Posts by Shween

Thanks Stefan. I had an idea that was the case.

Is individual fixture control still possible thru input assignments?

Or would that better be implemented now thru Submasters/Executor?

Hello DMXC Friends.

Simple Question (Hopefully)

Is it possible to add more than 2 universes of Direct DMX In / Out in the Input Assignment?

Great Thanks

P.S. Happy Thanksgiving [Frohes Erntedankfest!]

I was testing some methods for your fixture the other night, and there may be a better workflow to manage this particular device.

Workflow #1

it is possible you will need to add 7 separate devices for each of these fixtures:

Namely:

1. DDF Containing the Master Dimmer (Ch.1) and Master Strobe (Ch. 26) ONLY

2. 6 Generic RGBW DDF's and add all those to a Device Group (For Organization Purposes)

It will be a little Strange, in terms of how DMXC will automatically auto-address fixtures added in a linear fashion.

You would need to overlap the DMX Address in the Device Manager in DMXC, But here is the Concept:

1 DDF (Device) Containing the Master Dimmer and Strobe Channel for the whole Fixture.

(Keep Master Dimmer always 100% in each cue you create, and never touch the strobe function)

This will take up DMX Channels 1-26

Then, add 6 Generic RGBW Devices Starting on channel 2, then channel 6, then channel 10, then channel 14, then channel 18, then channel 22. This will overlap the channels technically created with the First DDF using 26 channels, but that's Okay because the DDF would not have any control of those channels anyway.

Use the Dimmer and Strobe Function DMXC Will create within the software to control the dimming and strobing for each fixture individually, without using the actual Fixture's dimming and Strobe Channels (Channel 1 and Channel 26).

I hope this makes sense. If not, I can create this concept and upload a demo project.

In each Cue List, You can change the Fade Factor, and Speed Factor from 0% - 100% - 100%

Assigning a speed factor or fade factor to an Executor only allows for values from 0% - 100% Nothing more.

I am trying to find an efficient way to control the whole scale without creating an input assignment to every cue individually.

Muddyhopkins

Hello. English User here. But I have viewed this thread translated.

In my personal experience, Sometimes there are some small and weird tricks you need to perform when creating the fixture profile to get it to function as the factory intended.

For example, say when the Strobe channel also functions as a devices Main Shutter channel.

I can't promise when I could take a quick look at the project and DDF, hopefully in the next few days, but, if you are able to post a link to the fixtures manufacturer page and manual that shows the channel descriptions, I would be happy to take a look and see If I can't try and make a profile that would fit this devices parameters.

I have had decent success when using the current version of DDF creator to make device profiles from scratch, with sometimes having to go and manually edit the XML.

But if you would like to post the Fixture and the Manual, as well as the current DDF XML you are currently using, I would be interested to see myself why this might be happening.

Is it possible for an executor Fader value to be Higher than 100%?

For instance, in a cue, you can set the "Fade Factor from 0 to 1000%"

Can an executor fader scale greater than 100%?

Yes! I'm really really happy that you were able to get it to work!

Funny enough, I have recently switched to sACN since making the original demonstration (due to a bug in the Art-Net firmware of DMX node I had gotten).

If you couldn't get the ArtNet to work, I was going to recommend trying with sACN, as it seems to use a more direct IP forward.

I am not quite sure how the developers changed the ArtNet Transmission in 3.3.0, but I am no longer sure how it 'Binds' to an IP anymore without using the 'optional' secondary IP Send parameter in DMX Interface Settings.

Perhaps LightningBrothers or JPK would know where to point for that updated information 3.3.0?

Either way, I would be interested to see what you do with it once you are able to create even a small demo! If you can render it out, totally share it here

Congratulations 🎉 🎉 🎉

To add additional universes in Pro DMX 2 (Up to 4) Follow these Steps.

1. Add another Art Net Device in DMX Control 3. Change the Settings Circled in Blue.

2. In Pro DMX 2, click 'Universe 2' and click on the 3 dots on channel 1 and enter the same settings as before, but just make sure to select universe 2.

3.Follow the same steps for Univers 3 and 4 respectively.

And it should be as 'Simple' as that!

Let me know if you are able to make this work!

It may take a couple tries to get everything to talk with each other, but this is how I was able to get it to work.

It's amazing your actually almost there. I am going to explain the 'Hidden Feature' Now to make it all work.

