ETC Ion & Chroma Q Color Force

I get the workaround, but why does there need to be one? Seems very clunky to have to build them all as separate channels. Hate to reference a competitor, but why not create "Point" channels for the cells like the MA? Or we can call them nA, nB, nC, etc. Telling the fixture it is in one mode, while telling the console it is in another is a workaround. There shouldn't have to be "workarounds" is my point.

The handling of this is on the development list but it hasn't been got to yet. (Every feature cannot be developed at the same time)

At some point there wont be a need for a workaround but until there is support for this in the console you will need to use these.

Tom

The handling of this is on the development list but it hasn't been got to yet. (Every feature cannot be developed at the same time)

At some point there wont be a need for a workaround but until there is support for this in the console you will need to use these.

Tom

Thanks, Tom. Hopefully they'll get to it soon. I noticed the first post in this thread was nearly four years ago, so it doesn't seem too high up on the priority list. Cheers.

Although there are a few advantages to the point system there are just as many disadvantages.
One of many examples to over come is,
I want to control 'the 7th Cell in each fixture' but next time I want to control 'every 7th cell across the fixtures' which may equal 7th, then 4th, then 1st.
When some users (including me) looked at the MA implementation a couple of years ago, they're just fudging the numbers and you lost as much control as you'd gained depending on what your trying to do.
Now this may have changed since then.

ETC are looking to add better control tools with these fixture and not just fudge the numbers.
MA didn't (they may now) have the golden ticket in fixing this problem.