Feature request: Move FX, Positions

[Adrian]

I really hoped that the 2.0 update would finally bring about a change in how positions are handled. Unfortunately not, so I'm renewing my request. Please let the movement effects take the positions palette into account. Example: If the Center position is activated, the moving heads move around the center position. If I select the Wall position, the light beams move on the wall. If I need a static position, I turn off the movement effect or use Live Edit. Why isn't that possible? Why?!

[[email protected]]

I have been missing this function since the first days, it was even a topic in the WEAC.

I have seen that there are SEQ positions in V2.0.3 that are already used in the FX, aren't they?

[86bibo]

You can already do that since long time. If you are defining a movement, you can choose with the buttons if it should do this movement in the center, left, right, top or bottom. Sure, this is not very sensitiv, but in most cases, I would say it is sufficient. With the new FW, you can also use the static positions in the sequencer. So depending, what you want to realize, this might fit to your demand.

[Adrian]

You can already do that since long time. If you are defining a movement, you can choose with the buttons if it should do this movement in the center, left, right, top or bottom. Sure, this is not very sensitiv, but in most cases, I would say it is sufficient. With the new FW, you can also use the static positions in the sequencer. So depending, what you want to realize, this might fit to your demand.

No, it is absolutely not the same!

[[email protected]]

You can already do that since long time. If you are defining a movement, you can choose with the buttons if it should do this movement in the center, left, right, top or bottom. Sure, this is not very sensitiv, but in most cases, I would say it is sufficient. With the new FW, you can also use the static positions in the sequencer. So depending, what you want to realize, this might fit to your demand.

It's not the same for me either.

I always like to use this to pan from left to right in the room exactly at ceiling height. But with the settings I almost never hit this point or I have to use the limits to restrict the area so that I can hit it, but then I miss it with other FX or I can't get to other positions.

[86bibo]

It's not the same for me either.

I always like to use this to pan from left to right in the room exactly at ceiling height. But with the settings I almost never hit this point or I have to use the limits to restrict the area so that I can hit it, but then I miss it with other FX or I can't get to other positions.

I understand your wish, but in the end the Wolfmix will always be a compromize between functionality and easy to use. For experienced users handling the FW2.0 will not be an issue, but for complete beginners, this already increases the complexity a lot. What you are looking for sounds for me more like a full flexible DMX software, like e.g. Daslight.

The basic idea of the Wolfmix MH control is, that you are limiting the movement to your standard working range (e.g. just in front of the stage). If you do so, you can also adapt your move FX quite good. I can understand, that you might have a scenario, where you can't or don't want to do that (e.g. a discoball in the back, which you want to focus), but I think this is the case for less then 5% of the users. It will never fit for all users 100% with a plug and play approach.

Please don't get me wrong, if there is a possibility realize this function in an easy way (e.g. to use a position preset as reference center point), it would be nice, but I don't think this will have a high priority.

[Adrian]

Wolfmix is ​​used by many mobile DJs, and I find the problem much more serious there than with a band stage. Due to space constraints, the lighting system often can't be set up symmetrically relative to the dance floor. Therefore, precise positioning is necessary.

I need to explain another problem with an example. I want the lights to execute movement patterns around a center position. With Wolfmix, this is absolutely impossible! You can define a center position, but as soon as you activate a MoveFX, the lights return to their default position. So, my question again: What's so problematic if the MoveFX uses the positions as starting positions?

@86bibo: Why are you trying to downplay the problem? If it's not important to you, then just leave it alone!

[willm]

Hello,

I think it's actually a slightly more complex thing rather than just allowing the fixture to move around a centre point that is determined by the static Positions.

A few examples of potential points where this might cause issues:

- It is possible to set a position that has Pan and Tilt both at value 0. In this case, the 9 different position adjustment buttons in the Move FX will behave strangely. For example, the left column of buttons will show the exact same Pan value as the central column of buttons. Likewise, the bottom row of buttons will show the exact same Tilt value as the central row of buttons.

- It is possible to set a Fan value in each static position- how exactly would this be handled in the Move FX, which also has a Fan value? Would they stack, or would one override the other. I can imagine strange, unpredictable behaviour in both instances.

- It is now possible to use Cross in a static position- how would this be handled in the Move FX?

- It is also now possible to set fixture offsets in a static position- how would this be handled in the Move FX?

- What happens if you disable the Static Position?

- What if you want to quickly activate a Static Position? You will now have to disable the Move FX first, before changing the position.

These are a few snagging points that I can think of of the top of my head, and I'm sure the developers may have some more ideas on the technical side.

To summarise, its something that would undoubtably provide a lot of extra power- but it's an idea that would fundamentally change some of the workflows of the Wolfmix- which currently works on a 'last-takes-priority' basis between the FX and Static screens. Implementing this functionality would take a lot of thought and planning, and likely a fairly substantial sized change to several components.

I can not guarantee at this point whether we will be able to implement this, but rest assured it is something that will definitely be considered going forwards. Apologies that I can not provide anything more definitive on the topic, but your feedback on this is greatly appreciated!

[Adrian]

Willm! You're just talking about why something supposedly can't be done. Leave that to the developers! I've worked with Chamsys for many years. These are basic functions. I suggest you take a look at professional systems.

[willm]

I suppose my point is that whilst may be basic in concept, fitting it into the existing, well established Wolfmix workflow might not be as simple as it sounds (not impossible by any means- but certainly not as straight forward as the concept may sound!).

Hopefully the explanation provides some insight into why that is, and I reiterate- it's something that will definitely be in discussion going forwards.