I have attached screenshots as detailed as possible:

1. First, Install Virtual Network Adapter As described in this tutorial (Click Link):

How to create virtual network adapter in windows 11 or windows 10

2. Once You Install the adapter, go to Start -> Type Control Panel -> In Control Panel type 'Network' -> Click on 'Network & Sharing Center'

3. In 'Network and Sharing Center' click 'Change Adapter Settings'

4. Find the new virtual network adapter 'Microsoft KM-Test Loopback' (I renamed mine to ArtNetLoop) -> Right Click -> Properties -> Double Click 'Internet Protocol Version (TCP/IPv4)'

5. Change Settings as Follows -> Click OK

6. Open DMX Control 3 (I am using v3.3.0)

Go to Settings -> DMX Interfaces -> Add Device - Artistic License -> Art-Net

[LEAVE ALL SETTINGS DEFAULT ('0')]

Change 'Additional Sent to IP' to the IP Address your Virtual Network Adapter is set to.

7. Open Pro DMX 2 -> Create a New Project AND SAVE AS! -> click Tools -> Options -> ArtNet -> Input -> Make Sure Network Adapter is set as your Virtual Loopback IP Address.

Also Make sure the On/Off Button is Turned ON [GREEN] Click It

8. Now for the Hidden Part. Click the Check Mark at the bottom and you will see this screen.

Make Sure you are in universe 1 (On the Right) -> CLICK THE 3 DOTS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE FIRST FADER

9. In this Window, Copy the Following settings exactly and hit Checkmark. [Only Adjust Setting Circled in Blue]

10. You should now be controlling ProDMX2 Faders from DMXC!

11. Now create your fixtures in ProDMX2 and Build your 3d show!

Wow, thank you for going out of your way to put that concept in a full testing environment.

I really hope that someday a 64 bit environment for DMXC can be possible. The workflow is just so fantastic, and I really support the project so much!

I look forward to keeping you up to date with any High-Scale concepts I can think of myself that may help in an efficient future development of the software and future features.

IlluminateXperience

Thank you for the Tag!

I have been a bit busy lately, and would hope to possible provide a few screenshots, but let me see if I can give you a small head-Start with this limited information without being in front of the software at the moment.

If you play around deep in the settings of ProDMX 2, you will find that It can accept up to 4 universes of Art-Net input in the settings.

You may need to set up a virtual network adapter if you plan on running DMXC and ProDMX on the same machine, but I do not recommend this because ProDMX / Studio DMX is very resource intensive due to what I have found to be many bugs.

The best way would be to run DMXC on a smaller computer or laptop, and then build your Visual Show in Pro DMX on an separate independent workstation.

Then, set the network adapters on each machine to the same IP subnet for ArtNet Transmission.

All of you IPs need to be manually input as static IPs on your PC network interface, and then set manually inside ProDMX.

Then, when you see that you are successfully receiving DMX input into ProDMX, there is a way to set each fader section/universe as an individual control to receive direct DMX commands. 0-512 in each universe (up to 4 universes)

It is a bit of a tricky process and took me about a week to figure out (there is very minimal documentation through Chromateq) and seems to almost be a hidden feature in the software.

Until I have a bit of time to make a series of screenshots that might help explain better, maybe this hint (without looking at the software in front of me) might help if you are determined and just a bit crazy (much like myself haha).

I am theorizing in doing patches with many more pixel-mapped features and the ability to scale larger show concepts.

For Example, a Christmas Tree Concept that uses 64+ universes of individual pixel lights.

And the way DMXC is able to efficiently manage a large amount of fixtures with many parameters is the reason I wonder if more than 16 universes is possible.

Plus, with higher-end PC hardware, and Art-Net and sACN abilities, I feel that many more universes are possible in DMXC. Although I am not quite sure how the Kernel and Umbra and other backend functions processes that decoding.

It's something I have been wondering about for quite some time now.

Simple question:

When will DMXC be able to support more than 16 universes?

Or, is there a way to interface more than one instance of DMXC and use a common Stage View?

Quote from showtechniker

I can reccomend Capture. Its "only" 400€ and quite powerful.

showtechniker

Thanks for the love and recommendation!

Someday when I 'go pro' and can justify spending the money on this type of software, I hope to one day to learn "L8" Software.

