Lighting Software (PC) vs. Lighting Console

Another example of a feature of a "modern" console--pixel mapping. How would one go about programming something like this on an Express/Expression/Obsession? Or even EOS, without at least the pixelToy add-on?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Chamsys LED Tricks - YouTube
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Another example of a feature of a "modern" console--pixel mapping. How would one go about programming something like this on an Express/Expression/Obsession? Or even EOS, without at least the pixelToy add-on?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Chamsys LED Tricks - YouTube

Manually via a chase, macro or cues? It's not as hard as you would think.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's my two pennies.

PC based control:
I own Martin Light Jockey 2. I don't use it much in a live situation unless I have to. It doesn't have enough handles for anything with more than a few moving lights. I do really like the way it programs set cues, for some things but even that has its great limitations. LJ manager is great for being able to schedule events and using the matrix controller to control LED walls. Over all personally I would not use LJ in your situation without doing a lot of pre-programming of looks (more than some others I'll mention later). It does have the ability to be controlled by external sources, so you could still do your cue triggers with a keyboard.

Martin M2PC is brand new product in the M2 product line. It is a control wing that connects to the PC. You can save big money by providing your own computer hardware and using the wing compared to the M2GO. I have not used one but after looking at some training videos it looks workable. I think I'd rather go this route than LJ because of the handles on the control interface.

GrandMA2 onPC is also a relatively new wing control module for computer. It comes with a GMA2 logo so it is automatically in the high end of the price range as far as pc based control wings goes but it also does come with a far superior software package. Price is going to come out around an ETC Element and for live control I'd have to go with the Element.

Consoles:
I've not personally run a hog system but I got a demo on a Road Hog during a concert I was working recently. It looks pretty versatile for live operation. A used one would be an option in my opinion.

I do all of my large show programming on ETC consoles. First off, if you're using an ETC console for live operation you WILL want some faders. Also, sure you can use an express console for intelligent fixtures, but honestly save yourself the headache and go with a modern console.

One venue has an Element console. It works quite well for what we use it for. I've run up to 13 moving lights on it, running effects on each. With the built in 60 submasters it is a great console and if setup right it would work wonderfully for you live.

Ion, it gets you some more features but not too likely any that you will find you use too much. The most useful for you probably being the "Fan" feature which allows you to specify a range of values over a range of fixtures and distributes the range evenly. An example would be say you wanted fixtures 1 to 10 to have an intensity starting at 10% at fixture 1 to 100% at fixture 10. Fan will do the math and apply the pattern quickly and very easily. Element also does not have discrete timing (individual fade time for intensity, focus, beam, and color). However, by the time you add a 2x20 wing to get a good amount of submasters for live operation you're looking at a lot of extra money over an Element, it's tough to swallow the cost difference for the features on a small rig. Edit: Ion does give you the encoder wheels which do make some operations easier, but I only use them while setting up a show, I don't use them when running live.

All in all, speaking for myself, I'd be looking at the M2PC or the Element in your case. In the end you need to sit down and really see how each console programs. With the exception of Martin LJ (because of it's lack of physical handles) the biggest thing that is going to make you love or hate whatever console you get is the software that the console runs. Martin, ETC, MA lighting, and Avolites all have several tutorial videos on youtube that will show you how to do basic programming and will give you good insight into how you have to think to run the console. They all have their similarities and they all have their outstanding differences.
 
Last edited:
As a developer of a software only solution for lighting ( Plexus) - this is a topic that I have done a lot of thinking about over the years. What's best depends on a number of factors. Let me try to take a stab.

A lighting console gives you a couple of things that a PC solution does not.
1 - a lot of buttons and sliders which sometimes are very useful.
2 - An integrated package so you do not have to think. You can just plug it in and go. If things don't work you send it in for maintenance.
3 - No chance that your board op will install Solitare, Doom, or surf the web with the board.

A PC only solutions gives you things that a console does not.
1 - Price point is generally much less expensive.
2 - you can easily and inexpensively have a backup computer sitting there ready to go if something breaks.
3 - A wider style of interfaces that can make running the board more intuitive and simple for your board op.

