Pixie 16 150 lights per port

[rpc1202]

Hey I am Trying to find a way to connect 150 lights  to each port and wondering if it is possible. I am running lightorama 5.6.6 and When I set the controller to control 150 only the first light out of each port will light. Set at 100 it works fine but i cant seem to figure out how to get 150 to function. Just using Dumb rgb where each string is just one color at a time.

[Vince4xmas]

I believe the Pixie16 is for smart pixels not dumb pixels. You can run 170 smart pixels per port on a Pixie controller.

[Jimehc]

What version is the Firmware in your Pixie? you may need to update the Pixie Firmware...

[dibblejr]

You cannot control dumb pixels with a Pixie16 

Please explain what you are doing.

Are you attempting to use the internal settings to set smart RGB pixels as dumb or dis you purchase sumo pixels?

JR

Edited November 2, 2021 by dibblejr

[Box on Rails]

It sound like your pixie controller is doing exactly what you are telling it to do in S5. If you set up a prop or string in S5 to dumb RGB and use a pixie controller in your show, you will only get one pixel to light up in the string. and that would be which ever pixel the RGB circuits is set to. example Unit 01, Circuit 1 to circuit 3. this is telling the controller to only use pixel 1 in the string.  A smart pixel string can light up in only one color but you have to tell each Pixel in the string to do so. Good luck

[TheDucks]

With Pixies, You CAN make the (whole) controller behave as DUMB (the string is treated as 1 Px). Keyword: Logical_Resolution

Page 18 of the current pixie manual (v1.06) : set it to 1

according to the next page the color effect macros will be disabled if the Pixels per port are NOT 50

So! Do you want to play dumb 😁 for the whole controller to save effort sequencing?  FWIW in the S4 Sequence editor, I could just collapse to the port only, and set the color and it affects all members inside

 

[Orville]

11 hours ago, Box on Rails said:

It sound like your pixie controller is doing exactly what you are telling it to do in S5. If you set up a prop or string in S5 to dumb RGB and use a pixie controller in your show, you will only get one pixel to light up in the string. and that would be which ever pixel the RGB circuits is set to. example Unit 01, Circuit 1 to circuit 3. this is telling the controller to only use pixel 1 in the string.  A smart pixel string can light up in only one color but you have to tell each Pixel in the string to do so. Good luck

Not sure of your meaning here, as Smart Pixels can light up each pixel in a different color than the one next to it.  Dumb pixels are the ones that can only be one color down the entire strand.   So, I'm thinking you have smart and dumb pixels confused with each other here. 

I use smart pixels, and I've had them light up in specific colors for each bulb when doing a chase or any other effect I want them to do in a multitude of colors down the strand.

[k6ccc]

Orville, I think what Box meant was that you can make a string of smart pixels behave like dumb pixels, but you have to tell every pixel in the string to light up the same color.

One way to do that is with the resolution setting (some controllers call that group size).  That way you can quite literally have an entire string behave as if it was a dumb string and only take three channels for the entire string.

 

[Box on Rails]

11 hours ago, k6ccc said:

Orville, I think what Box meant was that you can make a string of smart pixels behave like dumb pixels, but you have to tell every pixel in the string to light up the same color.

One way to do that is with the resolution setting (some controllers call that group size).  That way you can quite literally have an entire string behave as if it was a dumb string and only take three channels for the entire string.

 

That's it. I was addressing the initial post by rpc1202. It sounded like they where trying to set a Dumb RGB strings to a smart controller that was set to 150 pixels in S5 and the result was only the first pixel in the string would work. That's how I read his post. ?????

[k6ccc]

Same here.

 

[dibblejr]

Based on my first comment that's exactly what I thought he was doing. Others have done that with bad similar results.

JR

[Orville]

Thanks guys, that makes sense, but that's not how I interpreted it when I read it.  The wording of it had me thinking the other way around, and hence my particular comment on it.