Lighting desk

[SourceChild]

...Personally, I MUCH prefer the GrandMA to the Hog 3. I find it to be much faster to program Media Servers, utilizing the Smart Window...

I can partially agree. If I had a permanent venue or a tour that I knew had some longevity, I would be picking MA. On a three or four truck tour, the space needed for an MA or two is negligible.

[quote=jasonrudolph;5925]
...The other console, which doesn't come up often, as you can only get it from PRG is the Virtuoso...quote]

I freaking love the virt except that unlike other desks, the single cuelist thing slows down some of the tricks I use. The masking however is a very cool feature.

Only problem is that not as many people I work with know this desk like I do.

[SourceChild]

Actually I think you can get that console...

Actually, PRG will long term lease these so even though they are not "owned" the are available in permanent rental inventory.

[SourceChild]

mtron in fw800 enclouseres, how do they deal with 1024x768 files photojpeg 50% or apple intermediate codec?

1024x768

Inside a MAC pro using a SATA Mtron can get 8 layers AIC or 4 layers PJPG50%.

If using a fw800 on a MAC Pro, 6 layers AIC or 3 PJPG50%.

On a MacBook Pro, 3 layers AIC or 2 layers PJPG50%.

[FinnRoss]

Another thing; Highend very unhelpful with new fixtures for Hog 3. To do DMX Matrix they suggested patching 16 individual fixtures instead of just one, with 16 attributes as the MA does, plus has a built in UPS and doesn't fall over all the time. If you find a problem they fix it quick. Highend just insist you are doing something worng. MA are very helpful and nice people. Highend are just rude. It may cost a little more but it works a whole lot better, especially with large shows.

[SourceChild]

...Highend very unhelpful with new fixtures for Hog 3...

I don't think I would argue this. To a point, I agree.

...To do DMX Matrix they suggested patching 16 individual fixtures instead of just one, with 16 attributes...

A big downfall from Hog to MA is the matrix feature. However, I have dozens of templates for offsets and time values in my hog shows and literally hundreds of hours worth of editor programming already done.

I could perhaps duplicate the templates in MA but the editor on the hog3 is just faster for me.

...plus has a built in UPS...

Actually, Hog3 has a UPS built in as well. Sadly though if the computer locks up in the Hog to the point you need to cold start it, it can be a pain to wait the 2 minutes it takes for the UPS battery to discharge before the hog will shut off to be rebooted.

...and doesn't fall over all the time...

What do you mean by "fall over?"

If you are referring to crashing then I will tell you that the rate at which I program, I crash both desks just as often.

...If you find a problem they fix it quick...

There is a bit of a difference in the business model and the cost of the desks determine the amount each company is willing to commit to support. Obviously MA support is going to be better in this regard.

...Highend just insist you are doing something worng...
...MA are very helpful and nice people....

This may be related to the specific people supporting. I happen to know some of the tech support people at HighEnd and the ones I'm friends with are pretty easy to deal with.

...Highend are just rude...

I've noticed this a few times but I haven't ever had as great a need to bug the MA support staff since I typically spec Hog3s.

...It may cost a little more but it works a whole lot better, especially with large shows...

The cost is proportionate I believe but there are still things I can do on a Hog that I can't do as fast on an MA.

[Spam Butterfly]

If you want Hog III libraries written, you need to talk to Hog III librarian. He is usually pretty quick.

I find the Hogs more ergonomic and the syntax is more elegant than the Grand MA. Personally, I still program most of my shows on a Hog 2 OS system - preferably a Hog 2. It's simple to write you're own libraries for it too. There are still a few tricks that only the Hog 2 can do, and if the console has been looked after, it's still the most reliable desk around. It also has good timecode support (that will be the AMS Neve timecode chip then), and a decent MSC implementation. The downsides are that the Hog 2 as only 4 universes (without using overdrive boxes), no hard disk - perhaps one of the reasons that makes it intrinsically more reliable than other desks - however, floppies are becoming scarce. It's a better media server programming platform than the 3 - the fades are predicable, and the DMX does what you program. The Hog III still has rounding issues between real world values and DMX.

Whilst I love the Hog 2, it is getting long in the tooth...

The Grand MA is certainly an interesting desk, and I have no doubts that it would do what I want (and it talks Artnet too). What I find rather irritating is MA's stubborn refusal to implement any TCP/IP type media server features for any other media server than Grand MA Video.

Chamsys' Magic Q looks interesting - it's vaguely Hog like, and the media server support is good too - it supports Catalyst's web server.

Hugh

[emilianomorgia]

a bit off topic , but what drive me crazy is that no one design a SHUTTER ( or keystone ) UI . It is ridiculous we still have to rotate a wheel , actually many wheels to control a simple mechanism like Frame Shutter or in the case of Catalyst Keystone.

the Hog II did a giant step actually it create a entire NEW ERA of the lighting control and we now still living in that era . Every Desk mentioned it's son of the Hog but one of them did I big step forward in term of usability .
Yes for sure we went in to the networking days but the programmers are look a lot like the old hog .

Just recently I tough how many waste of time as been spent from zilllions of companies to create desk like maxxyz , vista , compulite and many others witch have a really little market share compared to what Maa and HES does .

I personally think the era of the hardware lighting desk it will be shortly over .

