Thru Thru

I am happy with the change because now it works like it did on the ETC Obsession 600 that I was programming before. The logic is sensible and the keystrokes are concise in terms of number and location. If I am working in a flexi-state it is more likely that I don't want to grab channels that are not already used, active, or patched. To me it makes more sense to add an extra keystroke to make that action happen.

I gotta say that I'm not a fan of [thru] only effecting certain channels depending on what flexi mode one is in. I think [thru] is a basic command that should have absolute behavior. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of a "magical thru" effecting only the current flexi view, and I think that [thru] [thru] is the more appropriate syntax.

-M

I just finished designing in a small rep house.  Viewing patched flexi was really useful, as I could hide all those channels that weren't in my I show.  Having a fixed view of the channels is important to me; after a couple hours of cueing, I tend to learn channels on the screen by geography as much as number, and my eye will often go straight to the level number.

There were also a handful of rep system lights that were obstructed by my set, so I also deleted those from patch so they would be off the screen and so I wouldn't accidently cue them in.  In this case having Thru apply to the flexi state is quite useful, as there are gaps in what otherwise would be a continuously channeled system.

On the other hand, I want my programmer to be able to use whatever view makes sense to him or her, especially is there's a tab with a view for dealing with movers, which is why I feel Thru behavior should be a desk setting.

-Josh

Hi Guys.  Have been watching this thread to see if there is a consensus.   We can swap the behavior, so that thru thru collects within the flexi channel state.  If we do this, the change needs to happen in 1.9.  So, anyone with opinions about this needs to weigh in soon.

We have no plans to make this a desk setting.  In general terms, we only do desk settings when a reasonable agreement about behavior can not be reached. It seems that an agreement about this should be achievable.    Our approach is that desk settings are fine when it comes to display preferences and such, but should be avoided whenever possible when it comes to the actual behavior of the desk.  The more desk settings that you have, the more trouble other programmers have when picking up a show, and the more designers have to talk to you before you can start programming about how the desk should be configured.     All of that takes time that no one has.    

So, lets see if we can reach an agreement?  It would be great if those of you who were involved in the initial discussion about this could provide input.

Thanks much!

a

[thru] captures all channels within a selected range

[thru][thru] captures all displayed channels within a selected range

This seems to make the most sense to the most people. I can see the logic and I can make it work for me.

When programming we have patched our entire large repertory rig for ease of the designer being able to choose to use basic rep channels as well as show specifically rigged units quickly.  We tend therefore to programme in Show Channel Flexi which grows as we move through the production process and currently masks out the rest of the rig.  Because we are dealing with a rep rig with channel numbers that are numbered according to their position rather than show use, they can jump about out of sequence numerically.  For us having Thru, Next and Last follow flexi is extremely useful.  If it's a huge pain for everyone else except for large rep and the desicion was to swap the function of thru to thru thru, I guess we could live with it ..... 

xx

I have to agree with Crispy Nick and Sarah, coming from a large rep house the thru thru is very useful, however, if thru and thru thru swapped, I could adjust.

Ed

I definitely vote for Thru having absolute behavior, with Thru Thru being flexi specific. Not the least reason being that if one is in flexi-active (or flexi-show, or flexi-view chans) and grabs a channel outside of the currently selected view the desk will grab *all* of those channels in the Thru range, which, I think, is inconsistent even with the intent of the current behavior.

-M

I agree with this, thru should capture all channels

Thru thru captures all displayed

And Nick I have only programmed on an Eos.  I have just gotten used to Active display because my rig changes for every different show we do at the Los Angeles Opera.  Ever since I started with 1.2 I have used Active and Patched displays.  Like most others I too delete my un-used channels

What ever Etc decides I will adjust

I've been following this as well and i'm on the fence about it.I'm partial to keeping it the way it is. I would not be against it becoming a desk setting rather than making the change whole. Giving the operator the option seems like the more logical solution to me.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, it's been awile since i've had n Obsession II  in front of me. Wasn't the behavior the same when you were in a Flexi state on an OB II??

I’m another one who is happy with things the way they are at the moment!

I confess I’ve never been a user of Active Channels, nor of Strand’s Compact view, even before I started working in a rep house – like Josh & Nick I like to know where on the screen I’m looking for each channel.

I now mostly use Show Channels or Patched Channels & it all works fine for me.