Lighting modeling software is insanely expensive, and to be honest, I am surprised the 3D engine technology isn't a bit more, how do I say.....

Like modern video games use such nice graphics.

Even free Unreal Engine has DMX capabilities now, and that has amazing lighting features like real time Ray Tracing and such (But a MASSIVE learning curve lol)

I actually used to play around and became quite familiar with Magic 3D Easy View, bundled with DMXControl for as long as I can remember.

Here are some of those demos:

Magic 3D Demo_A

Magic 3D Demo_B

Magic 3D Demo_C

But I've always wanted something just a little bit more expensive...

This software in the topic of this thread was called "Studio DMX" bundled with "Pro DMX 2" and is currently available for free from Chromateq (http://www.chromateq.com)

I would love to have tried using the new version of "Easy View View 2", but it is only randomly bundled with other lighting software like "Daslight" that has its features and DMX input locked unless you own their proprietary hardware.

And I have not been able to find or 'hack' a standalone version.

As for your upcoming translation of the Input Assignment Wiki, I salute you and thank you for your service.

I myself look forward to your detail on that powerful section! Google Translate and trial and error has only gotten me so far xD

Those are answers I was hoping to have answered.

I will check to see if I have already posted it in the BugTracker. If not, I will surely make a task regarding the Stage View Matrix glitch experienced.

Thank you for linking the documentation on the Input Assignment. I will be sure to reference it the next time I undertake another programming project. That is a massive help. I had no idea it would be as simple as adding a Rule-of-Three logic node to re-establish MIDI numeric values based off of MIDI input.

I will have to take some time to really get acquainted with the 'press release' videos you have published to really see first hand what features you describe and how much I have overlooked regarding the topics we have touched on here. I am interested to see the similarities in programming that you were referring to.

I am infinitely excited to see what new and improved features of the next official release of DMXControl will bring. Keep up the great work all!

Also, I guess I will add this:

It took about 2 Weeks to learn the Chromateq software and it's formalities enough to build a set.

About 2 Weeks to program in DMXControl

...............And then............. a little over a week of nonstop rendering and exporting to figure out why my PC(s) couldn't keep up and why YouTube kept destroying the video quality. <-

I also had to try 5 different GPU video cards, an infinite amount of system and hardware settings, and had to test across 3 separate computer systems trying to figure out the Chromateq software <-    <img src=

For a total of that 37 day timeline

Happy Times Though lololol

Cues_B

Cuelists_A

I really wanted to use DMXControl 3.3.0. And in hindsight, probably would have been able to, and probably should have.

But, Here is why I decided not to:

Before I found the Chromateq Software for the simulation modeling, I was playing with both DMXControl v3.2.3 and v3.3.0 to see what major stability changes there were.

My main test in both versions was to load in as many "Generic RGB" devices as I could to see how it would handle running hundreds of simple devices simultaneously.

I also wanted to test the efficiency of the way DMXControl handled Matrixes.

So in both versions, I began by initially loading 500 "Generic RGB" devices. This was the maximum amount that the application would let me add at one time.

If I wanted to say add another 500, I would simply have to initiate another instance of importing the fixtures.

This was my immediate result which I will attempt to explain as best I can.

First, in 3.2.3, I found that loading that many devices at once took a crazy long time for the application to load in the fixtures, with one exception.

When I began adding devices, I was adding them primarily by going into the "Devices Window" -> Right Clicking -> Add Device inside of the "Devices Window".

With the device window still open, it took probably about 5+ full minutes of waiting for DMXControl 3.2.3 to add all the devices at once if I was lucky. DMXControl 3.2.3 would be locked until all the devices were finished importing into the project. I believe sometime this would also crash the application.

I then discovered that if you do not have the "Devices" window open (rather keeping say the "Cuelists" window in focus), and instead add the fixtures using the "Add Device Button" at the top of the main Project Explorer window, adding the same amount of devices produced a progress bar, and resulted in a significantly less time (less than 30 seconds) to add the fixtures to the project.

I also discovered, that in the stage view, when viewing the graphical display, the visualization was very very choppy with that many fixtures added to a stage view window. (I believe it was after about 150-200 fixtures is when the results became choppy) and eventually you could not really tell what was accurately going on with chasing sequences.

