ETC Fixture Library Hub improvements

After the library requests were moved to the ETC Fixture Library Hub, there was also some functionality lost. Users cannot suggest improvements to existing fixtures anymore, only apply for new ones. It is often that after testing the fixtures in the real world (something that Carallon or ETC clearly are not doing) suggestions for improvements come up.

Please allow notes for existing fixtures. 


  • Can you check if you see the red Create Request button after you navigated to a fixture? This will take you to the same form as for new fixtures but has the manufacturer and the model already filled in.

    Is there something specific you'd want to see differently?

  • If you press the button on an existing fixture you are still asked to fill out all the details as if it were a new fixture. You cannot submit the form unless every single field is completed. Usually, it is something that is not clear from the manual, so it makes absolutely no sense to send the manual. Most of the time it is about reporting shutters, pan degrees, or control/macro channel issues.

  • The requested changes still need to be verified against documentation, that's why also for changes some form of upload is required.

  • I do not agree. Changes need to be verified with the real fixture at hand, not the manual that caused the mistake in the first place. Uploading a photo would make more sense. This system seems to be in place to discourage people to make a report, because there is such a backlog at Carallon. This is at least the impression that the system gives me. Totally not like ETC.

  • Another thing is that you cannot see whether a fixture is under debate by users. It is very useful to open a discussion (like in a forum), because sometimes it is not clear what is the right approach (zoom direction could be one)

  • Hello - 

    Like all new software development, our portal is not in place to discourage submissions, but was released with a basic set of features which we plan to build upon as development continues. I have noted your want to have a path for fixture changes/improvements separate from fixture submissions, and will discuss with the team. 

    Regarding creation and testing of fixtures, you are correct in that, with the sheer volume of new and updated fixtures being released, it is not feasible for all profiles to be tested with real units and updated firmware. As such, we rely on accurate documentation from the fixture manufacturer to build a working profile. I might suggest you approach these manufacturers about providing documentation from which an accurate profile can be built without the need for a physical unit. 

    Also always remember that Eos has an extensive profile editor, so if there are fixes or operational preferences which differ from the base profile, you are welcome to make those changes on your own. A single fixture profile can be saved in an .esf file and transported between shows like any other portable format.

    Thanks for the feedback, 

  • Thank you for your answer. I can see the situation you are in and why you keep referring to the manual. Sometimes the manual though is not the most comprehensive or self-contained document and it only makes sense in relation to the actual fixture. Also, not all manuafacturers use the same methodology for naming things or for parameter direction. This means changing the manual is not always the solution.

    I try to avoid building too many of my own fixtures, because it can make exchanging (parts of) shows even more confusing. I think it also important that ETC is consistent in its library, so operators can rely on parameters behaving in a predictable way.

    I appreciate you are considering my request.