Author Topic: New Software  (Read 24203 times)

Offline csf

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 118
Re: New Software
« Reply #15 on: November 23, 2010, »
This is the PM I sent to  frankr the other day I think it will help every one get a better idea of what I have in mind.

Basically my idea would eliminate the need to have one row on a grid for each channel in your light show.

The first part would be channel groups. If you wanted to use the sequencer traditional to control each item 1 by 1 then you can just make each group one channel. But now if you want to take advantage of groups you can put multiple channels in one group. Also channels can belong to more then one group.

Now for my show this year I have 80 channels, 30 of them give me control of 10 groups of RGB LED rainbow floods / spots. I also have 6 AC channels of red mines, 6 AC channels of green mines, 6 AC channels of color mines and 11 AC channels of white mines. The rest of the channels are more individually controlled so not much of a point in writing out what they control.

So right now if I want to use all the green lights I need to turn on 16 channels, if I want all red I need to turn on 16 channels, if I want all white I need to turn on 42 channels.  

If I brake this in to groups then I would only need to turn on one group to turn on 42 channels of lights.

Also then next year when I plan to add more of these items to my display with red, green, color, and whit mines, I won't need to re do the whole sequence all I would need to do is add the new channels to the correct groups.

(now think of some thing like a smart string where to be all red may need to turn on 128 channels, or to be all white need 384 channels to be turned on)

Now back to the sequencer the rows of a sequencer would now work more as layers then as channels, unless you want them to be channels. Just select the group from a group window and click on the cells you want them to be added to.

I figure I could sequence my whole show in probably 6 layers (6 rows using this methods.

Now where things really can get powerful is by adding in effects. Effects can be made using some type of scripting language, xlights already has a scripting language, and we can eventually make a gui for making scripts for none tech users.

Effects are then applied to a group of channels.

Such as turn on the first channel in a group and then go down the line turning the next channel on and the previous one off.

Now to make effects really power full they will also take information from the time line it to account.

Such as a fade on the time line will automatically fad the effect of a group.


Also we can have smart effects, which will work similar to effects but have keys on a time line.

In my display they will be times where the lights will keep switching between, red, green, colored, and white.

Now I could make an effect that switches from one color group to another. And every place in the grid that has that effect live the effect will be up in one color, turn it off, turn it back on and the next color will be up.

If we really want to be creative we can use these smart effects to add some randomness to the display.  So that each show will be a bit different. Like in the case of my show it really does not matter, what color (red, green, color, or white) is used, and which flashes next, as long as it's a different color then the color perviously on.

This would definitely make our displays have more of a re watch vale since it's never exactly the same. It would also add the the value of seeing the display live since,  chancres are you wont be uploading a video or each version of the show to the web.

You can kind of think of it as a concert. The main show is the same each time, but each location its slightly different, which makes it unique.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2010, by csf »

Offline castortiu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
Re: New Software
« Reply #16 on: November 26, 2010, »
csf,

With the software you have in mind, who is your target?

A musician? A tech savy? Or an average Joe?

I’m the creator of Prancer and this year I have created all my sequences using my alpha version, I’m not releasing to the public yet, first because still there is a lot to do and second and the main reason is because still is not “simple” enough to used for the average Joe.

Once you lock on the semantic of the software the user must learn how to use it, if the learning curve is high and then when you change some behavior you will be cursed since users need to learn new stuff.

Prancer is targeted for the “average Joe” and most of the users fall in that category, they don’t know midi or/and they just know computers enough to run Vixen, Vixen is a slow process but easy enough for anyone to understand, simple concept, every box represent the channel and intensity, that’s it, the semantic of the software is so simple that probably is the most used software in sequencing.

Unless they have software that guide in the process of creating a sequence then the assimilation of the software in the average public will be really slow.

Users in this hobby want to spend the time building the hardware, adding more channels or making a fabulous front yard with many colors and spend the less time as possible on the sequence creation, but everyone knows that the sequence is the heart of the show.

I’m sure in this hobby users come and goes every year, I bet the average user retaining ratio is no more than 2 or 3 years per user, and probably just a few are long recurrent users that make a show every year.

So, If there are two pieces of software, one is simple as Vixen and another one is incredible powerful but take months to learn how to use it, do you think a new user will go for the difficult path?

Take the following as a good intention comment.

If your software doesn’t have a GUI, what are the requirements (knowledge) for the average user to create sequences? Do they need to know scripting? How long is the learning curve? I mean if they have to spend 3 months to learn scripting what they get after that?

