Minimizing Blinky Lights

[Guest guest]

There was a lot of discussion late 2005/early 2006 about designing shows to reduce the blinkiness of the routines - the most common solution was to avoid going to full OFF and instead keeping a small % of intensity.

Has anyone experimented with that idea? I've been fiddling with it a bit today and it's more difficult to find the right "balance" than I expected. I'm waiting until dark to get a better feel for it, but I suspect something like 20% may be the right vicinity.

Anyway, wondering if anyone else has done anything along those lines.

[Guest guest]

Rick,


I remember this discussion too ... the idea, if I remember, was to keep the incandescent bulbs "warmed" up so that they ramped up smoothly.

Tell me when you think you will need this level of control. Or when you feel the "blinky" issue is most apparent or of most concern.

I'm trying to think about my display and determine when this problem would have occurred.

Thanks,

T.

[Guest guest]

I'm thinking about working with it some this year a little bit. I think it depends on the song, and the individual's taste. Some songs beg for smoothness, and some beg for "blinky." But even with that, I do think that it can go overboard (haven't seen it yet, but I do think it's possible).

[Guest guest]

This is something I,m thinking about trying this (my first year) This was made with 32 channels, I thought by using a lot of "ramp up's" and fades, that it would work with a slower tempo song , Here is a link , not sure what it will look like in real life.

http://www.thewestpole.com/video.htm , 2nd from the bottom of the page, Sorry bout the poor quality ,

[Guest guest]

I think both Kenny and Ray have the right idea. Of course the selection of music is key here.

Instead of tagging every beat on a song try transitioning through a section of the song. A dancer cannot stomp out every beat but flows through the music. Another good example is how they sequence music at the fountains of Bellagio. No blinky there.

Glenn

[Guest guest]

I have watched the fountains at the Bellagio many times and you are right, I have never seen them blink, not even once :].

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Some like it Blinky some don't.



One more please, just one more pleeeeze .............................. O.K.

To blink or not to blink, that is the question........

[Guest guest]

GS wrote:

A dancer cannot stomp out every beat but flows through the music.

My own feet may not agree (flatfooter/clogger here), but that is a very well-worded example for use with displays.


EDIT: I've also noticed over the years that a lot of Christmas music has a good waltz beat, even some of the faster songs (though, depending on the exact timing, some of these could be considered more of a jig). Waltz is a very smooth dance.


And DCook said it perfectly: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some like it Blinky some don't."

[Guest guest]

Well done Ray. I think it's really smooth and classy. I bet it will look great in person.

[Guest guest]

The first song I finished for this year was mya patriotic song. Ray Charles, America. I used my CD tree for almost all of his words so there were 14 channels for that. Then for the music and his back up singers I used a lot of fades up and down. So there is some blinky but lots of fades.

Now I am working on Run Run Rudolph by LS and I will tell you there is blink every where. Hit a few beats and you just can not go wrong. Put a blink any where you want it hits a beat or something. I think this will be one of the songs that will bring the house down when the people see it.

[Guest guest]

I have been doing a lot of testing in this area and have set up a few pre-lit trees in my computer along with C9s and minis.

I have watched A LOT of the videos here showing displays that are computer controlled. I have to admit that a lot of them are just to "blinky" for me and some I have found have very nice fades and effects.

The most popular effect off all the videos is to have a Tree light on a beat or a note. I think it looks really good do do this but instead of having the tree just turn OFF have it Fade down. You still get the effect of the light being lit up on the note or beat, but it takes away the "blinky" when you fade down each one.

Also I have done some testing with having all the lights on at 40% and then have things Ramp on to 100% and then back down to 40%. You still get the chase effects without it looking like a dance club (Some people may like the dance club effect).

I have been programming a few songs and very rarely do I just turn off lights without a fade down.

[Guest guest]

Neworder, and others ...

I too, rarely use "all ON/all OFF" in chases etc. Most are ramp downs, even if they are fast. I also like to have trails behind the initial on that might last past the next lights in the chase coming on. This gives more of a wave effect.

I tried the low 10 or 20% method, with pulses of full or partial power as need ... I used this mostly when I didn't want large dark sections of my display, or if I wanted leave something on, but not have it be the center of attention.

But, the way I sequence music I don't think the "blinky-ness" is a probablem (in my opinion and to my taste). I rarely used the twinkle or the shimmer effect ... except when the music called for something very fast and random twinkle would do the job. Shimmer, on the other had, was used only twice in a 15 minute show ... just too "spooky" to me.

... there's my penny's worth.

T.

[Guest guest]

I toyed with 40% being my general-purpose background level but I think it's too bright, so I'm assessing whether maybe 25% or 30% is more effective. It does seem much more soothing to avoid an excessive number of "Fades to black" in a song.

Also, though most of my display starts from black, I think once a section is "introduced" by being lighted it will stay on (albeit at 25%) until there's either a dramatic shift where it can disappear or the song ends.

It's a radical departure from my first couple of years. I'll be most curious to see what the neighbors' comments are as most of them have "grown" through the display's changes over the last 9 years.

Great discussion ... hope others will chime in.