I attempted the same test in 3.3.0:

Adding the fixtures with either "Right Click" -> "Add Device" in the "Devices Window", or, clicking the "Add Device" button at the top of the Project Explorer was a significant improvement, almost instantaneous add, and also resulted in slightly better performance in the Stage View, but here was the problem:

When trying to use Fan or Matrix Sorting in stage view (Hold M and then Drag Selected Fixtures), all of the fixtures in the Stage View would randomly scatter all over the place, and you could not organize the fixtures in the slightest way.

I was able to kind of get around that problem by creating a matrix and then making the Stage View Matix icon the same proportions as the full amount of RGB Fixtures, and then removing the individual RGB Fixtures from the stage view, but then this occured:

When selecting the "Bitmap" Matrix effect, no matter what type or size of image used, the only thing that would display was a default DMXControl Projects Logo across the lights in the Matrix.

It actually took quite a while to realize what the heck was displaying on all the lights at that point hahahaha.

So right off the bat, even though I did not end up using the Matrix feature at all in this particular demonstration, without doing too much more testing, I deemed that 3.2.3 was going to be ultimately more stable to program in than the release of 3.3.0, and decided to run with that.

In the future, I would probably use the Matrix Feature to program larger amounts of Static RGB washes and things like that.

I also would have liked to utilize the new version of the Executer, and discover what other improvements there were, but I didn't know when my sanity was going to break xD (Spoiler: It broke anyway )

So that is why initially I did not decide to use v3.3.0.

As for the Timecode Player, it's not that I didn't want to use it in DMXControl. It's just that in Studio One, I am able to both edit the musical timeline, add different audio layers and effects, and change them in real-time and as needed within the project, in addition to sending MIDI output (adjusting audio levels, time between songs, etc...).

I guess technically the new Timecode Player in DMXControl would eliminate an extra step of assigning individual MIDI rules in the MIDI manager and Input Assignment, but overall, using Studio One as a Timecode Trigger was just the most efficient way of dealing with this particular type of project.

Plus, I have been using it this way for many years, and am just used to using it as a master timeline trigger system at this point.

Plus, If I wanted, I could also use additional MIDI channels to trigger external video sequences in VJ applications and such, so it is a really intuitive way of using a master application to trigger all sorts of different show commands across different applications and platforms.

Also, triggering MIDI in this way falls in line with how I would program a 'Light Board' using TouchOSC and BOME MIDI, so it really leaves all possibilities open.

There is actually a situation I will probably make a seperate post on at a differt time regarding how Input Assignment treat MIDI Fader Data.

Briefly, I realized it might be possible to use a MIDI Fader rule (as opposed to a MIDI Button) in large cuelists containing things like color cues. Say you have 20 Colors in a color Cuelist, and you want to use "GoTo" to call a specific color cue. Rather than making 20 MIDI buttons and wasting 20 values (notes) in a single MIDI channel, you could in theory use a single MIDI note, and treat it as a fader, using each fader step as a "GoTo" recall number.

The problem is that Input Assignment creates a really complicated floating decimal number on the output, and I have not been able to find a way to "Round" the number with any functions available in the Input Assignment Logic. This results in skipped steps when trying to assign that floating number to a whole number that can easily be used as a "GoTo" step.

Perhaps you know of a method to round floating numbers in Input Assignment.

That one simple feature would allow much more efficient Input Assignment rulesets. I think I am simply overlooking something.

Also, I wonder if there is any documentation on what each Logic Feature of the input assignment does, as there are some I simply just cannot begin to understand what they do. Such as "Rule of Three" and "Smittrigger" along with a handful of others. I have searched the Wiki and Forum, but I think I have been looking in the wrong places.

As for the amount of Cuelists, I have attached images of the full Cuelist tree in the following replys. I will let you enjoy viewing the surface of this list haha.

It seems the number is 154 cues total used in this demo.

The attached Cuelist images will show how many cues are in each Cuelist down the line.

I must add those images in 2 more posts given the image limitation of a single reply (not Spamming)

</Ramble>

Stefan,

Thank you for your reply. It gives me peace of mind that you are able to understand my ramblings xD.

I would greatly appreciate and be happy to answer any questions that might be inspired by anything that I have shared. (I now just only read this after posting translated BugTracker Tasks just recently).

I encourage a relaxed state to take in the demo, and, appreciate your sincerity, and again, for [all] your commitment to this community and its development.