It’s awesome that someone is building something for MAC, someone has to take care of the MAC users, but again programming for MAC is like restore old cars, everyone love it but just few will use the service, basically you spend many hours on the software and because the target is MAC you collapse the target to the 5% of the general population, usually I look for 95% since I get more return for my bucks.

If the target is yourself then as long you are happy and makes your life easier then go all for it, it is an awesome sensation to create sequence with your own software, Also you mention Linux so the target may be is a tech user, if that is the case then be prepared to spend more time creating documentation than features, since tech user the first thing they go is for documentation.

Companies make specialized software and make a lot of sense for all platforms since on MAC or Linux is low volume high margin, but if the software is Open source what is the end benefit of it?

Windows 7 phone may look awesome and have better screen, more capabilities, don’t drop calls, and communicate with all social networks, but who the heck will program for it since IPhone and Android have more 100000 applications already out there. Microsoft will have to spend A LOT of money persuading programmers to program for it, and may be a lost cause already since the market belongs to Apple and Google.

Sorry if I sound too pessimist, I just want to make sure you have clear what are the reasons to create a new software, I may be missing something and I apologies if I didn’t understand your idea.

So may I ask, who is the target for the software you have in mind?

Cas.

Offline ptone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 107
Re: New Software
« Reply #17 on: November 26, 2010, »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
csf,

With the software you have in mind, who is your target?

A musician? A tech savy? Or an average Joe?

Cas,

You address csf, but I feel some of your questions are also directed at me, so I'll answer from my perspective and hopefully csf will weigh in from his.

First thanks for poking in here - and you raise interesting points.

Myself, I am NOT writing software for the average joe.  I'm writing my tools for the technically savvy - someone who wants to do very sophisticated things without a lot of effort or time.  (this does not include time to learn scripting).  For someone who understands programming in any language, I think the learning curve for what I'm putting together will be very small.

As you are seeing with Prancer, it is easy enough to come up with things that are powerful, or things that are easy to use, but VERY hard to come up with something that is both.  If you are designing for the average joe, you will end up giving up power in trade for ease of use.  I won't.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

If your software doesn’t have a GUI, what are the requirements (knowledge) for the average user to create sequences? Do they need to know scripting? How long is the learning curve? I mean if they have to spend 3 months to learn scripting what they get after that?


for my tool some knowledge of scripting or programming is useful.  But if you want to create a show with almost no limitation in sophistication, in a very short amount of time, then I think I'm building a great tool set.

I'm focusing on the fundamentals of design, and getting those right.  I can focus on that because I'm not building a GUI.  If I decide to start over in some part of the code to make it fundamentally better, I don't have to redo UI and window components. Having to do so would make me more likely to feel tied to a particular approach.  Once the design is right, and if I have time and interest - I can add a GUI.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

It’s awesome that someone is building something for MAC, someone has to take care of the MAC users, but again programming for MAC is like restore old cars, everyone love it but just few will use the service, basically you spend many hours on the software and because the target is MAC you collapse the target to the 5% of the general population, usually I look for 95% since I get more return for my bucks.

If the target is yourself then as long you are happy and makes your life easier then go all for it, it is an awesome sensation to create sequence with your own software, Also you mention Linux so the target may be is a tech user, if that is the case then be prepared to spend more time creating documentation than features, since tech user the first thing they go is for documentation.


First of all, MAC is an ethernet hardware address, Mac is a type of PC.  You can tell from your post that you don't spend much time outside the win32 dev world.  If you go to any tech conference where the brightest minds are working on the latest tech - you will see way more than %5 Macs there.  This is not meant to be a Mac vs PC thing - that is long dead.  But I'm writing software for people who are tech smart and sophisticated, and most of those are Unix/Mac people these days (just look at the recent Kinect hacking scene).

Mostly I'm writing this for myself.  Second I'm writing it for script literate people who want to get into DIYC, third I'm writing it for DIYC people who want to take it to the next level while spending a fraction of the time working on sequencing.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Companies make specialized software and make a lot of sense for all platforms since on MAC or Linux is low volume high margin, but if the software is Open source what is the end benefit of it?


Hmm - vast majority of open source software is Unix based - so the above does not make sense.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Sorry if I sound too pessimist, I just want to make sure you have clear what are the reasons to create a new software, I may be missing something and I apologies if I didn’t understand your idea.

So may I ask, who is the target for the software you have in mind?

