Jump to content
Light-O-Rama Forums

Pixel Tree Across the Street?


gmac

Recommended Posts

I was thinking of placing a Pixel Mega tree in my neighbors front yard. then it dawned on me....How do I get the signal to the tree? I can't run cat5 across the street. Would light linkers work? or is that to much data for them to handle? Are there any other options out there.

Any input would be appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless it's using slow sequences only or a small tree (in number of pixels), it would likely be too much data for ELLs. If you are using pixels (2801 or 2811, etc), you could use a WiFi link for E1.31. If I were doing that, I would use a dedicated network for the E1.31 and would most likely use 802.11a (5 GHz) rather than the far more commonly used 802.11b (2.4 GHz).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless it's using slow sequences only or a small tree (in number of pixels), it would likely be too much data for ELLs. If you are using pixels (2801 or 2811, etc), you could use a WiFi link for E1.31. If I were doing that, I would use a dedicated network for the E1.31 and would most likely use 802.11a (5 GHz) rather than the far more commonly used 802.11b (2.4 GHz).

Why is that? Not because I disagree. Just like to understand the logic. For example, why not use 802.11n? It's newer, more bandwidth, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand you correctly, Would i run a cat5 cable for my computer into the 802.11a to send the data wirelessly to the controller across the street? If so what do I need at the Pixel controller at the Tree across the street to recieve the data?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless it's using slow sequences only or a small tree (in number of pixels), it would likely be too much data for ELLs. If you are using pixels (2801 or 2811, etc), you could use a WiFi link for E1.31. If I were doing that, I would use a dedicated network for the E1.31 and would most likely use 802.11a (5 GHz) rather than the far more commonly used 802.11b (2.4 GHz).
I also wonder why not 802.11n 5GHz?

If I understand you correctly, Would i run a cat5 cable for my computer into the 802.11a to send the data wirelessly to the controller across the street? If so what do I need at the Pixel controller at the Tree across the street to recieve the data?
You would most likely need a wireless bridge on the same band and frequency.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be interesting to test. E1.31 is a streaming protocol and Usually WIFI introduces some amount of delay...

Please keep us posted how it works...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that? Not because I disagree. Just like to understand the logic. For example, why not use 802.11n? It's newer, more bandwidth, etc.

I tend to think of 802.11b, g, and n together since they all operate on 2.4 GHz, and 802.11a separately since it operates on 5 GHz, and the primary point was to get off of 2.4 GHz because at least in metropolitan areas 2.4 GHz is often very congested. That said however, some 802.11n equipment also supports 5 GHz so IF you have or buy 802.11n equipment that can operate on 5GHz, you will avoid the congestion of 2.4 GHz. One thing to keep in mind is that the 5GHz equipment is generally shorter range (in theory) than 2.4 GHz, but because of frequency congestion on 2.4 GHz the range there may be far less than expected. Also, it is easier to get high gain directional antennas on 5 GHz (they are a lot smaller) which will substantially increase range.

For those of you that live outside the metro areas, all my discussion about high RF congestion on 2.4 GHz may be moot, but it is a HUGE difference here. For example, I was recently doing some WiFi investigation for work about a mile from here and with a WiFi sniffer I was seeing about 250 access points at the same time. Less than 10 of those were on 5 GHz, (and almost half of those were the ones I was working on).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an experiment, I tried running some tests with a E681 and a wireless "gaming adapter" and sending E1.31 data over WiFi. It worked ok, with a slight delay in very busy passages. But... my router hates the volume of E1.31 multicast over WiFi and will eventually lock up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used wireless for my pixels and had no issues. I used an airlink 101 usb wireless adapter http://www.amazon.com/AirLink101-AWLL5088-Wireless-Ultra-Adapter/dp/B003X26PMO/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1358453229&sr=8-3&keywords=airlink+101+usb

on my show computer.

I used a netgear 1000v2 Wireless router at the pixel controller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have tried using the ELL's to an ELOR connected to a E68x.

It did work for about 500 pixels at about 100 feet with moderate sequencing activity.

There was a few lags/missed commands, so if I was to do it again I would keep the pixel activity simple.

Scott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...