Superstar and Nutcracker

[Robert Burton]

So how is the pixel editor going to be different than Superstar? I speak on being stupid to Superstar since I have not used it.

 

I am sure Superstar is a great product. MOST ALL OF US are doing this hobby on a tight budget. You get sticker shock when you purchase pixels anyway or you go from incans to pixels. The software cost just adds salt to the womb.

 

I too want to have specific control of each pixel. Pretty picky on my sequences for the most part.

 

[Ron Boyd]

If I understand it correctly, and this is just me taking my statement from what Dan has already posted, the pixel editor will be something like what Nutcracker does, the element level. here is a quote copied and pasted from Dan's post:

 

"Sequence Editor Pixel Effects Tool – The Sequence Editor will be enhanced to support pixel based objects such as CCR Trees, RGB-pixel trees, RGB-pixel matrixes, etc.  at the object level rather than at the channel level. Thus effects such as swirls, snow flakes, scrolling text, etc. can be accomplished using high level effects tools with real-time visualization. To help get this to market quickly, Light-O-Rama has purchased a commercial license for the xLights/Nutcracker source code.

 

The Sequence Editor interface will look the same and act the same allowing existing users to use it as they do today. Existing sequences will continue to work, however the user will have the option of sequencing pixel based objects using a new paradigm.  

 

Although the new tools in the Sequence Editor will allow for the sequencing of high channel RGB-pixel based objects, it will be limited to a list of pre-determined effects. The LOR SuperStar Sequencer will continue to allow users to create advanced, custom effects for their RGB-pixel based objects."

[bob_moody]

Just chiming in a little as a LONG time LOR user (ver 1.6 is earliest I have still in my archives).

I've made the trip through LOR and Superstar. I now have the 24 CCR version and not a single LOR CCx product.

 

I added 12 of the HolidayCoro 50 pixel strings this year in hopes of making a 180 tree to replace my aging (10 years old) incandescent 3 color megatree.

Last year I bought and returned LSP... I met FastEddy etc .. thought it would do the trick .. but ..

This year I took another look at Nutcracker. While its a great program, I have difficulty with the "model" concept of sequencing. You build a model and then you apply some effects to them. Its great for crank it out sequencing but you lose all granularity (read as personality) in the display. If all you want is to spin a tree, or spiral, or bars or any of the other built in functions its great.... I am still a little perplexed in how you place things as accurately as you can with LOR and SS but that's my learning curve.. To me ..

 

So now my issue is how to sequence this monster I have created:

In SS you have to create a visualizer model of the tree... one bulb at a time .. is 600 props !! there are limits and other issues ..

In SS you COULD create the tree using CCR's then run it though one of the converters talked about here in the forum .. Okay .. sounds great .. BUT .. I built this tree in a zigzag (50 up, 50 down .. etc ...) Not a CCR format ..

In NC I can solve all the issues with the construction of the tree, but, I have to sequence the tree by itself, Imported LOR sequences don't show up in NC.. They WILL PLAY .. but as far as I know .. that's it ..

 

Need to find a VIS for the tree .. or build one .. so I can use SS ..

OR

Settle and just apply generic effects to the tree in NC and import it to LOR.

 

Now .. I would have part done in LOR, part in SS and part in NC ..

 

so... as Rick Ricardo said... " splain dat Lucy... "

 

Bob

[BrianBruderer]

I feel your pain. And your last line gave me a chuckle.

 

You say you have twelve 50 pixel strings and want to make a 180 tree out of them. Are you wanting it to look similar to my "SuperStar" display that has a star at the top with 12 CCRs coming down?

[Ron Boyd]

bob_moody,

 

In the visualizer just create a CCR tree and use the option "CCR Edge to Center/Center to Edge" under the header "Type of Channel Bundles / Fixtures" Takes about 2 minutes, tops. That will solve the zigzag dilemma you have.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Ron Boyd

[bob_moody]

Brian... Yes . that is exactly what I am wanting to do ..

 

Ron.. So I build the CCR tree as you describe, sequence it, export it and then run it though the LOR2DMX converter ?