The main difference ( aside from cost) is the dedicated control surface on a console. If you have to have a dedicated console with multiple physical buttons and sliders, then a PC solution is not for you. But when do you need those physical buttons and sliders?
If you are doing busking on a show you have never seen - or you want to make the lights dance with the band - you probably need physical buttons and sliders.
If you are doing a show with virtually zero prep time (and you don't have too many channels) you probably want sliders. Think talent show where you get the list of what is going to happen five minutes before the show, and you have not had time to build looks ahead of time.

A good software program ( and there are a lot of bad ones out there ) is more intuitive and easier to learn and use than a physical console. Plexus thinks about lighting from the standpoint of a designer, and that means you should set up a magic sheet in the program - so you have to take the time to lay out that magic sheet. It allows you to call up channels by name or number. If you want to do this you have to assign a name to each channel. We have put a lot of thought and effort into making the task of setting cues and playing them back easy and intuitive. This means you have to do just a bit more pre-production work than just coming in, turning on the board, and start playing. Now with a software product you can do that pre-production work at home not in the church / theatre so you are not taking time at the venue.

One thing that a software product can do which might be very useful to the OP is that you can build virtual buttons. IE you can build a screen of buttons, associate each button with a cue, and label and size the buttons as you wish. This is a great way to set up a system where you don't have trained operators. IE you can define 'Choir up' 'Choir down' 'Pulpit up' 'Pulpit Down' etc buttons and an untrained operator can easily run your service. Again you have to do some prep work - but once set up it is very easy to use.

Last comment - there is a lot more variation in software products than there are in consoles. Some products ( like Plexus) have tried to re-think what lighting control should be. Others have simply tried to re-create a physical console on a screen.

As the OP has a computer based system now, I would strongly suggest he download some PC based products and try them out. Take the time to set up your rig and write some cues. See what makes sense to you and what you like best.

If you choose to download our product, I would be happy to answer any questions that come up ( or training material is spotty at present ).
 
... If you have to have a dedicated console with multiple physical buttons and sliders, then a PC solution is not for you. ...
I'll disagree with that statement. Many/most manufacturers offer various wing options to ease the pain of PC-only operation. While most seem expensive for what they are (some buttons, rotary encoders, and sliders), the gains in productivity/ease of use can approach a dedicated control surface.
 
I'll disagree with that statement. Many/most manufacturers offer various wing options to ease the pain of PC-only operation. While most seem expensive for what they are (some buttons, rotary encoders, and sliders), the gains in productivity/ease of use can approach a dedicated control surface.

Derek
I don't think we disagree, we just have slightly different definitions. From my perspective there are:

Dedicated consoles. Someone has designed a specific control surface and packeged the whole thing into a single ( expensive) package.
PC only ( our product ).

Someone designs software to run on your PC with some kind of hardware device ( usually by third parties) to spit out DMX. No physical input but a keyboard, mouse, or touch screen.

PC with wing - Hybrid. . A PC product which has an auxilary hardware wing with sliders or buttons. The wing is sometimes specific to the program, sometimes a third party.

I agree with you re the hybrid making it OK to do pure busking - but that was not what I thought I was talking about. I should have been clearer.
 
Last edited:
Another example of a feature of a "modern" console--pixel mapping. How would one go about programming something like this on an Express/Expression/Obsession? Or even EOS, without at least the pixelToy add-on?

Derek,

Just a point of clarification - the EOS line consoles (except Element) have had pixel mapping built-in since January of 2011 (version 1.9.5). Pixel toy is a separate piece of software that isn't tied to a specific console.

-Todd
 
I'm a lighting tech for a pretty big university. During the school year, we have a lot of events (concerts, worship programs, ect.) that I design and run lighting for. I've used a number of systems- Luminair for iPad (100$), lighting programs for laptops, an older Leprechaun console, and right now I currently use an ETC Smartfade. I'm old school- I prefer my faders over electronic controls. I find that there's less room for error, and more ability to customize and control what you want. It really depends on what you want- a lighting console is less portable, but has more features than an iPad program or computer program. Personally, I would use something portable (iPad) to adjust lights once mounted, and then use a console for the actual patching and program itself.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back