Channel selection with multi-cell fixtures - possible bug/feature request

Hi there,

Using v2.7.2 public release.

Possibly a few potential bugs/unhelpful features on channel selection when using multi-cell fixtures. I work a lot between MA2 and EOS only...

1. When making a channel selection of a mixture of fixtures without multi-cells and then fixtures with multi-cells the channel selection goes to only the cells of all fixtures. In my mind it shouldn’t and should select what I type. Example:

101-106 - non-multicell S4 Lustr S2

301-307 - colorforce 72 in M4 (12 cell) RGBA mode

I type the syntax:

101 thru 106 + 307.1 thru 317.12  enter

This should in my mind select:

Channels 101-106 as fixtures completely

And then select channels 307 cell 1 thru 317 cell 12 (I.e 84 cells of the 7 C/Force’s excluding the masters)

Instead it tries to select .1 to .12 of 101-106 and 301-07 meaning that actually the only thing it selects is 301-307 .1 to .12

Is this what is expected or is it a “bug” feature?

2. Using multi-cells on a magic sheet...

Until now I haven’t really used magic sheets that much in EOS apart from having a visual of the rig in front of me... however I’m now coming from a world of using MA2 a lot which has Layout Views that if you drag and drop a line of fixtures the order the drag starts from and ends determines the fixture selection - very helpful for LED battens/arrays.....

In EOS Magic sheet I have drawn 7x ColorForce battens as 12 individual cells each (haven’t included the master) and assigned channels to be .1 to .12 which is fine. There are 1 line of 7 channels so 84 cells wide. The feedback is as I would expect in terms of how it behaves to syntax commands...

If I drag and drop (to select cells) from 301.1 to 304.6 (centre) and then 307.12 to 304.7 I would expect my channel order to be just that... instead the command line feedback comes to me as 301 thru 307 cells only meaning that the order runs from L-R and not SR to C and SL to C... this again seems odd....

Not sure if all of the above is what was intended, if it was then please see my post as a “feature/development suggestion/request”, if it was not intended then see this as a possible bug report!

Thanks for your time and I understand multi-cell is new - just wanted to give some feedback!

Happy Saturday all!

M

Parents
  • EOS does tend to have trouble with order of operations sometimes.
    If you had typed 307 [Thru] 308 [.] + 101 [Thru] 106 [Enter] You would get your desired result.
    "All Cells" works... but if you specify individual Cells, then EOS assumes you mean Cell 101-106 from then on.

    Syntax will be a be a perpetual problem if you're co-mingling Channels and Cells.
    I'd strongly suggest you start utilising Groups when working with MC fixtures. It eliminates all of the syntax quirks.

    (and I have zero answers for anyone about magic sheets. sorry)

Reply
  • EOS does tend to have trouble with order of operations sometimes.
    If you had typed 307 [Thru] 308 [.] + 101 [Thru] 106 [Enter] You would get your desired result.
    "All Cells" works... but if you specify individual Cells, then EOS assumes you mean Cell 101-106 from then on.

    Syntax will be a be a perpetual problem if you're co-mingling Channels and Cells.
    I'd strongly suggest you start utilising Groups when working with MC fixtures. It eliminates all of the syntax quirks.

    (and I have zero answers for anyone about magic sheets. sorry)

Children
No Data
Related