Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38

Thread: DMX Control of Hazer Through LivePRO

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    417

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buffo View Post
    That was uncalled for, Jeronen. Stop being an ass.
    I think you misunderstood me (or I wasn't able to explain myself the right way in English).

    But your patronizing comments to Bill above are completely out of line.
    If you read my lines carefully, you'll see that I say 2 things:

    - Laser software companies should stick to controlling lasers
    - Lighting software companies should stick to controlling lighting


    First, your concern about the hazer Jem had was unfounded. Bill's answer was actually *correct* for the hazer Jem has. (It doesn't have a priming function, so 255 is the correct setting.) So you're blasting away about something that isn't even relevent to Jem's particular situation. (And if you had bothered to do a little research on his particular model before you posted, you would have known that.)
    It was a general warning / help for people - less offtopic than most other topics are going here. I don't understand why I should not post that.

    You have *no* way of knowing what Bill is into. I'll wager you've never even met the man, much less have any idea of his experience with stage and lighting effects.
    I'm sorry, but I think you're wrong here.. I've seen the DMX-possibilities of LivePro and LD2000, I've seen the DMX-implementation of the FB3 board and I've read his posts about DMX, so I think I know what his knowledge (not experience) is.

    Besided, do you exactly know what my experience with stage and lighting effects is? What my daily job is?

    I'd say that it's *YOU* who should stay out of things you're not into. (Or at least do some research to be certain that your words of caution are actually applicable to the case in question before you go off on another tirade.
    Bill was presenting the information as a general way to control smoke machines or hazers. I posted a warning after that, also in general (not specific for this topic, I know). The meaning of forum-topics, is that in the future, other people are able to use the information they find for their application. Not only Unique 2 users, also the (common used) 24/7 or Technohazer.

    Otherwise Jem could just have sent an e-mail to Bill for help.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Orlando, FL - USA
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JeroenVDV View Post
    This method will for sure make problems with several hazers.. They'll use the "prime" function when the fog-channel reaches the 255 (full pumping, big output, to suck fluid into the pipes when it has run out of fluid).
    It was a general warning / help for people - less offtopic than most other topics are going here. I don't understand why I should not post that.
    This is useful information. I guess there is a new class of fog machines coming out whose DMX functionality is more sophisticated than in the past. Up until now, the DMX input on fog machines was used as a simple on-off control for the fog.

    So no problem, we will simply augment our DMX output control to add additional funtionality for such situations.

    Within LD2000 itself, this would be pretty easy. But for LivePRO, up until now, the DMX functionality has been pretty limited. But then, so far, our users really haven't asked for anything more...



    Quote Originally Posted by JeroenVDV View Post
    - Laser software companies should stick to controlling lasers
    - Lighting software companies should stick to controlling lighting
    That's a pretty preposterous notion really. How would anyone grow if they never entered any new field? For example, should laser software companies not enter the field of SMS/MMS messaging (a field we entered in 2002 and a field in which we are now a world leader)? Should laser software companies not enter a field of laser scanning (a field for which we have numerous patents, and in which we have offered assistance to, and helped shape all major and minor scanner companies)? Should CarmenGary or Zoof or Yadda not enter the field of laser software? Of course not!! Preposterous!! The only way that people and companies grow is by entering fields they don't currently serve.

    I will fully accept criticism where it is warranted. Lasershow Designer 2000 is first a laser controller, and second everything else. BUT, with LD2000 version 5.0 you will see a massive change regarding DMX.

    Best regards,

    William Benner

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,446

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by JeroenVDV View Post
    I think you misunderstood me (or I wasn't able to explain myself the right way in English).
    Ahhh... I had forgotten about the language barrier. OK - Maxima Mea Culpa - my fault there. It is entirely possible that you didn't realize that the tone of your post could be taken as an insult by Bill.

    Eh, maybe I should have had a second cup of coffee before I replied to you earlier! That might have given me more time to relax, and then maybe I would have remembered about the language barrier...
    If you read my lines carefully, you'll see that I say 2 things:
    - Laser software companies should stick to controlling lasers
    - Lighting software companies should stick to controlling lighting
    I understand what you were trying to say... Basically you would prefer that companies stick to their areas of expertise. However, as Bill mentioned, if companies don't branch out into new areas, their product will get stale and no one will buy it anymore.

