OK..I went over fasteddys vimeo vid and I think I have messed up somewhere...but I don't know the best way to correct it. In LSP I have 9 RGB objects setup as fasteddy shows. so its like this LowerRightPeak 40 pixels numbered channels 1-120 Lower Left Peak 40 pixels numbered channels 121-240 AboveGarage 60 pixels numbered channels 241-420 Above Door 54 pixels numbered channels 421-582 TopLeftRidge 239 pixels numbed channels 583-1299 TopRightRidge 147 pixels numbered channels 1300-1740 TopPeakLeft 32 pixels numbered channels 1741-1836 TopPeakRight 32 pixels numbered channels 1837-1932 TopPeakBottom 48 pixels numbered channels 1933-2076 When I say numbered channels my channels look like this (1,2,3) Channel#1 that would be on that LowerRightPeak Then my last one on TopPeakBottom would be (2074,2075,2076)Channel#48. ALSO LowerRightPeak, LowerLeftPeak, AboveGarage, AboveDoor are ALL ON ONE STRING..same for all of the TOP... objects, which I assume isn't an issue if you use the 4 universes. THAT is where I think I have something wrong...each object starts at channel 1 and goes to the last channel number for the number of pixels, then the next object starts at 1 again. Do I need to group UNIVERSE objects together somehow so the channel numbers go from 1-170?...When I start scheduler up it complains about an output not setup and to go into output config. ALSO...is there a way to control the lights from sequencer instead...
As mentioned, if you can post screenshots of your P2 config and your LSP e1.31 configuration, we should be able to help you out. When you have a channel that reads as you've listed, the important thing is the 3 numbers in the bracket - the "Channel #48" is actually only a text description (you can double-click the channel to change that if you like).. In this situation, I would think that the 2074-2076 is correct for the last pixel I haven't seen the config for multiple universe off a single output on a P2, but I assume that you specify up to 4 universe numbers, and number of channels on each of these universes.. You then need to make sure the e1.31 config in LSP is setup to match this - so universe numbers, and number of channels. You can right-click any controller and choose "Test Controller" to do a quick test - you can only test a bank of 8 rgb channels at a time. And if you want to get some live output from the sequencer, you can enable live output by pressing the "Output" button under the "Playback" ribbon. You can then add some effects in the grid, and hit Play and you should get output happening.. (one quirk I've found with LSP is that you sometimes need to optimise the sequence to get output working properly- right click the spectrum graph area, and choose "Maintenance Tools", and "Optimise Entire Sequence" - I tend to always do this before any test..) You need to setup the e1.31 plugin in both the sequencer and the scheduler (each has their own separate config files for some unknown stupid stupid reason).. You can either set it up in the scheduler config, or I'm pretty sure you can copy the OutputConfiguration.xml from your sequencer directory to your scheduler directory..
YUP...thats what it was...SILLIEST programming quirk in LSP so far! IT should REQUIRE optimization BEFORE being imported into the scheduler AND should export the output settings!
Just wait until you really get stuck into LSP, you'll find plenty more where that came from! There's so many things that I would love to suggest as feature improvements, but too scared to, in case they take time away from fixing bigger issues.. Even just little things like on RGB channels, whenever applying an effect, it pops up a colour dialog every single time.. Yes, you can hit enter if you want to use the same colour as last time, but why in the heck did he not do it like any other program, where you have a colour selection panel in your toolbar, and all tools use this colour selection.. This alone would save me hours of wasted time I think! Good to hear your issue is sorted!
I would add your future feature requests over at the LSP forums because regardless of what features you want, the main focus first up will be fixing up any issues, but at the same time some of those issue may benifit from some of your suggestions, so i wouldnt hold of as it looks like LSP may go through a strong development period over the next 12 months
Yeah, good point - I wouldn't have bothered before (as I figured that it was pointless with the direction David was going), but now with the future much more positive, it's much more worthwhile.