Cas.[/left]

To me writing my tools are about being nimble and flexible in creating sequences.  I put up some sample code for creating a many-channeled RGB mega tree on another thread - I'm not sure how you could ever make something like that easy via a GUI:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I know that we have some similarities in our programs - but I'm not trying to reach the most people, or sell it, etc.  But I also have spent relatively little time on it and already have a lot of functionality considering I only started several weeks ago.

-Preston
--
budding channel wrangler

Offline castortiu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
Re: New Software
« Reply #18 on: November 26, 2010, »
I never put in doubt what the software can or can’t do, I made it very clear asking who the target user is, and as you mention you target a tech savvy so all the points I made did not apply, if you want then we can start over and comment about what I think for software that reach tech people.

I’m sorry if you took it personal, in a tech conference may be the brightest minds working on the latest tech, but I’m not targeting them, I’m targeting users in DLA which are in need of software to help them to create sequence easier and faster than current software, does GUI have to sacrifice some versatility… may be… who knows…, that’s the challenge, but even if has to sacrifice some and still provide way over more features than current software, then is mission accomplished.

From your response looks like you may think Prancer won’t be free, when in fact it will be.

Cas.

Offline RJ

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8519
Re: New Software
« Reply #19 on: November 26, 2010, »
Guys it is not about who is making the right choices. It's about everyone making stuff their way. The users are always the people that decide what is popular in the end.

I do not want all three of you working on three programs all the same. Make it your program to the goals and specs you have in mind. Let the others do the same. In the end the users have lots of choice and they are happy and some will use one and some will use another etc.

It nevers bothers me to see someone use hardware other than mine. As long as you do it your way and it is useful to you. The other people that do use it will be the icing on the cake. You will get a great satasifaction from seeing them use it and enjoy it.

I think all have promise. If I had not been so busy getting a show together and helping users get Aether working in a hurry I would have by now setup the other two with forum areas.

It occured to me reading this thread that members may see three people working on Software but only one with an area. This is not to be taking as anything, Prancer was worked on first and so I had got an area setup. The other two I just had not got with them to see if they wanted one and what to call it.

That is being rectified.

RJ

Innovation beats imitation - and it's more satisfying

Offline csf

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 118
Re: New Software
« Reply #20 on: November 26, 2010, »
Guys I never starting posting my ideas here to step on any one in any way.

I hope we can all peacefully coexist here, otherwise let me know and I will develop else where, I do have a few web sites of my own, or if the idea of new free software is what's bothering people, I can just keep the software to my self. Time permitting I will at least be making this program for my own personal use for next year, wether other people want me to releases it or use it that's up to the rest of you. Last thing I want to do is release a peace of free software that causes a split in the lighting community.

At the end of the day were all taking different approaches to sequencers.

castortiu - from what I understand Prancer will completely free the user from the gridv (there will be no grid at all), and be all Item based. It will also be set up so that that any one can pick it up and start using it.

ptone - hour ideas is scripted based and will be more for tech people and musicians.

My idea is a modern take on a grid based sequencer.

Maybe I am missing something, and if I am please let me know what it is, but I can't seam to figure out how any of our projects are steeping on each others projects.

Offline rrowan

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5899
  • 08096
Re: New Software
« Reply #21 on: November 26, 2010, »
Hi Csf,

IMHO

Please develop the program you want, no one has the right to say otherwise

Hopefully you and the other programmers develop the best program each can and let the users decide if they want to use it or not. Each program should state the intended level of user to use the program. ie: Easy, some scripting, heavy scripting, etc

Personally I love to see each and everyone's program here on DLA.

I think a lot of people who are normally nice and friendly are just stressed out.

Cheers

Rick R.
Light Animation Hobby - Having fun and Learning at the same time. (21st member of DLA)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Warning SOME assembly required

Offline RJ

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8519
Re: New Software
« Reply #22 on: November 26, 2010, »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Guys I never starting posting my ideas here to step on any one in any way.
I hope we can all peacefully coexist here,


I thought that was what I was saying ? Maybe I did not come out well but I meant there is room for it all.

Quote
if the idea of new free software is what's bothering people


I did not know or see people bothered by it, the only people I see saying anything is the three that are developing and we all know you each will think yours is the best or you would not make it the way you plan to.

