FB4

[hitekvoop]

Latency is no problem with ethernet. What could eventually be problematic is "consistency" (real time operation). But ethernet is a pretty solid thing... If you wanna go rock solid, you could implement some LXI communication (class A or B)

AKA Jitter. Latency is a given, jitter is the silent killer.

RE: multi-pair cat-5, I just built my snakes out of this: http://deepsurplus.com/Network-Struc...id-Cable-150ft

I'm actually only using 16 pair out of 25 on each cable. I hardened the ends with neutrik ethercon connectors and built a pair of 75' which I can hook together using ethercon couplers. Running: 1x ethernet, 1x startech usb extender, 1x DMX + Estop for my mobolaser, 2x Estop for my L/R remotes. So far, so good.

-rick

[JasonB]

There's really not much knowledge or programming required to create smooth laser output in real time on Ethernet laser show controllers, even over Wi-Fi antennas (if the signal is stable of course). One 100Mbit line is about 6-8MByte without any problem. If you run your laser at 100000pps, the data flow is about 1MByte - so one 100Mbit line can easily handle up to 6-8 lasers running at 100000pps (which is not required of course). Not to mention, it's pretty standard to gave 1Gbit Ethernet output nowadays...

mystery123, well said...We do some incredible things now with off the shelf products for factory automation with 100Mbit ethernet as well.
On another note....
There is a lot of good engineering coming from Bratislava, Slovakia! My wife went there on business once with a major telecom company and she was impressed.
I was lucky enough to go the the UK once as well.... Now thats a wonderful country also! Sure hope I can make it back there sometime... The more I learn about life over the pond the less impressed I am with the US .....

[mystery123]

Well I hope this discussion doesn't end up US vs Slovakia ... the point was, Ethernet is a great way of doing laser shows ... we love it, it saves so many problems...

[Pangolin]

There's really not much knowledge or programming required to create smooth laser output in real time on Ethernet laser show controllers

Hehe. So on one hand, you have what could be deemed on of the founding fathers of the laser industry, saying that he's never seen something smooth that uses a network (aside from Pangolin and Laser Animation DSP) and on the other, you have someone saying that it doesn't take much knowledge or programming to produce smooth output. These are two pretty much diametrically-opposed views!

For sure our own viewpoint on what is smooth is a very high bar! And yes, when I talk about smoothness, MANY OTHER PEOPLE tell me that they believe that the output from their software is smooth (even know it absolutely jitters like hell to my eyes). The only conclusion that I draw is that people simply don't know how smooth something can be, and therefore when they see the output of others, they are satisfied with how good it is. (How many people were quite satisfied with their first kiss in high school, but later came to learn how much better things actually get )

Anyway, FB4 is really much more than just an FB3 with a network connector. MUCH more! But we haven't said too much about it (aside from the obvious -- that it has a network and that it outputs to a laser).

As discussed at the recent FLEM meeting, the development of scanners has taken some of our time, and taken human resources that would otherwise have been dedicated to finishing FB4 development. But -- if you read the thread about FLEM you will HOPEFULLY come to the conclusion that this detour in development was worth it, since the result is 30K scanners (and real 30K, not fake 30K, 40K or 50K that others are selling) capable of scanning entire laser shows at 60 degrees while remaining cool and selling for the price of Chinese scanners, as well as 90K (yes, real 90K) scanners too! If you come to Prolight & Sound, you'll see FIFTY PROJECTORS with our new scanners in them! (A few at our booth, but mostly at other booths.)

FB4 has taken somewhat of a back seat during the first few months of this year while we finished up the scanners in preparation for large-scale sales. In the mean time, people already have a lot of options for using Pangolin software over a network, including QM2000 and FB3 with network-style USB extenders.

We try to concentrate our efforts solving problems in areas where there are no solutions. Up until now there have been no scanners capable of scanning fast and wide and cool while selling at Chinese prices, and there have been no 90K scanners either. If you wanted these things, you had zero options up until now. But if you want to do network-related things, you've had options from Pangolin since literally 1997 (hehe, before most other laser software companies were even in business). In its simplest form, FB4 greatly refines something you've been able to do otherwise for a long time. Therefore -- as a company -- we have placed the emphasis and priorities of our development efforts working in areas where there has been no solution up until now.

Bill

[norty303]

Bill, one query regarding FB4, because it will help me at least decide now whether it is worth waiting for...

Are there spare lines on the cat5 using your FB4 implementation which could be used to run estop? If not, will FB4 have any sort of estop signal implementation built into your protocol?

Whilst my desire to go cat5 is high, I do not wish to simply swap multiple lines of ILDA for multiple lines of cat5.

