craigecooper Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Was considering the 4M / 60 pixel / M - 2812 lights and was wondering if anyone else was considering ? Too much work to adapt existing 16 string 150 pixel sequences ? thanks,Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryDrumAZ Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 (edited) My tree is 2811 nodes, 12 strings at 50 per string. It was quite easy to setup, but this year I will be using pixel mounting strips instead of PVC for the strings. As for adapting sequences, we are 100% rgb, so I redid all our sequences. For the tree, I purchased a lot of sequences for it and that gave me more insight into SS. Edited February 27, 2015 by LarryDrumAZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpageler Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Isn't each pixel individual controllable in 2812's? If that's the case you would be trying to incorporate sequences based on 50 pixel groups per 5m strips, to 4m strips that have 240 pixel groups? So a would a converted sequence only be lighting up a little over 20 percent of your 2812 pixels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigecooper Posted February 27, 2015 Author Share Posted February 27, 2015 Was considering taking an existing sequence and inserting an empty row every third pixel. Then copy the adjacent row either up or down one to fill in. Still leaves about 14 of the 240 left over. Just a thought. Really wanted a slightly shorter tree and the extra pixels were interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k6ccc Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 My pixel tree (flat, not a mega tree) is 122.5 inches from the center of the top pixel to the center of the bottom pixel, so a little over three meters of lights. I'm using WS2811 square node pixels. One of the changes I am considering for this year is to double the number of pixels, but make each addressed pixel actually would be two physical pixels (very easy to do in the E682 setup). This way I would not have to change my sequences at all. It would give me pretty close to the LED density of a CCR. So many of the sequences available for either purchase or sharing are based on 50 pixel strings. Because of that, I would recommend staying with 50 addressable pixels per string (whether it's actually 50 physical pixels, 100 LEDs that are addressed as 50 pixels (as I expect to do), 150 LEDs that are addressed as 50 pixels (what a CCR does), or even some other multiple of 50. One other thing to keep in mind about the 60 LED per meter strips - they are bright! Remember that a CCR used 30 LED per meter strips and people regularly comment about how bright they are. You would be doubling the LED density compared to a CCR. You can see what I did on my pixel tree at my website at:http://newburghlights.org/pixel_tree.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now