Feature request: Sub numbering extension

I am in the same boat. But feel if they would just alllow cue list 1/1-3 load to clear faders we could manually play back our looks on individual sliders then we wouldnt have to make notes of what subs we used. I use the go button once in the last 7 years... i put this in a few times as a request. But film is too small of a market for ETC i believe. 

I've been thinking about this and have been somewhat confused. If you have hundreds of Subs, are you remapping Subs to Faders for every shoot? If so, why not store your scenes in Presets?

So you want to assign Submasters 243.1 - 243.3 to Faders 1-3. Instead, Record scenes to Preset 243.1 - 243.3. Then, instead of remapping Faders, keep Subs 1-3 assigned to Faders 1-3, but then record Presets 243.1-243.3 to Submaster 1-3.

Next shoot, Record to Presets 244.1-244.7 and then assign Presets 244.1-244.7 to Subs 1-7.

You have a tool (Presets) that you didn't have before, why not use them? Also remember... [Group] [Preset] (243.1) [Preset] (243.1) [Enter] recalls all channels with data recorded in the preset and assigns the value of the Preset.

mdrohn 

Hi Wuz314159,

I think you may be mixing me with Ranger's comment above, but here are my thoughts.

I don't typically have a huge number of subs, much less hundreds that need to be on faders at the same time.  I want the sub numbers to correlate to a cue number or a channel number, whatever that cue or channel number is.  In a typical instance, I might make a sub for a limited and specific transition within one shot, such as an actor flipping a light switch that makes five practical lamps turn on or off as well as a key light, soft box, etc.  If that was created to happen within cue 345.2, It's much more convenient and intuitive for later reference to call it "sub 345.2".  When the shot is done and we move on to a new setup, I might recycle the sub if we're covering the same action in the same scene from a new angle, but most of the time that sub will never be used again... until it is, days or weeks later when we might unpredictably need to reshoot or otherwise refer back to that look.

The idea to use a preset on a fader is an interesting one, but presets can't do the same things subs do, and when I create subs for this purpose I need all their subbiness--priorities, timings, restore state, HTP/LTP, exclusions, etc.

I think Ranger was talking about batch-loading consecutive cues onto consecutive faders, which isn't a workflow I've ever tried

Hi Wuz314159,

I think you may be mixing me with Ranger's comment above, but here are my thoughts.

I don't typically have a huge number of subs, much less hundreds that need to be on faders at the same time.  I want the sub numbers to correlate to a cue number or a channel number, whatever that cue or channel number is.  In a typical instance, I might make a sub for a limited and specific transition within one shot, such as an actor flipping a light switch that makes five practical lamps turn on or off as well as a key light, soft box, etc.  If that was created to happen within cue 345.2, It's much more convenient and intuitive for later reference to call it "sub 345.2".  When the shot is done and we move on to a new setup, I might recycle the sub if we're covering the same action in the same scene from a new angle, but most of the time that sub will never be used again... until it is, days or weeks later when we might unpredictably need to reshoot or otherwise refer back to that look.

The idea to use a preset on a fader is an interesting one, but presets can't do the same things subs do, and when I create subs for this purpose I need all their subbiness--priorities, timings, restore state, HTP/LTP, exclusions, etc.

I think Ranger was talking about batch-loading consecutive cues onto consecutive faders, which isn't a workflow I've ever tried

You could have the cue fire a macro to clear all your subs and to load the presets that belong to that specific cue onto your sub faders. 

Hi Theatermachine,

The issue isn't how to load or unload subs, it's about having a unified numbering system to permit efficient archiving of cues and associated subs.  This is probably something that is particular to the motion picture/TV workflow.

The biggest difference is that we don't typically use the cue stack to create a sequence that then gets played back a bunch of times.  Cues are recorded primarily for archiving and reference purposes.  99% of the time the look in a cue is for one-time use only right when the cue is created.  But it's also typical to have to look back and refer to a certain cue for levels when reshooting or using it to build a variation for a different shot, but at the same time completely unpredictable which specific cue that might be.  So any one-time subs that might have been created for use with that one-time cue would be a whole lot easier to manage if they had an intuitive and shared numbering system.

I understand. So in addition to your request, maybe you would also need that amount of fader pages?

No, I'm only likely to have a modest number of subs that were created for that purpose by the end of a season or movie, and I won't need any of them loaded to faders except when we're in the associated cue(s) shooting that particular setup.  It depends on the project and the DP's style, but in my experience on most gigs you only need to do a lighting gag once in a while.  The cue numbers in which I might need to do that are essentially random, so forcing the gag sub to be an integer 1000 or lower is very limiting.