Smart pixels as dumb?

[iresq]

Trying to figure this stuff is very challenging.  I had planned on starting RGB this year with dumb strips for a variety of reasons (programming time being the largest).  Continuing my research it does not appear that there is a large money savings between dumb and smart strips.  In addition, I'd probably want to upgrade to smart anyway. So I was thinking to just go smart and group the pixels and treat as dumb.  Anyone else do this?

 

I will be using the strips to outline house, windows, and doors.  From what I can see most of the programs are geared for programming mega trees and pixel grids.  Not so much the way I plan on using them.  I tried to follow the directions of creating and RGB strip in the Programming Pixel Based Candy Canes thread but could not quit put it together. I also could not find the 50 pixel rgb strip visualizer prop I have heard about. 

 

A related hardware question, how difficult is it to set up a 1.31 network?  I read a thread talking about ip configurations and multicast stuff.  That is all greek to me (another reason I was going with dumb),  I get that I will need a router.  

[dougd]

My thinking was the same, savings is very small, so just go with smart pixels and group them.

 

E1.31 network is not hard to setup. you really don't need a router for 1.31, a network switch is what you need. Where it got a bit complicated was if you have 2 NIC cards and want one to be 1.31 and the other to be your home network. There was a command you have to issue but you just to it once and it was pretty easy to accomplish.

[beeiilll]

Like you I am just getting into taking the big leap into the RGB pixel world myself.

You want to study some as you really can't use samrt pixels with the dumb pixel controllers and vice versa.  I too am concerned about the big challenge that is coming with them but I suppose that it is part of the game we play to make our shows bigger and have more WOW in them.

I don't get your saying that the pricing is close between smart and dumb though?  From my researching on ALiExpress (Ray's store) I find that the smart pixels are more for sure.

Here is a 5 meter of "dumb" strip for $24:

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/5m-one-roll-5050-SMD-30LEDs-m-led-strip-waterproof-by-silicon-tubing-and-coating-RGB/329544925.html

and a 5 meter of smart strip using the 2811 IC for $53:

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/5M-DC5V-Pixel-RGB-dream-color-led-strip-WS2811IC-150pcs-IC-150pcs-SMD5050-led-IP68-underwater/682562197.html

 

So there is a $24 difference right there although yes there are a ton of different ones out there in each type so pricing can be all over the place.

 

Controllers also can get a little pricey when going to the smart ones as well but again there are a bunch out there.

I am going to probably go with the dumb strip and a cmb-16 controller from LOR for my windows and doors and then make a pixel strip tree with the smart strip.  I already am using all LEDs in my display so the change is not something that I have to do all at once but I do want to get into the better use of things and at least using the dumb strip around windows will let me use one strip rather than 4 seperate strings of lights and I will get all the colors I want with only one strip.  Later on I can upgrade them to smart strips if I really see the need to do color chases around the windows but that is certainly not a high priority at this point.

I think that the pixel tree will give me more WOW than anything else at this point.  I am just not sure if I want to go with individual controlled pixels or use something like:

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/5m-led-digital-strip-DC12V-input-WS2811IC-256-scale-10pcs-IC-and-30pcs-5050-SMD-RGB/568458133.html

as this smart strip has 10 ICs and 3 LEDs per IC per meter.  So it does not have the resolution of the first strip I referenced but still would make quite a show and with less channels to program.  However the first strip would give me better resolution in case I want to do text on the tree and more intricate effects.  It comes with a cost of much more channels to program as well as power requirements that will no doubt make me run power injection if I use a long strip of pixels.

 

Each has their own advantages and disadvantages.  It becomes more of a whatever you can handle both in cost, set up requirements, and of course the dreaded sequencing.

 

Also you have to figure what you want to use for power for things such as 5 volt or 12 volt.  Another thing that each has both good and bad points about.