 

I will give that a try !!!

 

Thanks guys for the replies . hopefully not a hijack .. I was just chiming in with my dilemma and thoughts on LOR and NC.

 

Bob

[Ron Boyd]

Where can I find this LOR2DMX converter? I don't think I've seen this. Does it change a CCR channels to DMX channels?

[bob_moody]

Ron,

 

There is a topic in the Visualizer forum..

 

http://forums.lightorama.com/index.php?/topic/30005-lor-cc-dmx-lets-you-use-cc-in-the-visualizer-and-dmx-in-the-show/

 

I have played with it a little bit and it does/did work...

 

Bob

[Ron Boyd]

Ah. I was afraid that was going to be the one. I'll give it a try. Not really comfy messing around with stuff like this. I'll make sure I back-up before even installing it. Thanks Bob

[bob_moody]

Yeah its java and java gets bad publicity... But...it does work and none of my scanners had a fit over it...

But more to the question Ron....if you didn't use something like this, how would you manipulate the CCR viz into SS and then convert it to use with dmx?

[Ron Boyd]

I just make 2 sets of channels, One for CCR stuff that are in multiples of 50, and 1 for DMX. I degroup the CCR channels then re-group the 50 RGB channels and 7 Macro channels seperately. When my sequence is complete, I delete the macros, cut and paste from CCR to DMX and then delete the CCR channels. Basically the same principal, I just do it manually.

[bob_moody]

Ron,

We may want to take this to another thread...but...not being familiar with CCR... You had me right up to the 7 macro channels?? Is that a LOR_centric channel for talking to the lor controller that we don't need in dmx?

[bob_moody]

At the risk of getting a warning for hijacking the thread...

 

Ron .....

 

THANK YOU VERY VERY MUCH !!!!

I got it working.

 

I created the viz as you described, Opened it in SS then applied a single bottom to top morph, saved and exported the file to LMS.

I opened the exported LMS, degrouped the 12 strings and deleted the Macro channels for each string

I opened a new LOR musical sequence with a single channel.

I then inserted a device for each of my 4 universes. This created and assigned channels 1 thru 450 for each universe.

I then grouped each 450 channel segment into 4 separate groups (univ 6,7,8, and 9)

I then converted each group to RGB by selecting the 1st channel and telling to create 150 more.

Finally I copied and pasted the modified SS export into the new LOR sequence.

I saved it to a flash drive and took out to the shop where I have the tree setup with a laptop.

I started the LOR Control Panel, opened the sequence, set the play to visible screen and hit play ..

VIOLA!! ..

The morph played perfect across the 12 strings .. all starting at the bottom and chasing/fading up to the top...

 

So now .. I am BACK IN BUSINESS with SS to do all my programming. I may try to create barber pole spiral in Nutcracker and export it and see if I can find a good place to insert it in the sequence .. but that is a another can-o-worms...

 

Thanks again Ron and Brian and to everyone reading this thread .. I apologize again for hi-jacking it and I hope I have not offended anyone in the process and I also hope that this might offer some insight as to what can be done with SS..

 

<one happy coder>

Bob

</one happy coder>

[BrianBruderer]

No problem. Thanks for describing what you did, it will help others who are doing the same thing.

[robigd]

Don't want to offend anybody, but wanted to offer my 2 cents on some of the content in this thread. I am a software developer myself and personally don't mind the purchase and licensing structure of SuperStar. I disagree that the purchase of CCR/CCB/CCP should include the free use of SuperStar. If the cosmic color devices couldn't be programmed without SuperStar then that would be a completely different story, but they can.

 

A perfect example in this case is Microsoft's Visual Studio. You could do the exact same things using Notepad to write your code, without ever purchasing Visual Studio, but any Microsoft developer knows that Visual Studio simplifies the process 1000x and are going to pony up $500 for Visual Studio 9/10 times. If you really wanted to, you could program your cosmic color devices using the Sequence Editor, but most people will opt for the easier way, and that happens to be an add-on that costs extra.

 

Sure, Brian could have taken the open source route, but he didn't. That is his choice.

Edited January 17, 2015 by robigd