LSP 2.0 Release

[RJ]

 I do not mind people speaking their mind about an issue but this is not a respectful post and does not follow with our rules about respecting those we disagree with. Lets keep things nice as it has always been on DLA. I understand your aggraviated and am not concern over your posting, it is the words used that I have issue with, it needs to be scale down a little to keep it professional. I am sorry you do not feel you are being treated fairly. I hope you can find a resolution that will work for you.

RJ

[jeffcoast]

I don't have a problem with the pricing structure as it is. Programming takes alot of time, and he can't do that totally for free. We spend thousands and thousands on hardware, and quibble over the compensation he is asking for, to make it work easier. To do the stuff with Vixen that his software is going to be able to do easily would take you hours and hours of sequencing, so I feel it is justified to pay him for his time to save me my time in sequencing. We haven't seen any prices for LOR S3 yet, so can't compare something really equivalent to what LSP is capable of, but look at the pricing structure for MADRIX, and its channel count, LSP is a bargain.

[dandyman]

Holy Cow !!

The more I play w/V.2.0, the more impressed I am...

Been playing with it since it came out a few days ago (was one of the original V.1 purchasers)... gladly paid the upgrade fee for the Advanced level... the Advanced level will be more than adequate for the static & RGB channels I'm using this year (less than 2500)...

Hasn't locked-up once... much faster and MUCH more stable...

Being able to 'spiral' the mega tree just using RGB pixels is amazingly simple... and the mega tree RGB transitions are great !

[Wombat]

I have said some stuff on here and on LSP in which I felt passionate about. Enough to risk being banned from LSP which I have been

I have now been given my money back and a free version of LightShowPro Professional Edition by David.

I have however Refunded this money back to LSP as I believe that all that I was entitled to was a Free version of Professional Version of Light Show Pro V2 edition and he is running a business.

I hope that I have not lost too much respect from you guys.

Regards
Wombat


Sent to:   
   David Johnson   
Email:   
   You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Total amount:   
   -$99.00 USD
Fee amount:   
   $3.67 USD
Net amount:   
   -$95.33 USD

Date:   
   18 Aug 2011
Time:   
   07:57:43 AEST
Status:    
   Completed

Subject:   
   
You have sent $95.33 USD to David Johnson with PayPal
Note:   
   
Hi David, Thank you for the refund However I cannot accept. I believe that you have a Business to run and feel that the free upgrade to Pro Edition all that I was entitled to. I hope that we can still do business in the future and wish you well. Thank you

[RJ]

I did not delete your post?

Is it gone?

Sent from my Charge by Tapatalk

RJ

[rrowan]

Hi Wombat

nobody deleted your post, its still there #29 bottom of page two

Rick R.

[Wombat]

Oh sorry RJ I didn't read your post correctly my apologies.

I will go and edit the post now

Regards
Wombat

[charles59]

I hope that I have not lost too much respect from you guys.

Regards
Wombat

Nothing lost here.  Regardless if others thought it was worth the money, was a good deal, or otherwise, in my opinion you had a point. The business offered you something, and you had some rational to support the fact that wasn't what was delivered.  Now perhaps the response to champion your position went overboard, but in the end, you behaved respectfully, in accepting only what you understood was offered in the first place.

In the end, enjoy!

[RJ]

Agreed that was my point also.

RJ

[dmoore]

I don't have a problem with the pricing structure as it is. Programming takes alot of time, and he can't do that totally for free. We spend thousands and thousands on hardware, and quibble over the compensation he is asking for, to make it work easier. To do the stuff with Vixen that his software is going to be able to do easily would take you hours and hours of sequencing, so I feel it is justified to pay him for his time to save me my time in sequencing. We haven't seen any prices for LOR S3 yet, so can't compare something really equivalent to what LSP is capable of, but look at the pricing structure for MADRIX, and its channel count, LSP is a bargain.

I feel you are spot on.  The development of this "class" of sequencing software is a very large undertaking. 

I too would also caution that if we nickel and dime someone that undertakes a large endevor such as this that we may find we won't have anything to sequence with that allows us to make full use of these wonderful new technologies.  This is not a large market, this is a market (high channel count, pixel displays that LSP is now targeted at) that is today comprised of hundreds of people, not thousands and thousands.  If you do a bit of math you start to see that you need to make more per seat to make this a worthwhile effort. 