 

I would think that if you are only going to do your windows, doors, and outlines, then the smart strip would do good for you and you can just duplicate the commands for channels to cut down on programing time in the beginning and then make changes to the sequencing and programming as you get more used to things.  That way you would have the advantage of having the smart stuff already there and it would just be a matter of "chair time" to set up the programming.  That is why I am also torn on using smart for the windows and doors as well right now rather than the dumb stuff.

You know sitting here and writting this has just convinced me to go with smart strip for the house as well.

Why have to buy twice?  It should make things easier later on.

Thanks Dave.  At least this has settled one more question for me.  Now for the 5 volt or 12 volt? Hmmm.

 

I have an ECG-P2R controller on order from J1Sys so I will let you know how the E1.31 thing goes when I get it!  Not to hard from what I have read so far though.

Edited February 4, 2013 by beeiilll

[TitusCarnathan]

Just because the pixels don't have an IC chip there is no reason to call them dumb. They are IC chipless rgb lights. 

 

If you have a similar price difference go ahead and get smart pixels. And in the config menu for your e131 controller just set it to group the entier string. With the e682 you can have it set to group it on one setting page. then with an extra channel you can have it change the e682 to a different setting page to change the group setting to have the pixels controlled separately.

 

If you figure the cost a dumb string might be about $7 - $10 cheaper than a pixel string, But then you would either need a 3 channel dmx controller cost about $7 or a dc controller.  

 

The price comes out to around the same cost. And with pixels you can do chasing and twinkling effects.

[iresq]

For the strips I was looking at:

 

$45 + free shipping SMART vs $ 44 shipped (thought shipping comes down with mulitple) DUMB

 

I will admit that every time I look at the different strips I get confused.  Not sure what the difference is for the one you posted except it has more certifications?

[MikeyRo]

As far as programming the roof /window line, Nutcracker has some great effects for single strand, in line strips.

[iresq]

Thanks Mikey, will check it out.

[MCas4380]

I have decided to go smart first with such a small price difference.  I considering using this since i still like the look of individual points of light. around the house and windows.

 http://www.aliexpress.com/item/WS2811-LED-pixel-node-DC5V-input-full-color-RGB-string-50pcs-a-string-IP68-rated/581805567.html

At this price it's not much more then a set of LED's

[Shan-Man]

How about these at the same price but with black wires for a cleaner look (versus multicolor)?

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/WS2811-LED-pixel-node-DC5V-input-full-color-RGB-string-50pcs-a-string-IP68-rated-in/677496152.html

[Ron Boyd]

My thinking was the same, savings is very small, so just go with smart pixels and group them.

 

E1.31 network is not hard to setup. you really don't need a router for 1.31, a network switch is what you need. Where it got a bit complicated was if you have 2 NIC cards and want one to be 1.31 and the other to be your home network. There was a command you have to issue but you just to it once and it was pretty easy to accomplish.

Well Doug, You'll have to show me that command next month at the Mini.

[beeiilll]

My apologies Dave on the price.  i wasn't considering the shipping thing and if you do I guess it does come out pretty close for "most" things.

 

But I agree now that I have thought about it, I am going to jump into the full smart pixels and just either copy commands or whatever it takes to make things look "simple" to begin with and then just expand the sequencing later on.

 

The only problem I see is the increased channel count to deal with and some of the associated problems that people seem to be seeing with large channel counts causing in the playback and running of the lights with different programs.  That may dictate whether or not to have a real big number of smart pixels at this time.  As well as the size of the computer to run it all as the amount of housepower is becoming an issue with a large number of channels too.

 

It certainly is a new challenge to look at this stuff and figure it all out.  But it is also part of the fun of this hobby too.

 

I like Dougs thing about E1.31 being easy to set up.  Guess it is about time to study that function too. 

Edited February 5, 2013 by beeiilll

[dougd]

Will do Ron. I will set it up and we can do some tests at the mini.