    Still, the two lines quoted above weren't the ones that struck me as rude. It was your next line where you said "please don't try to do something you're not into." That statement assumes that Pangolin isn't into DMX, which is quite far from the truth. Sure, they are not an industry leader in DMX technology, but they *are* in the business of supplying DMX-capable hardware to laser show production companies.

    Furthermore, the sentence sounds presumptuous. It sounds like you are quietly telling someone that they shouldn't be posting, because they don't know what they're talking about. That is what bothered me.

    I realize now that you didn't intend your statement to sound offensive. The subtleties of the English language are difficult to explain, and even more difficult to learn. (Which is why we have misunderstandings here even among people that both speak English.) But it *did* sound as if you were telling Pangolin to stay out of the conversation because they didn't know anything about DMX. However, they *do* know a good bit about the subject.

    I know Bill personally, and he is an incredibly intelligent man. He has a diverse range of knowledge and experience, particularly when it comes to theatrical productions. Sure, laser shows and laser show controllers are his specialty, but that is by no means the limit of his expertise. So when it sounded like you were trying to tell him to stop offering assistance, it bothered me a great deal.
    It was a general warning / help for people - less offtopic than most other topics are going here. I don't understand why I should not post that.
    I agree that the information you shared is good to know. (In fact, I said so in my earlier post above.) The first part of your post was right on topic. I wasn't objecting to you sharing the additional information, I was objecting to your insistence that only light show companies should be talking about DMX.
    I've seen the DMX-possibilities of LivePro and LD2000, I've seen the DMX-implementation of the FB3 board and I've read his posts about DMX, so I think I know what his knowledge (not experience) is.
    You are aware that the QM-2000 board was released over 8 years ago, right? Surely the standards have improved since then. That doesn't reflect on Bill's knowledge or experience.

    Then too, as Bill said - the QM-2000 board is a laser show controller first, and a limited DMX controller second. It's not meant to take the place of a DMX lighting panel. But just because it's designed for a different market doesn't mean that Bill can't talk intelligently about DMX devices.

    Likewise, the FB3 is also a mature product that has been available for several years (though it is newer than the QM-2000), so it, too, is not an example of the state of the art in DMX devices. Also, the FB3 only supports limited DMX input, not because Pangolin doesn't understand DMX, but because of the specific market that the FB3 is aimed at serving.

    Again, you can't make assumptions about a person's knowledge based upon a single product, or even a group of products. You don't know the reasons why the product was designed the way it was.
    Besides, do you exactly know what my experience with stage and lighting effects is? What my daily job is?
    I do not. And that is why I did not make any claims about your knowledge level, apart from the fact that in this specific case, your advice did not apply to Jem's hazer.

    Honestly, I had a suspicion that you *were* very experienced in the field, which is why I was puzzled that you didn't look up the specs for Jem's hazer before you posted. You assumed his was one of the newer models that had a priming mode, when it actually didn't.

    You may well be an expert on DMX devices. If that is the case, I value your input to the discussion. I'm sure everyone will benefit from your knowledge. (I mean that! If you are very experienced in lighting controllers, there are *several* members here who could benefit from your knowledge.)

    However, that doesn't mean you have the right to assume that Bill Benner knows nothing about it, or to say that he shouldn't be talking about DMX. While everyone certainly appreciates your input, when you try to tell others that they shouldn't be offering their input simply because they don't work in your industry, that is wrong. Even if you *think* you know more about the subject than someone else, you don't have the right to tell them to stop posting.

    If someone posts information that is incorrect, by all means speak up and correct it. That's how the forums work. But just because you knew some more information that applies to new hazer machines on the market doesn't mean that Bill's information is invalid. His answer is correct for the large collection of less-expensive hazers that many hobbyists have.
    Bill was presenting the information as a general way to control smoke machines or hazers. I posted a warning after that, also in general (not specific for this topic, I know). The meaning of forum-topics, is that in the future, other people are able to use the information they find for their application. Not only Unique 2 users, also the (common used) 24/7 or Technohazer.
    I agree. And had you stopped at just the warning, we wouldn't be having this discussion now. Your post started out great. You mentioned that there were some hazers that would not work with the instructions that Bill posted, and you took the extra step to post the correct information for those special hazers. That's what the forums are all about - adding to the volume of knowledge. If you had just stopped right there, people would be thanking you for your input. (And indeed, I do thank you for your input, because it *is* valuable.)
    Otherwise Jem could just have sent an e-mail to Bill for help.
    No, that would not be good. Then no one else will benefit from the answer. If Jem gets a reply via e-mail from Bill, then no one else has a chance to read the reply. No one would get to read *your* message either, so your added information would also be lost. No, it's much better to post it in the forums where everyone can read it. But sometimes that means that it takes a few replies for *all* the information to get posted. That's OK though. It's what the forums are for.