RJ
 
Innovation beats imitation - and it's more satisfying

Offline ptone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 107
Re: New Software
« Reply #23 on: November 26, 2010, »
Just to be clear - I think more the merrier.  I've learned what I have from diverse communities that share what they know and enjoy a bit of friendly challenge.  I'm sorry if I come across a little bombastic at times, but I think what interests are shared by people working on new stuff is greater than that which is different.

Cas - I applaud you working on something anyone can use.  Quite honestly the main reason I'm not, is that it is 10+ times more work than what I'm doing.

I think we should all of course keep on keeping on, and continue to share ideas and progress.  When and where possible, we should collaborate on standards of interop.  For example, should there be some new format other than vixen?  For me I'm thinking of the signaling layer - which contains basic timing events and objects, but not full channel output.

RE RJ's comment about making it the best.  Reminds me of a comment made by a friend who was a world class kayaker and kayak designer.  I asked him once if he thought his designs were the best.  He said - of course, If I didn't think they were the best, I would design them differently.  He knew that not everyone would agree, but it was his passion and focus to his own ideals (sometimes quite counter to the industry) that led to the quality of his designs.

-Preston
--
budding channel wrangler

Offline csf

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 118
Re: New Software
« Reply #24 on: November 26, 2010, »
RJ you have been very supportive to all of us and I appreciate it.

I was referring mostly to the post by castortiu. I can only imagine the work he has put in to Prancer and I am in no way trying to take away from his accomplishments. At the same time though I felt like his post was somewhat against the idea of other new software.

I have scene it go bad before in communities when someone is developing a software and then another programer comes in and has a different idea for a similar program, and next thing you know there is a split in the community. It happened in an open source game I was working on at one time. I was working with the original main programer of an open source game for a while, mostly testing, importing objects, making custom xml files for the game objects, creating GUI XML files, and trying get it to compile (the list of libraries were rather long and at the time I had made more progress then any one else on getting the code to compile) . Then all of a sudden a new programer came on the scene, at this point the original game  was over two years in development and had a very strong code base (it was a completely custom game engine). This new programer started showing all these  pretty screen shots. I will say the screen shots were nice, but the fundamental code that we already had laid out was not there, it was mostly all eye candy he was showing. Well the rest of the community started baking the new coder, and well the community split quit badly. Now it's been over a year and nether version game has made much progress at all. Truthfully that is the last thing I want to see happen here. Maybe that experience has just left me with a sour taste in my mouth since I spent all most four years involved in the effort see it fall apart.

Sorry for any miscommunication. Just being the newest person here I rather bow out now if it was going to be an issue for the community.

Personally I too feel the more the merrier, and that was the whole reason I started developing the ideas for this program, at the end of the day each user has there own things there looking for in a program, and the more programs they can pick from the better the chancres are they will find one that meats there needs.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2010, by csf »

Offline castortiu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
Re: New Software
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2010, »
I’m not continuing the discussion since everything I said was misinterpreted.

First I never say I was bothered at all because there are more software in development, in fact I applauded many times about people taking challenges, how that became I don’t like more people creating new software honestly I don’t know.
Prancer “quick updates” thread was hijacked and didn’t say a word since I thought was cool about more people bringing ideas.
Second, the whole intention of the post was an introduction to what I see is a limitation from “my point of view” and instead I wanted to start to give feedback how you could take a product/idea that will be used for few people and bring it to the masses, but of course before I could start to give feedback I was shoot in the head.

If you have 95% of DLA users using Windows and they do not have a degree in computer science then If you develop only for Mac and do scripting then you will have very few users and that’s a FACT, but if the goal is NOT to bring the application to the masses then it ok since was never the goal, that was the main reason of my question, but we/DLA are in need of new software to control thousand of channels and I think anyone spending time on new approaches should try to focus on bringing a solution to the problem with whatever approach, never I said that any new approach must contain a GUI, in fact Prancer is based on a pseudo language and the GUI is on top of it.

For example one of the problem is how in scripting you handle physical location, basic effects are done on a Megatree but what about I need to create an effect that is a chase with only color red and starts on the left of the display and finishes on the right, basically any object between should be scanned for red channels/pixels and turn on accordingly, if you do not contemplate physical location (X/Y/Z) in the original design then the application is already limited, a GUI allow you to do that since every object contain a physical location, but again the GUI is an artifact and the core should be who is already prepared for that. If you start just with the scripting then when the GUI layer is added you might find out that create those kind of effects won’t be supported unless the Core change radically. AGAIN I’m not saying that the GUI is mandatory, I’m just saying be sure what the final goal is and what are the step to reach it, and if in the process we can have updated working versions even better.

