Jump to content

Brian

Regular Members
  • Posts

    7,422
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    31

Posts posted by Brian

  1. Do you mean a lighting control program with a real Windows user interface, as in designed in Windows and uses Windows GUI things?

     

    Pretty much.

     

    Stretching PC to mac - QLab takes a very non lighting desk approach to lighting control.

     

    That's the kind of approach I'm interested in.

     

    In PC-land there's things like DASlight and Sunlight which take a different approach. As does D-Pro.

  2. For indoor spaces there is a lot of talk around having lots of air changes as being one of the mitigations against transmission.

     

    We all know that lots of air changes does not make an environment suitable for haze.

  3. I guess the difference I'm looking at is the UI. There are systems, like Chamsys, where you could take the UI on the PC's screen and make a physical console which looked the same, and then are systems which use a more 'PC-centric' operating mode where it would be difficult to mimic it on a physical surface.

     

    In both cases the destination is the same but the journey will be different.

  4. Is anyone using a control system specifically designed, from the ground up, for lighting control on a PC?

     

    By that I mean one which originated on a PC and not one that was designed for a console and has been ported to a PC. So that means not Chamsys, not Avolite, not MA.

  5. Why 612KHz?

    That's a good question, and one where googling has not been productive.

     

    I'm thinking that a typo and that it should be MHz. 612MHz as the LO, mixing down to an IF of 45Mhz would put the received channel slap bang in the middle of terrestrial TV channels.

     

    Plus, 612kHz is too low to be any use in receiving a video signal and has no bearing on the display side. It's an old TV so line scan will be 15,625Hz so 612kHz isn't going to be a harmonic of that with any strength.

  6. I'm a bit constrained as to how much detail I can put out but to answer some of the questions...

     

    IP68? - yes, it really does need to be that, though not, as I said, when operating.

     

    Power? - yes, battery would be fine as the operating period is relatively short. No more than 1hr will cover it.

     

    Moving? - yes, the reception end will be moving, although within a constrained area. Something like a 30 degree beamwidth from the transmitter would keep the receivers covered. Worst case would be to go old-schooll and have someone pointing the antenna at the reception target area.

  7. When the said channel level on the Level 6 is at zero, the channel still outputs power. Raising the channel level towards full overrides this. Touching the case chassis causes a slight dimming of the channel output. All other 5 channels behave correctly.

     

     

    Can you clarify...

     

    1) You say the channel still outputs power. How are you measuring this? If it's just with a meter across the output, and with no load, you will see a voltage caused by leakage current. If using a meter you must also have a load lamp connected.

     

    2) You say 'raising the level towards full'. Does this mean that the output 'snaps' to the position of the fader and now tracks it correctly from (near) off to full?

     

    3) Which channel is misbehaving?

  8. Looks like I'm going to need to send a universe of DMX wirelessly over a minimum of 2km, ideally I'd like 5km.

     

    Unobstructed line of sight is not a problem, transmit power source is not a problem, receive power source will need to be battery. If the receiver is an off-the-shelf product it'll need to be IP68, but only when it's not operating. There's no opportunity for an intermediate repeater.

     

    Anyone done anything like this?

  9. ...whether ozone can be used to manage risk in "real time":

     

    I'd hardly call 10 hours 'real time'...

     

    To demonstrate its effectiveness, an ozone generator was used in a sealed chamber that was doused with a sample of coronavirus. The results suggested that the virus’s potency declined by more than 90 per cent after being subjected to the ozone for 10 hours.

     

    Scaling that up to something that would deal with your typical 10,000 seater arena is going to be an interesting challenge.

  10. ...someone had re-plugged the midi so my adaptor went from the in to the thru...

     

     

    Not sure I understand that bit. You probably know this but MIDI Thru is not like a DMX Thru in that there are electronics that buffer MIDI In before it gets to MIDI Thru.

  11. Interesting views from the experts now about how reliable temperature checks are as a way of detecting someone's health. Especially as it now looks like you are most infectious in the day or so before you notice any symptoms.

    Is there a link to that info ??

     

    The article I read in the last couple of days referenced the US and, probably, the views of Dr Fauci. But the official UK advice backs this up...

     

    There is little scientific evidence to support temperature screening as a reliable method for detection of COVID-19 or other febrile illness, especially if used as the main method of testing.

     

    Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/dont-rely-on-temperature-screening-products-for-detection-of-coronavirus-covid-19-says-mhra

     

    Follow on: https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2020/08/13/fauci-says-coronavirus-temperature-checks-notoriously-inaccurate/#18a6b43733f0

  12. Interesting views from the experts now about how reliable temperature checks are as a way of detecting someone's health. Especially as it now looks like you are most infectious in the day or so before you notice any symptoms.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.