EOS Profile has overlapping DMX assignments error

i'm using Litegear Spectrum OS3 profiles on a job this week and i think i've found a flaw in one of the EOS profiles that i'm looking at using. its Auroris profile 11, 24 cells. am i tripping or are there overlapping addresses in here???

look at cell 11 parameter 6 and cell 12 parameter 1, etc. in the photo. . . 

Litegear doesnt have a 24 pixel map so presumably whoever wrote this just doubled it up but the overall parameter count doesn't match up. the profile says it should be 411 addresses (doesn't make sense having an odd number). By Litegear's count it should be 416, right?? The 12 cell profile tops out at 208. think i'm gonna use that one instead.

anyone run in to this too??

  • Yes, that's a bug. But this doesn't seem to be a library profile. If it is, please tell us the exact type name as well as your software and library version.

    If this is a custom profile please share the showfile here or send it to eos(dot)moderator(at)etcconnect(dot)com.

  • it says "OS3" in the Screenshot. Since ETC currently has only the "OS2" in the Library, this is for sure custom made.

  • correct it's a custom profile from a showfile one can download from the Litegear website

  • I had a quick look at the homepage of lightgear.com

    "nothing" seems to fit together.
    The DMX Chart download here and the ETC Profiles for the different Modes Download external ETC Showfile are not matching in Cell Count.

    I had a look into Mode11 since it is the most fitting with your Picture.
    There are 4 types of Mode11 (in the Showfile), each with different Cell Count.
    Compared with the DMX Chart, i can't get why there are the 4 Types. There should only be one.

    So you have a Custem Made Fixture from LightGear (which is ok designed) and than you have apparently again made some custom editing to match the Cell Count (?) and the error came in at the last part. 


    Now the Big Question:
    Since this is "only" Custome Made, do you need any help from the Community to write you a working Fixture?

    Otherwise i would recomment to make a official Fixture-Profile Request on https://fixture-library-hub.etcconnect.com/

    And i recomment contacting LightGear to tell them that they may please have a look at the Fixture Profiles they Made.

  • The root of this is a bug:

    Fixture Editor: Multicell Editor Incorrectly Allows Cell Address Overlapping

    This bug was fixed in 3.2.4. This means when you create a custom fixture now this won't be possible anymore. However, since Eos can't in all situations infer what the actual intent was when creating the profile, it will not attempt to re-write the fixture itself.

    Your two ways out of this are either editing the profile yourself, or obtaining a showfile that was fixed by somebody else.

  • understood. i wasnt looking for a fix, just to ID the bug. given your response it looks like it was written in an earlier version. thank you. 

  • You are correct Mathilda. Litegear has a history of making mistakes with their equipment physically and within the software. I don't know who wrote the profiles for them, but the flaw is written into that particular profile. There are actually 6 M11 profiles: 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24 pixels (cells). And the reason for that has to do with the "family" of products that they produce. It's the Litemats and Auroris that use those profiles. Depending on the product, you can multicell them in different amounts and you select that cell count inside the menu system of the fixture. So presumably they had the person/company write the profiles to match up to those options to make it easier for programmers in film production to assign the profile to the light that has "x" number of available cells. For instance the Litemat 8 can have anywhere from 1-8 cells depending on how you configure it. So you'd patch the profile to the cell count that matches the config of the light. Its a bout versatility because in film they like to have a lot of options and sometimes make strange choices on how things get configured. 

    i plan to contact them to point it out. I've found at least 2 other profiles in that list that have errors as well, not with overlapping DMX addresses, but with cell counts. 

    thanks for the feedback!! Cheers. . . .