Also the MIDI approach is fantastic as a learning experience but who will use it? LSP approach is a good one, first they are capturing the users providing what the user expect, after people complain that is buggy, and slow, then they added MIDI and WII, and keep other set of users happy for another while until they start to solve the problems, may be the software is crap inside, but once they take the market they have time to fix everything over time.

I have experience in the whole software life cycle development and you can create a beautiful piece of software from the engineer point of view but be a total disaster on the average consumer and have a horrible written piece of software and capture 99% of the market, when I asked about who is the target is because if the application is intended to be used for DLA users then the approach as it is won’t work, maybe there is a way keeping the original ideas but give a nice wrapping and provide what people expect. If Prancer never sees the light of the day for x or y reason then other applications should be already trying to solve the problems as well, so we can have plan A, B and C.
From “my point of view” is like trying to shoot a fly with cannon.

But as Preston said, it is not made for the average Joe, so what I wrote above does not apply.

Having said that, I step aside…

Cas.

Offline ptone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 107
Re: New Software
« Reply #26 on: November 27, 2010, »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Prancer “quick updates” thread was hijacked and didn’t say a word since I thought was cool about more people bringing ideas.
Second, the whole intention of the post was an introduction to what I see is a limitation from “my point of view” and instead I wanted to start to give feedback how you could take a product/idea that will be used for few people and bring it to the masses, but of course before I could start to give feedback I was shoot in the head.

Cas,

Nobody is hijacking anything, and nobody is shooting you in the head  <md..

We are all just exploring our interests and pursuing this because it is challenging and fun and rewarding at one or more levels.  You continue to send some mixed messages about whether you are passing judgement on the value of these other projects, and part of it is that you are not a native English speaker.  You feel strongly about the goals you have set out for the average DIY user/member running on win32 platform - so continue to channel those efforts.  But continue to engage with your peers in discussions on the common challenges and solutions associated with the next wave of high-channel count setups, there is no right or wrong way here.

All the best,

-Preston
« Last Edit: November 27, 2010, by ptone »
--
budding channel wrangler

Offline csf

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 118
Re: New Software
« Reply #27 on: November 27, 2010, »
castortiu thank you for the expanded explanation. I fell I know have much better understanding of where you are coming from.

Quote
Prancer “quick updates” thread was hijacked and didn’t say a word since I thought was cool about more people bringing ideas.
Second, the whole intention of the post was an introduction to what I see is a limitation from “my point of view” and instead I wanted to start to give feedback how you could take a product/idea that will be used for few people and bring it to the masses, but of course before I could start to give feedback I was shoot in the head.

I am really sorry if you feel I shoot you in the head. I think ptone may of hit it on the head if you not a native english speaker. My writing skills are definitely far from an english major, and that may of lead to some confusion along with me being a bit confused about your original post.

Well know that I believe waters are cleared I hope we can all help each other and our programs along  ;D Cause from my experience programs make the best alpha testers ;)

Edit: I see RJ set up a board for me, it's 2:15 am here now and I have a day of putting up lights ahead of me tomorrow so I better get some sleep, but tomorrow night I will put together a topic that lays out my ideas and plan so that you guys can all give me your feed back on them ;)
« Last Edit: November 27, 2010, by csf »

Offline rrowan

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5899
  • 08096
Re: New Software
« Reply #28 on: November 27, 2010, »
Hi Guys,

Just for the record. I use Windows, MAC, Linux (in no particularr order)

I have some programming background (mostly a hobby). Been using a computer since 1984.

I don't get into this OS is better than that OS. I see pros and cons to each and just use the best tool for the job.

To be honest, If I could use Linux Init 3 to run a sequence I would be thrilled (very little overhead). To program the sequence I would more like to see what its doing but a mix of gui and programming would good. My problem is I have no music background.

But then again I don't see myself as the average user.

Sorry for my rant

Cheers

Rick R.
Light Animation Hobby - Having fun and Learning at the same time. (21st member of DLA)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Warning SOME assembly required

Offline tconley

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 105
    • Conley Family Christmas
Re: New Software
« Reply #29 on: November 28, 2010, »
Do you have instructions for loading xlights on linux.  I am running Ubuntu and i would love to not have to swap out hard drives to windows just to run my show.
Pinky, are you pondering what I am pondering?

 

I think so, Brain, but this time, you put the trousers on the chimp.

 


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login