[Pangolin]

Hi Norty,

FB4 uses network cable, and broader TCP/IP for communications. What I meant by "protocol" was just something that sits on top of TCP/IP and allows us to get the level of smoothness we get. However, with that having been said (that is uses network cable), I will also say that we use network cable in a different way compared to how it is classically used. You can use FB4 with regular old network cables connected to your PC, or you can "do something else" (like a twist) and get even further functionality from FB4 and network cables.

Bottom line -- you will get more functionality from an FB4 and network cables than was classically and historically available. So -- same old network cables, but more functionality.

ESTOP is indeed an important requirement. I'd recommend you bring this discussion to the Networking section of the Pangolin forum, where I'll have folks like Hugo comment on how he does it, since he's been using network cables along with our QM2000.NET and ESTOP for the past ten years.

Bill

[loopee]

What's the chance the the FB4 will support Power over Ethernet

I would see this as providing greater flexibility - i.e.

- Removes the need for additional outlet at the projector to power the FB4 (and removes any plug pack type device)
- Means that the FB4 can be mounted some distance from the projector and operator, and doesn't require a power source (apart from the network switch that are now becoming cheaper)
- Provides a means of remotely rebooting the FB4 by shutting down the switchport and then re-enabling it (equivalent to powering down and restarting the device) or you can just unplug the patchlead at the switch for the same thing
- You could power 24/48 FB4 devices from one switch, and if required have a switch with redundant power supplies for reliability
- You can get PoE mid devices that can extend Ethernet runs up to 200m in length (basically a two port switch with PoE)

Troy

[sbk]

For sure our own viewpoint on what is smooth is a very high bar! And yes, when I talk about smoothness, MANY OTHER PEOPLE tell me that they believe that the output from their software is smooth (even know it absolutely jitters like hell to my eyes). The only conclusion that I draw is that people simply don't know how smooth something can be, and therefore when they see the output of others, they are satisfied with how good it is. (How many people were quite satisfied with their first kiss in high school, but later came to learn how much better things actually get )

I'm wondering what you exactly mean by "smooth". I can for sure see differences of frames per second "FPS" smoothness between the output of an FB3 and i.e. a networked Fiesta.NET, but mainly because the FPS is adjusted differently by software. On Pangolin software you set a max PPS speed and then the frames are always output at this speed, meaning you can reach as much as 100 FPS or more.
On Fiesta i.e., there is a fixed FPS rate which is low by default (35 FPS), and then the PPS is adjusted to never exceed FPS, so images may look not so "smooth". But after having adjusted this FPS to 50-60, things get really more smooth.

What's the chance the the FB4 will support Power over Ethernet

Unless you can have your whole projector powered with POE, I don't see obvious advantages to have it implemented for a DAC, since you always require AC power for your projector...

[loopee]

I don't see obvious advantages to have it implemented for a DAC

What, so not one of the examples I posted would provide an advantage.
I recall a post some time ago where the poster (I think it was Edison) was speaking of a multiple network based controller setup where they had one or two units crash and locked up over the night and they needed to power reset them. So if the controller is up with the projector on a truss how do you access it to reset it?

You can make it optional so you don't need to use it, but for the whole ~$5 it would cost per unit to implement it's not a bad option to have (grant it, the switch cost maybe a little higher, although I just had a look at Dlink and they have a 10 port PoE for US$380)

I work with PoE device daily (Wireless Access points, IP Telephones, Surveillance cameras (all these devices also accept power from a plugpack)) and it is the bees knees!

since you always require AC power for your projector...

but you need a second power outlet for the controller, and not every projector has power out and depending on the controller (Fiesta.NET as an example) may need a plugpack for power that makes it messy

[sbk]

What, so not one of the examples I posted would provide an advantage.
I recall a post some time ago where the poster (I think it was Edison) was speaking of a multiple network based controller setup where they had one or two units crash and locked up over the night and they needed to power reset them. So if the controller is up with the projector on a truss how do you access it to reset it?

Not really obvious advantage, at least for my uses, see why below :

I see mainly two use schemes of a network DAC :

- A centralized control rack on the stage, which contains all the DAC and also a router, switch, power distribution etc. You have one ethernet cable between your computer and that rack, then from the rack you go with ILDA to the projectors on the trusses.
As I pass also the emergency signal + main power ON/OFF of the control rack from my computer, I can reboot the whole from my desk with a key switch.
And since you have to power other things with AC in the rack, no need for POE...

- Integrated OEM DAC into the projector : that projector needs obviously AC power and has some standard DC voltages available inside to power the DAC, so obviously no need for POE either...