We got a clear example of what a lighting tool can be using common hardware .
Catalyst it's a strong software run on common computers , and it live in a real world eco system , where every year CPU goes faster and cost less .
I don't see why a lighting desk have to cost 40.000 euro ! ( more or less ) when the fastest Pc cost 4.000 .

Indeed why need faders and other " special " input devices that can't be found outside the lighting industry , then why not make only this input devices ? and use the personal computer industry power and growing speed .
Yes I know there are companies that sell this side wings and this is good .

Maa for example , as far I know , don't have any Pc control surface , neither
the HogII like from UK does it , and so all other . Only HES as been so smart to think to 512 channel widget and programer and playback wings and recently they " un lock " the use of dp2000 for the hog3 pc software .

HES and Maa and so ETC and Martin does Pc software witch are not really designed to be a Pc software . What they do they are simulating the real hardware desk but are not truly designed to be operated on a Pc .
( Just to clarify , when I say Pc I don't think to a little 13" laptop )

Indeed working using a Hog III Pc software ( IMO ) it's better then anything else , but I still working in a " SIMULATOR " of the real Hog .

As far I remember when I was a boy I saw big hardware machines to editing videos , monochromatic CTR monitors was display information to control many ( I think the was ) betacam VCRs .

what do we have today ?

best hollywood movies are edited on Mac or Pc certainly not a 13" laptop , but a real workstation filled with all the goods necessary to do what it's need.


So as I said , I might be bit off topic but since we start speaking of lighting desks i like to give my clear and deep opinion .

[Mr_P]

I use an MA light or my iPC...

iPC - for all of the reasons hugh mentioned - Hog 2's are old - iPC runing H2 software is great and can be easily expanded with DMX widgets to 7 universes. I still use my programer wing and a laptop if im travelling light.

MA is great due to greater number of pallets - and nice colour screens. Just as easy to customise fixture profiles if reqd. Dont ike H3 for catalyst programming due to lack of customizig profile - otherwise, software is gettig better slowly.

I own an iPC - purchased due to its potential longevity - H3 will eventually be stable. HES has pored too much in to it to drop it in the near future.

HOWEVER, my next desk purchase will be an MA light - cheaper, reliable, scalable - although, not as attractive (yet)

S

[Mr_P]

a bit off topic , but what drive me crazy is that no one design a SHUTTER ( or keystone ) UI . It is ridiculous we still have to rotate a wheel , actually many wheels to control a simple mechanism like Frame Shutter or in the case of Catalyst Keystone.

not true - go look at keystone controls n the mix window - click and drag!!

the Hog II did a giant step actually it create a entire NEW ERA of the lighting control and we now still living in that era . Every Desk mentioned it's son of the Hog but one of them did I big step forward in term of usability .
Yes for sure we went in to the networking days but the programmers are look a lot like the old hog .

Hog was advanced for its time, but AVO, ETC, JANDS compulite all have good range of desks - not all as good as each other for dealing with media servers - but good in their field and unique from the Hog2

Just recently I tough how many waste of time as been spent from zilllions of companies to create desk like maxxyz , vista , compulite and many others witch have a really little market share compared to what Maa and HES does .

Vista is a great desk - ideally suited for timeline programming....

I personally think the era of the hardware lighting desk it will be shortly over .

NEVER - people like hands on FADERS and KNOBS - mice are a pain! - you can only control one thing at once with a mouse or even touchscreen. Faders and knobs allow programmers to do more than one thing at once.

Granted - PC systems have their place for offline programming at the airport - or creating custom fixtures, or updating pallet names - but are no substiue when faced with a hard programmig session on big shows.

I will grant one exception to the pc lighting controller however, in use as a midi or MSC slave on an installation.

We got a clear example of what a lighting tool can be using common hardware .
Catalyst it's a strong software run on common computers , and it live in a real world eco system , where every year CPU goes faster and cost less .
I don't see why a lighting desk have to cost 40.000 euro ! ( more or less ) when the fastest Pc cost 4.000 .

Indeed why need faders and other " special " input devices that can't be found outside the lighting industry , then why not make only this input devices ? and use the personal computer industry power and growing speed .
Yes I know there are companies that sell this side wings and this is good .

Well you;ve just contradicted yourself and re-afirmed he need for hardware!

HES and Maa and so ETC and Martin does Pc software witch are not really designed to be a Pc software . What they do they are simulating the real hardware desk but are not truly designed to be operated on a Pc .
( Just to clarify , when I say Pc I don't think to a little 13" laptop )

not true - Hog PC works great!

Indeed working using a Hog III Pc software ( IMO ) it's better then anything else , but I still working in a " SIMULATOR " of the real Hog .

As far I remember when I was a boy I saw big hardware machines to editing videos , monochromatic CTR monitors was display information to control many ( I think the was ) betacam VCRs .

what do we have today ?

technology has moved on! - the microprocessor replaced the valve 40 years ago!

best hollywood movies are edited on Mac or Pc certainly not a 13" laptop , but a real workstation filled with all the goods necessary to do what it's need.

So as I said , I might be bit off topic but since we start speaking of lighting desks i like to give my clear and deep opinion .

So im still not clear - are you pro hardware or software lighting desks?

Lighting desks are here to stay - the ameture user may only be able to afford a PC and offline software - but you'll find that every PRO user and hire company around the worldstill use real desks....

The future of video control is in dedicated video control desks. Take a look at the coolux control surface for pandoras box - is an interesting solution for them. -

(Catalyst is better though)

S

[emilianomorgia]

What's a Real Desk ?