I would say that we need to look at software as an integral part of a display now, not as a secondary though as it will make or break a high-end pixel display.  I completely believe that LSP is worth the money when you compare it to the "other" options on the market at this time (as Jeff mentions above.)

David

[joshuashu]

It is these posts and talk of pixel this and pixel that,  that has brought me to give up on LSP and pixels. I mean i am limited on budget and can not even afford the upgrade and he will not even support of fix the scheduler for 1.8.  it has been very disappointing. I think you will all see that E.1.31 will not last long..

[dmoore]

It is these posts and talk of pixel this and pixel that,  that has brought me to give up on LSP and pixels. I mean i am limited on budget and can not even afford the upgrade and he will not even support of fix the scheduler for 1.8.  it has been very disappointing. I think you will all see that E.1.31 will not last long..

Joshua -

In 2010 I did 2,800 channels of which about 80% was RGB and a majority of that was pixels.  In 2009 I  had a "regular" ~150 channel display using 100% incandescent.  You know what?  People liked my 2009 display better.  It wasn't that people didn't like the color or the high level of individual control offered by pixels, it was my poor 2010 sequencing and lack of good design.  Why mention this?  Because it is still VERY much possible to do some amazing shows with a few AC controllers and a bunch of cheap incandescent lights. 

Just like an instrument - it's what the person using the instrument can do with it.  Sprinkling a few thousand dollars in pixels in your display isn't going to instantly make it better and in fact, it could make it worst as my case was (in the opinion of a fair number of viewers of my display).  It's what you DO with those, how you do your design, tell a story, convey a feeling or do your sequencing that will have a much greater effect.

I'd completely say you are right to give up on pixels - focus on doing what is in your budget.  This won't be a fun hobby if you are stressed out about having spent too much money and focus on the "soft" factors instead. 

And about that E131...I have to disagree with you there - it's nearly impossible to think large scale pixels (even larger than what is out now) without E131 - with no disrespect to PixelNet which I feel solves a different issue.

David

[typoagain]

It is these posts and talk of pixel this and pixel that,  that has brought me to give up on LSP and pixels. I mean i am limited on budget and can not even afford the upgrade and he will not even support of fix the scheduler for 1.8.  it has been very disappointing. I think you will all see that E.1.31 will not last long..

I know how you feel. I too have to deal with a limited budget.

But I never wanted to run tens of thousands of lights.

I started with LED strings and am trying this year to get into RGB. But instead of pixel strings I am adding the 5050s modules that I am getting from Harrison at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login. I am doing things like using an 8" RGB ball on top of my North Poles and RGD floods. This way I can get the most bang for my buck. It allows me to learn RGB and start to get into it a little at a time.

I bought LSP back when V1.8 was on sale. I have also spent about $200 on the modules with the programmers and transformers. But I bought it in three parts over the last year. This made it easier to swallow.

I look at it this way. Anyone can go out and buy a ton of lights. And I love this type of display. But I want mine to be different from anyone else's. I will have North Poles that are different from any I have seen anywhere. My star is different from any on this board. I just want to be unique.

Too me, part of the challenge (and the fun) is to build not only the best display I can, but to have one with things that you will not see anywhere else in town.

I guess I am weird. But I am proud of it!

[steve_hirst]

Too me, part of the challenge (and the fun) is to build not only the best display I can, but to have one with things that you will not see anywhere else in town.

We will let you be as different as you want to be (because we all know your different) but you and David make a few god points. RGB can only be what you put into it. Everyone should make there show how they want it. even if I had the exact same pieces that you do, my show will still be different because I put mine together and you did yours.

[mykroft]

OK, need some guidance from a LSP Pro

I have a smartstring controller that will have 60 rect modules (120 channels) that I am trying to design for a northstar....

What I would like to do, is split tho 60 modules into smaller groups - virtual controller?

Ex

Channels

1 - 10
11 - 16
17 - 24
25 - 30
21 - 40
41 - 46
47 - 54
55 - 60

so each leg can be indv controlled, and each module in the leg can be indv controlled as well

Is this possible, or am i trying to do this completely wrong?

Thanks
Myk