    I did forget about the language difference, however, and for that I apologize. I realize how difficult it can be to express your thoughts in another language. (I lived in Germany for 6 months, and only towards the end was I really comfortable enough with the language that I felt certain that I could make my point without offending people.) It may be that you just didn't realize how your post could be read in such a way as to be offensive. I hope we can move forward from this point.

    And once again, I apologize for assuming that English was your native language. My mistake.

    Adam

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pangolin View Post
    I guess there is a new class of fog machines coming out whose DMX functionality is more sophisticated than in the past. Up until now, the DMX input on fog machines was used as a simple on-off control for the fog.

    So no problem, we will simply augment our DMX output control to add additional funtionality for such situations.

    Within LD2000 itself, this would be pretty easy. But for LivePRO, up until now, the DMX functionality has been pretty limited. But then, so far, our users really haven't asked for anything more...
    Any news on whether or not the new versions of LivePRO/LD2000 will have the additional DMX functionality added?

    It would be nice to be able to variably control the output on the Unique 2 hazer. At the moment it's either all on or all off. Believe me when I say that 'all on' isn't a good thing when it's being run in your house I never knew such a small box would be capable of producing so much smoke in such a short space of time. I pressed the button to switch it on and pretty much immediately I saw the smoke I pressed the button to switch it off, say perhaps 3 or 4 seconds. In this short space of time I had produced such a thick fog that I was barely able to see my hand on an outstretched arm - I won't do that again in a hurry

    Jem
    Quote: "There is a theory which states that if ever, for any reason, anyone discovers what exactly the Universe is for and why it is here it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another that states that this has already happened.”... Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    212

    Default

    Interesting discussion going on here.
    I do use a hazer that is DMX controlled and uses 2 channels and yes LivePRO/LD2000 would cause a lot of problems with it if I was to control it using that.

    But along the lines of DMX I want to control my lasers via DMX I have the ability to do that as they both have DMX in/out but that would mean I am limited to the built in shows (not good). I also have a DMX/DAC which has an SD card. So using DMX signals from my lighting controller I can change various aspects of the laser and pick shows from the SD card to play. Sounds good yeah. Well it is not as good as sounds because of the software I have. The lasers came with iShow and that is, how can I put this, very basic to say the least. So if I want to create a show I have to do it frame by frame. I also have Mamba Black but that cannot export a "full show" in ILDA format, it only saves created frames not the ones that get created in the show that have had effects added. The DMX/DAC unit is expecting the files in ILDA format.
    So the big question here is :- Does anyone know of software that can create shows with good morphing/transition effects etc that outputs the whole show, all frames includingg those created by the software, to ILDA format so I can then put it onto the SD card.
    I am open to software/hardware suggestions as long as I can control the laser "shows" from dmx signals. The reason for this is I do the lighting for a band and do not want to have to use two laptops as syncronisation problems then arise, I am a man and I cannot multitask and I am not ambedextrous.

    Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Orlando, FL - USA
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    Hi Onge,

    I was waiting for someone else to comment, so that I wouldn't have to post something that seems commercial in nature. But here goes...

    Pangolin's LD2000 software suite, specifically Showtime:Live and LivePRO, can be controlled by DMX. The LD2000 software suite runs on a PC, so this combination offers maximum flexibility, but of course requires the cost and bulk of a PC plus the cost of the software/hardware itself. You can read about the LD2000 software suite here:
    http://www.pangolin.com/LD2000/index.htm

    A lower-cost option would be Pangolin's Flashback 3 laser controller, which can also be controlled by DMX. This is a small board which can be embedded directly into a laser projector, and offers a very capable DMX implementation (greatest number of DMX-controlled channels compared to any other small board in the industry). You can read about the Flashback 3 here:
    http://www.pangolin.com/flashback/flashback3.htm

    On PL, there are many people who use both the LD2000 software suite and the FB3, so you can ask around for opinions regarding capability, price, and quality of the displayed output.

    There are also probably others who have software and hardware systems which may be controlled by DMX. You will have to do some homework and see if Pangolin's system offers the right combination of price/performance/quality for you. We believe the answer is yes , but this is for each individual to decide for themselves...