Just my selfish opinion, but I find it counter-intuitive to suggest that the simple version (single press) deals with “hidden” channels, and the double press would be the way to deal with what you’re actually seeing.

Kate

Cottesloe Theatre

National Theatre

I've often said that these consoles are the coolest when you are programming your own show.  I think this issue is related to that.  I'm still amazed at what I can do and what I'm learning to do, but it's hard get a designer to get enthusiastically invested in learning all of the tricks the board can do.  Especially when every venue has a different console.  It's not their job and I wouldn't fault them but we still have to be able to agree on the language we use.  I am only now just beginning to make headway on getting them to accept and use [Thru Select Active] which sounds kind of clunky.  Again, sometimes its hard to get them to a point where caring about the difference between Thru or Thru Thru gets high on their priority list during tech week.  I can just imagine trying to explain that now, just because I'm running in something called "Flexi Active Channel" so that it makes it quicker to tell them what channel so and so is on page three [this by the way, becuase we don't have mirror mode], they have to think about the difference between Thru Thru and Thru each time they call a sequence.  They already glaze over at me after they've heard "EOS ION RPU RVI RFR iRFR and ETC" spouted out through the day. 

On the other hand,  I can see the utilility of this feature when you are pushing your own buttons, looking at your own screen, calling your own channels.  Or working for a designer who comes from a programming background.

I mentioned before that I found myself working in Flexi Active out of the need for Mirror Mode.  I used to really like All Channels with unpatched channels deleted, thereby learning channel systems by geography.  Lately, I've come around to using Patched Channels.  With one screen of playback, and two screens of channels, it never crossed my mind to use more than one Live screen at a time.  Though, now it occurs to me, that I have a fourth screen from the nearby RPU that I could put on Flexi Active, and not have to worry about it.

I guess in the end, I can live with it either way.  As it stands now, I just need to stay out of Flexi Active Channels while programming for someone else.  Remembering that a lot of designers don't want be bothered by that stuff.  Plus, mirror mode will be here with v1.8 in ten days, right?...  Right?

Oh yeah, could someone help me out with the "Large Rep Plot" scenario?  I know that I'm missing the obvious, but I would think that each show would have a specific patch that makes sense to each designer.  

As someone that has not yet programmed an EOS/ION, but am sure I will someday, I would like to put in my $.02.  First of all I would like some clarification of the current functions of the different syntaxes.

x (thru) y = selects all channels on the programming desk's active view between x and y

x (thru) (thru) y = selects all channels between x and y regardless of view or patch

x (thru) (select active) y = selects all channels on the programming desk's active view between x and y that currently have a value

Someone please correct me if I am wrong.  I bring up (select active) because I think some people here have been wanting (thru) (thru) to mean (thru on) [from Strand talk].  Now, in my opinion, the confusion here arises from the many different flexichannel views available today and the rise of many different monitors with multiple displays, NOT the actual function of the (thru) button.  If I recall from the "good old days" of Express(ion) land, there were only 2 different Stage displays possible, normal and flexichannel, and it's impossible to have them both at the same time on different monitors.  If you used flexichannel it would display all of the channels that had a value recorded in a cue of the current show file.  Now, when you were in flexichannel and you hit the (thru) button it would only include the channels that were in the flexi.  Because there was no (thru) (thru), if you wanted to select a channel that wasn't displayed, you keyed it in.  This was never confusing for anyone because the RVI would never display anything different than what the programmer was seeing.  There was no (thru on) or (select active) to worry about (unfortunately), so if the designer looked at the screen and says thru then s/he meant thru.

In conclusion :-D, if I am correct, and please tell me if I have gotten something wrong, the function of (thru) has not at all changed.  With the addition of (thru) (thru), ETC is simply trying to give the user options.  Just like the many new flexi views and multiple monitor displays.  These are all new and exciting, and hopefully, helpful utilities that ETC is making available to us.  However, with them, comes added responsibility for the user.  It is our responsibility to communicate with the designer to make sure we are using the same display, or if not, how we are going to communicate with each other.  It is our responsibility to know which of our displays is active when we type something into the command line.

/end rant

-Tim

You are close, but Expression 2/3 and Obsession II (and I believe I as well) did have the [Thru][Thru] syntax to mean all channels - [Thru] did only follow one's flexi mode. In other words, they were the same in concept to Eos 1.7's implementation.

But you are correct - there was only "Show Channels" flexi on these desks.

-luke-

Ahhh!

Please leave [Thru] as Flexi dependent. This is me rallying behind Crispy. We to have about 1000 ways of dimming it is sooo useful to have this feature. Does it not work for you 'patch what we use' guys to use Tab 1 with Patched channels and then have a second tab with Active if you like this view? It seems Active is the only problem case here.

T

Wow guess I really opened a can of worms with this thread.  I still stand behind (Thru) should be Abs.  Thru selecting whatever you type 1>5 selects 1,2,3,4,5 if they are patched of course.  I read everyones thoughts and alot of them make great sense.  So whatever ETC decides I will adjust, then figure out how to explian to all the different types of designers it is not a BUG just a new function.  I think right now though we are about 50/50 on this???

Anne, have you guys made a final decision yet about this???

This is why I think this should be a desk setting, that we the programmers can choose for ourselves!

Have fun everyone

tomsnell said:

Does it not work for you 'patch what we use' guys to use Tab 1 with Patched channels and then have a second tab with Active if you like this view? It seems Active is the only problem case here.

Then you'd have to take up 2 screens with the channel display - because Patched Channels would have to be an active tab (and therefore visible) in order for the desk to respond to the commands, and the other one with Active Channels so you can see that...

(With all these tuppences I've put in, I'm down several quid, so I'll shut up now!)

Dave

tomsnell said:

Does it not work for you 'patch what we use' guys to use Tab 1 with Patched channels and then have a second tab with Active if you like this view? It seems Active is the only problem case here.

Then you'd have to take up 2 screens with the channel display - because Patched Channels would have to be an active tab (and therefore visible) in order for the desk to respond to the commands, and the other one with Active Channels so you can see that...

(With all these tuppences I've put in, I'm down several quid, so I'll shut up now!)

Dave

Anne and all the wonderful folks here,

Well, it has been several years since using the Obsession 600 and my theater days (miss you guys), as I now program in film & tv. I was recently reminded of THRU THRU and it logical makes sense. It has been mentioned to keep the syntax as is and I agree with that, an OPTION in desk settings to adjust (I love the fact of customizing the console to a certain extent) a plus. In my world we do have programmers changing shows and replacing programmers, so keeping the console consistent is of course the best option. The common consoles in film & tv are Expression 2,3, Hog and soon to be ION. Most programmers (newer ones of course) are familiar with THRU and have had little programming with Obsession syntax, so coming in on a new show with this console with THRU THRU can ruin the day for them, as well as, future employment. I have been using the Ion for 4 months (Love It). I REQUIRE the use of Flexi-Active channels for efficiency as the Gaffer (lighting designer) is always asking for levels on channels and having them displayed on one screen a must and using THRU a big bonus. OK....with that said....every second counts in dollars for production time. Until, reminded of the THRU THRU I was pulling my hair out at this situation, my bad memory. NOW, that I am reminded of the syntax it is fine but would be faster with just THRU (wouldn't be a bad idea to BOLD case it in the MANUAL on all required pages) and ADD a option in desk settings to Turn ON or OFF so we may customize the console for our world. Sorry for the rant and hope this adds a different perspective....if not, well thanks for reading, peace.

I appreciate the rallying behind me but I must say that i don't really mind which thru does what. Although it may have happened that way on the obsession doesn't mean that its necessarily the most logical. 

Just let me know and I'll learn to push those buttons instead.

To chime in again, I think there's actually two points being discussed.

- First is thru vs thru-thru behavior, which one is flexi based and which one is absolute.  

I'm inclined to say thru should be flexi based; if you're taking advantage of the feature, you're most likely in a rep sort of situation with channel gaps in a system of channels and will use flexi thru all the time.  Thru-thru would only be necessary to add new channels to show channels view or active view, which is much less common.  I recently discovered that if the starting channel in the thru range is not on the screen, thru becomes an absolute thru.

- Regardless of how the votes go, I think the other issue is that the flexi mode of thru is screen dependent, and that Eos can have multiple channel views, with an RVI in yet another view.  Even in mirror mode, if my understanding is correct, the Eos desk could have, say, a third screen of active channels that is not mirrored on a 2 screen RVI.

I think for flexi thru to be useful to a designer, there needs to be some way to know that the programmer is in the same flexi mode, whether that's a desk setting, a soft key ([thru] {show}), some way to bind thru to a tab, etc.  Admittedly, the alternative is to just always use groups or a frequent use of the [-] key, which isn't so bad.

-Josh