is there in the next update a pixel mapping or what are the plans? it will be useful even if you have only 20 sunstrips or led fixtures the video you do with a media server but for those little things very handy:)
[QUOTE=Buzz313th;73244]I ran the 7970 for a while, but just upgraded both boxes to AMD W9000s. They are monster cards. 6 outs at 4k each, plus I can Genlock (Framelock) at the cards which is awesome since I don't have to do an ImagePro. They are well worth the money and transforms the box into a good investment.
With Apple and Catalyst I´m a bit limited which cards can be used. But the cards in the new MacPro are quite comparable to the W9000 (unfortunatly without Genlock) Looking forward to the new Axon Pro HD Live with Genlock... I think they might use also this Gfx
[QUOTE=digne;73248]hello, I'm quite divided on the pixel mapping directly into the console. This would require a lot of crossfade on all DMX channels and suddenly the console performance would suffer . So I think the media server solution is better. But imagine a pixel mapping on a 10 x 10 magicPanel wall ( 60x60 pixels). If I want to run a media on the entire map then the media server works well. But now imagine that we want only turn on the first and last LED of each MagicPanel ... I think it becomes a little complicated with a media server The easiest, in this case, is that the console directly turn on those LEDs. But unfortunately this is the media server that is wired to the magic panels .... Should therefore merge the media server AND the console... So in the end we need 1 media server + 1 merger htp.
So I think it would be more interesting than the hog can be a REAL merger htp that can make a pixel mapping alone. This way we can run all kinds of media but also easily controlling each pixel.
Regards,
Gael
Very good point. Artnet merging should have more options, like LTP, HTP per channel
All Said we need some form of pixel mapping !! chamsys ops in film use pixel mapping instead of effects to do chases !! at festivals you get a wall of jarags and a small pixel effect is a quick way of getting good visuals !! if chamsys and Avo can do this over artnet surely H4 ( which has *** loads more power) is capable !! Having to change desk to chamsys because H4 Cant is not the best way FORWARD !! Can we please move forward with a little more haste !
Andy, sometimes more power and more options also results in a more difficult setup and realisation. Chamsys and Avo are outputting artnet just from the console. So only one physical output and processor taking care of all. HOG can output from the console and also via DPs, so a distributed system where the calculations for DMX are done. This is a more complex task than in the chamsys or avo world. I agree that it is not impossible and should be done. But it is more complex to implement. With that said I heard rumors that it is worked on.
Personally, I am more interested in taking things to the next level. We should focus more on what we want from pixel mapping and what kind of pixel mapping is something new. Is there going to be pixel mapping or not is kind of irrelevant discussion. What we should think is what kind of pixel mapping is best for our needs and what is a good integration with FX engine.
IMO it is important.
-To have a pixel mapping that is easy to use -Good crossfades between FX engine, and between bitmaps. -Here's a good place for multitouch moving, scaling and rotation. -Still image animation (for example move, scale, rotate, intensity) -Ability to pixel map almost any parameters (pan and tilt, iris, zoom, etc)
[QUOTE=srautane;73303]Personally, I am more interested in taking things to the next level. ...
IMO it is important.
-To have a pixel mapping that is easy to use -Good crossfades between FX engine, and between bitmaps. -Here's a good place for multitouch moving, scaling and rotation. -Still image animation (for example move, scale, rotate, intensity) -Ability to pixel map almost any parameters (pan and tilt, iris, zoom, etc)
Good point Sami, the option to map the value of a pixel to any parameter would be a great tool for creating very complex looks. All of your requests is what I would request from a good pixel-mapper, and thats also a reason why I´m using a media-server for that task most of the times. I think it makes no sense just to implement a small bmp-animator, if it is done it must be done correct and as a minimum with the same options a Chamsys, AVO or Clarity offers. If you want to seperate from the competitors you need to provide some stuff that the others have and make it better/easier to use or you must provide more features
I have been reading with interest. Personally I think the pixel mapping thing is a reaction to the inability to do what we want to do on the console, and is a crude workaround, in most cases. What's missing for me on this and some other consoles currently, is the ability to layout your fixtures graphically yet proportionately, be there 10 or 10,000 of them, and be able to create the desired looks on stage quickly, accurately and in a manor that is both reusable and scaleable. By this I mean you should be able to create a sequence on one show with 100 fixtures and re-use this on another show with 500 fixtures. You should be able to alter the relationship of the fixtures in the layout to create various offsets without reprogramming your data.
The main issue I have with pixel mapping, and yes sure it does have a place of sorts, is that unless you are creating pixel accurate bespoke content, it easily becomes generic wall paper, is very hard to manipulate accurately, and almost impossible to use with music which has a non-linear or syncopated structure. If it is bespoke, altering the fixture count requires remaking the content.
I feel as if what is being requested can be achieved by other means, it just takes a shift in thinking perhaps to get there. The beauty of coming at this from a different angle is that it's not fixated to any number of parameters or fixture types and thus should offer support for future fixture releases of any kind however off the wall they become as they come to market.
I'm very excited about the future plans of the development team and quietly confident a good all-round solution can be found. I'm just not sure old-style pixel mapping is the whole answer.
