Corbettlight
Active Member
True enough, but espresso is overall better.
Favorite Light Board Feature
- Thread starterLightingPenguin
- Start date
True enough, but espresso is overall better.
I hate how the Innovator doesn't have an Undo button. That would have come in handy for me countless times, especially as the board's buttons are a pain, in my opinion, and so I'll accidentially record cue 20 as cue 2, rewriting cue 2. (I did this on Wednsday - always check the screen before pressing enter!!)
The Back button is also useful. I've had to press that button right after unintentionally pressing GO multiple times... in the middle of the scene - when the next cue is a blackout.
The Back button is also useful. I've had to press that button right after unintentionally pressing GO multiple times... in the middle of the scene - when the next cue is a blackout.
I'm not sure from your post what you don't like. Is it just the latter part of your post?
tomthetechie
Member
If a light board works in simple english I'm satisfied (example: [record] [1] [dimer(s)] 1-4) other than that... it would probably be Go.... it makes life so much easier.
Actually, my favorite feature is a monitor display. I feel so empty working a board without one.... especially if it's to old to handle one
Actually, my favorite feature is a monitor display. I feel so empty working a board without one.... especially if it's to old to handle one
Sorry if I was unclear.
1) I don't think I like the idea of a "Channel" having multiple parts/parameters/attributes. When the word was first introduced to the lighting community, it was "Control Channel" and opened a new concept to lighting designers, who previously had only thought of "dimmers." Younger viewers don't have these issues.
2) I think everyone can agree that having different definitions for "channels," "dimmers," "fixtures," "attributes," "parameters," "outputs," etc., is a problem.
On a side note, right now there is an interesting discussion happening regarding the nuances and differences between <Thru> and <Thru> <Thru> as implemented on the Eos family over at the ETC Forum. Everyone, weigh in if you have a strong opinion.
1) I don't think I like the idea of a "Channel" having multiple parts/parameters/attributes. When the word was first introduced to the lighting community, it was "Control Channel" and opened a new concept to lighting designers, who previously had only thought of "dimmers." Younger viewers don't have these issues.
2) I think everyone can agree that having different definitions for "channels," "dimmers," "fixtures," "attributes," "parameters," "outputs," etc., is a problem.
On a side note, right now there is an interesting discussion happening regarding the nuances and differences between <Thru> and <Thru> <Thru> as implemented on the Eos family over at the ETC Forum. Everyone, weigh in if you have a strong opinion.
(I didn't mean to bring that discussion here, but since you asked...) As I understand it, Eos allows a user to display only Active Channels in various views. When in one or some of these views, X <thru> Y will act upon only currently active channels. To act upon ALL channels within the range, one must use X <thru><thru> Y. I may have the behaviors backwards--they reversed in the latest software revision, thus the discussion.
Axislights
Member
Sorry if I was unclear.
1) I don't think I like the idea of a "Channel" having multiple parts/parameters/attributes. When the word was first introduced to the lighting community, it was "Control Channel" and opened a new concept to lighting designers, who previously had only thought of "dimmers." Younger viewers don't have these issues.
2) I think everyone can agree that having different definitions for "channels," "dimmers," "fixtures," "attributes," "parameters," "outputs," etc., is a problem.
I understand what you mean now. And I somewhat agree. I guess what it really boils down to for me is display and control. I like a fixture to only take up 1 "slot" across and have all of its attributes/parameters to go under it. I want to select a "fixture" and then control all of its attributes/parameters on encoders/wheels/trackball etc. I don't like it when a fixture is displayed across the screen i.e. Express(ion) with each "control channel" being displayed.
If that makes any sense.
-Tim
The feature that I WISH there was on consoles today is this: I want to be able to do more than one thing in the command line at once. When programming and an LD says "Can I have channels 2-4 at 50 and 5-8 at 75?" I want to be able to enter that all in one command line. In reality it probably only saves me one keystroke, but if the LD sees it as one idea why can't the console? Consider if the LD decided that he then wanted all those channels up 10% you could just hit the +10 button without having to call all the channels again!
As a quick hijack Dimmer check isn't just about making sure the lights are turned on but that they're focused properly. Something you can't really do if they all come on at the same time.
Similar threads