I had thought about using some dumb strips this year myself, but if you don't have any of the hardware already to support it, smart pixels seem to be the way to go for the future.

Edited February 5, 2013 by dougd

[beeiilll]

Will do Ron. I will set it up and we can do some tests at the mini.

I had thought about using some dumb strips this year myself, but if you don't have any of the hardware already to support it, smart pixels seem to be the way to go for the future.

 

How about a hint for those of us who can not make it to Mini's or get togethers?  It would be nice to know any of the "tricks of the trade" when it comes to this stuff as it is so new and with all the things necessary to learn, any little bit helps for sure.

[dougd]

Well when it comes to grouping pixels, here is how I believe it would work on the E682.

Lets say you want to do 4 strings of 32 pixels and treat them as dumb strings.

Your strings command would be 4.

Your group command would be 32.

Your pixel command would be 1.

When adding this config to LOR you would just add 4 RGB channels. First channel would control string 1, 2nd channel would control string 2 and so on.

You could also accomplish this by having all 4 strings coming out of one port of the E682 but you would have to use power injection and the commands would be slightly different.

As far as networking with 2 NIC cards. Look at this post, paying strict attention to post 39

http://forums.lightorama.com/index.php?/topic/21604-im-having-some-e131-issues-anyone-want-to-help/page-2

That's what I followed and had 2 networks set up. One for E1.31 and the second to handle internet traffic.

[iresq]

I didn't even consider grouping via hardware.  Was thinking more along the lines of software.  I could group each section of pixels by color in LOR for easy(er) incorporation to my existing sequences.  Then I could go back and start ungrouping to have individual control.  Hopefully the software side of LOR/SS/Visualizer will get some nice RBG upgrades.

[dougd]

Well I do quite a bit of grouping and Degrouping (breaking out my red, green and blue colors),and lots of tracks with my RGB stuff. If I truly want dumb pixels I would group via hardware.

Edited February 5, 2013 by dougd

[jerrymac]

To me smart -vs- dumb has little to do with the pixels themself and more to do with what I intend on doing with the pixels.  Items where I want a pixel by pixel chase I use smart strings/strips.  Items where the entire section of segment will be the same I use dumb pixels/strips. 

Example:  Mega tree smart pixels (I now have one 360 with pixels and one 180 with smart strips).  My mini trees are dumb (to small to really do any chasing or spirals). My archs are dumb strips cut into segments.

Look at the cost and need for controllers (smart -vs- dumb).  Since strings and strips are fairly close to each other in price with smart a little more, but controllers are a completely different issue.  San Devices or J1Sys running about $180 to a great number of pixels but limited distance (lending itsel to short distance between items on the controller).  Dumb controllers from $8.00 to $40.00 and can be de-centralized limited to the number of channels necessary.  (my mini trees have one 3 channel controller on each tree and mega tree's has one 682 on each tree).  Window outlines I use dumb with a controller on each portion of the window outline, since I do NOT do pixel by pixel chases but do use segment by segment chases.

So the great question goes on which is better smart or dumb?  the real answer is depending on the use, Smart is better and Dumb is better.

[edvas69]

Both the the J1SYS and Sandevices controllers allow you to group pixels in a string to what ever number you wish, so you could group a whole 2811 pixel string/strip as just being 3 channels (RGB) and be treated the same in the sequencer as a dumb RGB strip/string, you can divide an output in what ever groups you want. So this is what the OP is asking about so then this solution will fit his needs perfectly because he can treat all the strings/strips as being the same as a dumb string/strip and then further down the road set them up as individual pixels with individual control.

Edited February 6, 2013 by edvas69

[viennaxmas]

Can the grouping / de-grouping be dynamic? E.g could I have one sequence where I use my strips in "grouped" mode and then use them in Individual mode in the next sequence? Maybe some kind of switching via API?

[edvas69]

No this is setup in the hardware config of the respective controllers so if you set it that way then thats how they will be treated.