.  There is no limit to how big or small these display groups can be.  You can also put any item in your display into any number of display objects.  There is a big cross reference being created here.  The display groups can have smart characteristics that are definable and configurable.  The goal is you start building out a set of higher level display groups, to save on sequencing.

Some smart effects that are created would be specialize to deal with common things like arches, megatrees, rgb strings, rgb matrix, left-to-right, right-to-left, top to bottom, fans, spinners ... fading (directional fading).  In addition, these effects can be defined, shared, imported (think google earth objects) ... and layered.

Then at one level, sequencing would be defining broad actions, effects, and transitions between these display groups ... possibly implemented in a similar timeline form to current sequencing software.

At a higher level, there could sequencing macros created which infer that once you do this, you also do this, then this ... and those can be stretched across time like a chase and time warped on the fly as needed.

And along with this is a very realistic visualizer which might even offer point and click sequencing options for those wanting to sequencing or paint a picture (as mentioend earlier) in a paint by numbers kind of way.  You could draw boxes over top of the display visualizer and those boxes could be used to sequence with and do high level sequencing, but you could always go back to the traditional sequencing view to fix some things afterwards.

I could also see a point with a voice guided sequencer might work to some extent.  You would direct the sequencer with commands: "begin a left to right fade, all items, red only, 30 to 100 percent, go" ... ok, were getting crazy here, but its fun to think of.

[WWNF911]

While I respect everyones ideas and am glad were all having a little fun thinking of all the magic this next generation of software can do, I'm a little disappointed in the reoccurring theme of having the software do all the sequencing for you (automated). I just cant help thinking and being somewhat proud that the sequencing we do is an art form. I know for some it's a love / hate relationship. I've been there. I know that sometimes it can take LOTS of long agonizing hours and yes I've been in the anguished position of scrapping all those hours and starting over,.. but I've also been laughed at out in the yard while watching my show for the umteenth time while my wife asked me "What are you doing? It's not like you haven't seen it before. GUILTY,... I'm a little proud. I can't help it.

Now I'm all for powerful tools that can help us create our art. Maybe I'm missing it here and we're all just agreeing to agree. 

[ptone]

While I respect everyones ideas and am glad were all having a little fun thinking of all the magic this next generation of software can do, I'm a little disappointed in the reoccurring theme of having the software do all the sequencing for you (automated).

...

Now I'm all for powerful tools that can help us create our art. Maybe I'm missing it here and we're all just agreeing to agree. 

I think a good measure is to consider a the level of appropriate abstraction.  With somewhere from 1 to a 100 channels, it would be possible to write your sequence as raw byte values that get sent out over the serial port.  This would give you the raw low level control.  However a program like Vixen provides a nice level of abstraction by giving you a box in a grid for each of those values.  It is a tool that abstracts away the lower level of the technology letting you focus on being creative.

Now in the context of higher channel RGB displays, something like Vixen will feel like writing out raw byte values to the serial port.  That is, it doesn't provide enough abstraction for you to focus on the creativity.

An analogy that I like to use is a dance choreographer.  You want to make your lights dance to the music.  You want to be able to give the "dancers" instructions about where to move and when.  You don't want to sit there and describe each muscle fiber.  You want to tell the dancers to leap or twirl, and maybe teach them some new tricks - but for the show, you want to focus on the overall composition of light and movement.

So software for high channel count RGB displays just needs to provide a tool to abstract away a bit more detail, but not take away creative control.

I also have a further goal of making the sequencing easy enough to sequence without a preview.  Its ambitious, but I don't think there is any reason that good, non-automated sequencing can't be done in the span of minutes to an hour while looking at your display live.

-P

[mokeefe]

I have to agree with ptone's comments.  Like many other people around here, I've been sequencing shows for a number of years using the traditional grid style.  We all know how to do various effects like chases with this style tool.  However, with the emergence of RGB nodes and the number of channels that entails, I can't see how the traditional grid method can possibly sustain that.

There are all sorts of places where abstraction only benefits the creative process. Heck, software development itself depends on abstraction.  No one (well, except maybe RJ) programs in the low level bits and bytes that actually drive the processors in computers.  We've developed tools that abstract all that freeing up the developer to create much more sophisticated applications without the need to worry about what's going on under the hood.  I'd much rather use my limited brain cells to think about the kinds of effects I want to happen at different points in my show.  I don't want to be bogged down with figuring out which channels on which controllers I need to set to which value to do that.

If sequencing software developers come up with some way to allow a bit of "automated" sequencing, I think that's fine and will likely open this field up to many more beginners. There will always be plenty of opportunity to show off your artistic ability no matter how much "automation" is introduced.

It'll certainly be interesting to see in what direction the current players (and maybe new ones) in the sequencing software realm take it.

-Mike

[rrowan]

Just random thoughts here, Nothing Exciting

I see Vixen like a Spreadsheet and thinking the next generation should be more like a Database approach

So moving from Excel to Access in the thinking process

Like in a database you have a section what controls the output, another is the table, another is the store procedures

So if you want to see each channel look at the table, if you want to see a Mega Tree look at the form, If you want a effect and or custom effect look at the store procedures, etc

Does any of this make sense or should I go back to the wiki editing?

Rick R.

[Trepidati0n]

While the drawing method in LSP is nice..and Vixen does a good job to.  Modifying pixels and locations could get "aggrivating".  What I would like to see is something like in LSP where you can do your initial outlines/work but then use some like a CSV file to import/export to fine tune channels based layout upon some large "grid" (maybe something like 640cells x 480 cells or some ratio/value specified by the user.  This in turn would allow the programs to help with intial "layout" but not have to deal with "big changes" or "fine tuning".