    Best regards,

    William Benner
    President: Pangolin Laser Systems, Inc.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pangolin View Post
    Hi Onge,

    I was waiting for someone else to comment, so that I wouldn't have to post something that seems commercial in nature. But here goes...

    On PL, there are many people who use both the LD2000 software suite and the FB3, so you can ask around for opinions regarding capability, price, and quality of the displayed output.

    There are also probably others who have software and hardware systems which may be controlled by DMX. You will have to do some homework and see if Pangolin's system offers the right combination of price/performance/quality for you. We believe the answer is yes , but this is for each individual to decide for themselves...

    Best regards,

    William Benner
    President: Pangolin Laser Systems, Inc.
    Hi William,

    Thank you for the input.

    I have already decided that in the near future I will be getting the "PRO" version of LD2000 + QM2000.NET brick and a FB3 card or two, sorting funds out.
    This was decided upon by reading the forums on PL as a lot of people on here have a vast amount of knowledge and as you have said not of "commercial nature."

    Once again thank you all,

    André

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Onge View Post
    I have already decided that in the near future I will be getting the "PRO" version of LD2000 + QM2000.NET brick and a FB3 card or two, sorting funds out.
    Nice ... You definately won't be disappointed. The QM2000 is brilliant... I want another one

    Jem
    Quote: "There is a theory which states that if ever, for any reason, anyone discovers what exactly the Universe is for and why it is here it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another that states that this has already happened.”... Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,585

    Default

    I've dug this old thread up to see if there has been any progress made regarding *variable* DMX output within LivePRO for my Look Solutions Unique 2 Hazer.

    Bill suggests in post #12 that there may be a possiblility of variable control being introduced into LivePRO, but I haven't heard anything as yet. I just wondered if there was any sort of workaround.

    At the risk of sounding *really* stupid ... What would be really nice is to use one of the sliders on my Behringer BCF2000 MIDI controller to control the haze output and another one to control the fan speed. This would of course mean somehow linking the MIDI to DMX within LivePRO.

    As i've mentioned previously, I don't know the first think about either MIDI or DMX , but I am willing to learn

    Jem
    Quote: "There is a theory which states that if ever, for any reason, anyone discovers what exactly the Universe is for and why it is here it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another that states that this has already happened.”... Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    212

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jem View Post
    At the risk of sounding *really* stupid ... What would be really nice is to use one of the sliders on my Behringer BCF2000 MIDI controller to control the haze output and another one to control the fan speed. This would of course mean somehow linking the MIDI to DMX within LivePRO.

    As i've mentioned previously, I don't know the first think about either MIDI or DMX , but I am willing to learn

    Jem
    You should be able to do that with your BCF2000 you just need a program or two. Bome's Midi Translator and AutoHotKey. Both free

    The Midi Translator allows you to convert midi signals (from the BCF2000 or any midi device) to keystrokes.
    AutoHotKey allows you to create scripts that can send keypresses/mouse clicks to applications and much more which can be triggered by a key press (from the Midi Translator).
    With these two programs you should be able to control any piece of software from your BCF2000.

    Basically DMX is a serial communications signal. DMX512 allows 512 channels and each of these channels allows a value from 0-255 (256 different values). Now a simply way of looking at this is like this. You have a hazer/fog machine that has 2 DMX channels. The first channel controls the fog output and the second channel controls the fans speed. If channels 1 and 2 both have a value of zero then this could mean no fog output and fan is off. Now if both channels are set to 255 then this could mean maximum fog output and max fan speed. This is only an example of how DMX works, most DMX fixtures have various number of channels and various values on each of those channels to do certain things. Again as an example our "Hazer" we described above actually has values of 0-250 for variable fog output and 251-255 is the prime function. So to control you fog output you would only use values from 0-250 but if you ran out of fluid in the hazer you would need to prime it so you would send it a value of 251 or greater.
    For more info on dmx have a look at the DMX Wiki which is something that I have contributed to a lot.

    Hope that helps,

    Onge
    Last edited by Onge; 12-06-2008 at 08:14.
    350mW RGB, 180mW RGY Moving Head, 180mW RGY, 10mW Green, 5mw Green, 4x5mW Red
    Mamba Black 1.96 and MediaLas USB DAC, DMX SD DAC
    Just Floyd - The Pink Floyd Tribute

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •