Jump to content
Light-O-Rama Forums


Beta Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jwilling

  1. lonewolvie wrote: I love the smell of paranoia in the morning! It smells like... 'Trade Secrets'! As a former employer had as the corporate mantra: "The question is not, 'are you paranoid'? The question is, 'are you paranoid enough'?"
  2. appears to run happily enough on my Vista Ultimate (32 bit) system. Have not tinkered with the export function tho... -jim
  3. Jeff Sand wrote: Was peripherally aware of that, but the idea was to be able to leverage existing hardware and resources rather than to have to go out and purchase a console. While not as convenient in all situations as a physical console, a 'soft' console; properly done would be of great use I would think, and provide access to the additional functionality available in the LOR controllers where a normal DMX console would not. And if one has a touch screen available, well... :cool: BTW: a quick peruse of the LOR website did not turn up the wiring instructions you referred to. Mind posting the direct link? Ah; no mind... not on the 'LOR website' as such, but in a document I located at: http://lightorama.com/Documents/DMX-DOC.pdf
  4. Guess I'll add my voice to the discussion. I heartily agree with the comment that it is a sad thing to have these controllers on the shelf for 11 months out of the year due to a lack of options. I have seen many a time where I would have liked to be able to use the controllers for lighting control in a 'live' environment, but have been unable to since the software as it currently exists does not lend itself to this mode of operation. One might observe that you can have a level of 'live' control via the hardware utility console, but only on one controller at a time and in a fairly limited fashion. I would love to see a utility/program/software that could be operated similarly to a 'standard' (if there is ever such a thing) 'intelligent' lighting console, where you could operate multiple controllers and create scenes, triggers, and shows as well as have 'live' control. Would think the availability of this functionality would not only keep the controllers from residing on the shelf for long periods, but might generate some additional interest/sales as well.
  5. You know... you are really starting to depress those of us who are not going to have one this season...
  6. Figure that a direct question is in order before I just declare it a 'write off' for this year... How constrained is the CCR supply at this moment? From the commentary in some of the other threads, one would tend to conclude that they are still in fairly short supply.
  7. LightORamaJohn wrote: Perhaps not so much the quality of the writing, but the introduction of a number of new concepts (macros, control registers, etc...) that may be foreign to a number of people. You must admit, it is a rather dramatic departure from the mode in which the LOR products have operated previously. This combined with the lack of direct support in the software for these new functionalities and their associated complexities is likely to set a number of heads into a spin. ...and a dearth of specific examples (demos if you will) of the various macros/functions/etc. that people could load and view, then tweak to see the changes... (hint, hint...) Trying to learn, let alone master a device like this with the ever ticking clock at your back can un-nerve the best of us... I'm frantic'ing bad enough trying to get ready for Christmas. Don't even want to think about the people trying to get their Halloween shows going!
  8. James Shelby wrote: Waxing a tad theoretical, (disclaimer of any 'inside' knowledge) The addressing ID dials are rotary switches, not potentiometers, and they are read by the on-board CPU at power-up/reset to determine the particular unit ID. The ID code for each unit is sent as part of the data packet stream that is seen by all controllers on the 'network', and the unit ID is used by the controller to determine which data packets to respond to. So it appears unlikely that damage to the cat-5 cable would single out one controller for grief, rather that all controllers downstream from the damaged cable would show problems. The fault is most likely in the switch on that particular board, or the associated logic that allows the processor to read it. Thought it could be a simple as a bad solder joint. Can't get too much more specific as the board manual does not include a schematic. Theories and conjecture... FWIW. (that way I don't get yelled at)
  9. GaryMartin wrote: Cautiously... yes... with the caveat (again from the manual): "Cut Point - the ribbon can be cut at these points, but doing so voids the ribbon portion of the warranty." Also; keep in mind when planning something like this that each circuit board that makes up the pixels is apx. 4" long, so this could still become a limiting factor. And of course you will want to seal each of these newly created 'segments' to protect them from the elements... Have to admit, I've thought in similar directions... But having not seen the cost (or availability) of replacement ribbons in the event that such an experiment goes horribly wrong, it does give one pause. ...for a moment or two...
  10. GaryMartin wrote: Based on the 'official' specifications, I'd think not. From the manual: "The ribbon can be wrapped around a 3" diameter pole." Need to keep in mind, that the ribbon does not have nearly the flexibility of a 'standard' rope light as it contains 50 circuit boards linked by interconnecting cable, and as such will be limited by the flexing capability of the circuit boards and the components on each. Additionally; one needs consider that even though there would be more 'flex' at the 'cut points' (the interconnects between the circuit boards), any extreme flexing at these points runs the risk of putting strain on the interconnects with in increasing potential for stress induced failure. ...or in a bit less verbose wording: breaking the wires. :shock:
  11. So... is it just me, or an artifact of the camera, that makes it look as if some of the pixels do not appear to be responding correctly in some colors? In particular it looks as if when white and purple are cycled into, there appears to be 5-6 pixels in the upper right quadrant of the disc that seem to be in blue rather than the actual selected color.
  12. ...and since you are going to tease us with the (near) release version of the manual (dated Sept. 30th for those who have not looked yet). When does this thing release into the 'wild'?
  13. So... now a couple of months and a delay or so down the line... Once again trolling for insight. Might we get any hints/clues/etc. as to how the CCR will be represented in the Sequence editor and Animation window? I like many I suspect are still working to finish/finalize/start/struggle-thru sequences, and for me at least it is quite the mind bender to attempt to try and sequence anything around the (greatly hoped for) CCR with no actual point of reference. Trying to work through it on the basic 150 channel model is painful at best (as it would be with any similar device), and attempting to sequence based on the preliminary details on the 'macro' capabilities is a migraine inducing exercise in theoretical visualization! :shock: Must admit, the 'matrix' editor function in LightShowPro looks quite impressive, though it is far too far down the time stream to consider an editor change... And I would hope what ever comes along in the LOR software would be similar/comparable. So; yes I suppose this could be considered little more than 'pot stirring', but hey! A little stirring up from time to time is not necessarily a bad thing.
  14. All of which makes me a bit curious... What sort of prices are they getting for the RGB-LED rope light? I'm thinking that it should be controllable via the LOR CMB-16D DC controller with a small bit of tinkering. Seems like a bit of overkill to have go the whole DMX + controller route for a rope light. Even if the DMX controller is a bit dodgy, if the rope light is decent... (for the price)
  15. Well; I feel better now... Was starting to fear that the laws of basic electronics were beginning to change!
  16. BILL VANDERSLICE wrote: If the 1.5 amp converter of proper voltage and connected with the proper polarity did not get a result, then it's a good bet that the DMX controller has gone bye-bye. Having additional amperage capability should (almost) never cause a problem, where as having reduced capacity as with the 300ma unit almost certainty would with any load at all.
  17. deblen wrote: Or... if you were considering another controller/more channels, have a look at the CMB-16D Deluxe DC Card. A 16 channel LOR controller but strictly for controlling DC powered widgets/lights/etc...
  18. Well... working from memory, and presuming that the 'PC' version of the board is using the same TRIACs for switching as the 'D' boards do, then I would lean towards no. The TRIAC, being electronically equivalent to a dual SCR so as to pass the full cycle of an AC waveform, once triggered it is dependent upon the zero-crossing of the waveform in order to 'reset' the device for the next cycle. DC voltage, not having a periodic cycle would never reset the TRIAC, so once triggered would remain on indefinitely unless externally interrupted. Think that is correct, and perhaps even borderline clear... It has been a long Monday...
  19. captainron19 wrote: Yes; the first time you load the sequence into the editor, it will be converted to the new format. The conversion only occurs on the initial load, after that is will be saved in the S2 format. It is a one way trip however. There is no provision for saving back to the S1 format. If you wish to keep the original file, you should save the new sequence under a new name or in a different directory to avoid overwriting it. (and/or keep good backups)
  20. Is it perhaps a bad portent that the date on the 'preliminary' manual for the DIO still reads "September 24, 2008"?
  21. chowell wrote: Keep a "Monster Garage-esque" countdown clock above the desk in my (home) office, so I'm always (painfully) aware of the movement of time... (says the man in the 17 foot long multi-coloured scarf, quietly chuckling to himself at the irony) Finishing housings for two new controllers, struggling with that increasingly insistent voice in the back of the head saying that the 'flow' of the songs in this year's set list is still not quite right, still not started on the frame for the 'Z'-Tree that I decided to shift to for this year from the more common pole based mega-tree, have not yet committed the scripts for the voice-overs to paper, having a bit of a frantic moment with the delay of the CCR (hard to integrate properly when you can not see/play with it), trying to (finally) decide if this is the year to go to LED floods (and the associated DC controller) or to do one more year with the incandescent, trying to avoid making any (more) changes to the overall layout... Must be something else that I am forgetting... Oh yes, of course... Getting the sequences for the rest of the songs completed! Overall... no more behind schedule than usual...
  22. Well drat! And I was so looking forward to a new blinky to start working with next week. But I would have to agree, if they found something to cause them significant enough concern as to decide to delay the product, then little doubt that it is the correct decision. Disappointed, but appreciative.
  23. Pardon if someone has already posed this one, but was doing a bit of thinking/sequencing/debating this evening and it suddenly struck me. Just how will the CCR be represented in the Animation Window? ...and as an aside I suppose, how might it be represented in the Holiday Light Designer? (if anyone from that group lurks about) I have to say, I've found the animation editor quite tedious when trying to layout complex setups, and more so when trying to represent multiple colors in adjacent lines (pixels). I've found myself more than once wishing the animation editor had a 'constraint' function, to lock movement (drawing) to the horizontal or vertical. Would make laying out adjacent string much easier. But I drift off topic...
  24. ItsMeBobO wrote: I too would like to have smaller arches. Can the cable be cut and extended with four lead wire and resealed? I hear "Void warranty" coming! Anyone else wondering why 50 was selected instead or 32(96) or 64(192) pixels? Do two ribbons chasing end to end look like a continuous effect? Well... it was offered (by Dan I think, no... I'm wrong. It is a note in the manual) that there is a 'cut' line between the individual RGB modules that make up the ribbon where you can split the ribbon, but at the sacrifice of the warranty on the ribbon. It has also been mentioned that there is the capability for 'daisy-chaining' ribbons, but this is not being offered at present as LOR has not found a water tight connector that they are comfortable with yet. So... I'd like to offer a thought for consideration by the LOR crew... Since there is obviously a seal on the one end where the ribbon connects to the controller, might LOR consider offering a option to get the ribbon configured in two eight foot sections hard linked (wired) between the two segments using the same seal that is being used for the controller cable? I also think this would be brilliant for arches, but as others have observed the arches are visually better in multiples. ...and as much as I might like to, I know my budget is not going to allow for more than one of these this season. Which then also brings the thought, is there a macro mode that would allow one to program the two segments as independant units? (for non-synchronous effects, etc.) or would you have to take direct control of the pixels?
  25. FandomFilms wrote: Not to hijack the thread too severely, but your note piqued my curiosity so I hopped over to have a look. Bit of a 'flag' went up when I noted that the sale notice stated" "Take 10% off the ORIGINAL Firefly RGB Pixel System" Causes one to wonder, does this infer that there is a 'NEW' version in the offing?
  • Create New...