Page 1 of 2


Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:07 pm
by RobHalliday
Mark needs to be able to set a light in the same cue that it fades out in, please.

For a whole host of reasons, I don't want to have to insert a point cue between two cues. This is a surefire way for a show to end up in a follow on cue at some point if it doesn't complete before the next cue is called (-and as an aside, maybe Palette could handle that situation more intelligently, too.....)


Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 12:42 am
by RobertBell
RobHalliday wrote:and as an aside, maybe Palette could handle that situation more intelligently, too.....)

Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:09 am
by gooze
I think the question is: Is there a way to prevent ugliness if you press go if a light is still marking?
I must say it has become a lot clearer with the big bubble showing MARKING. So it's all up to the operator if he GOes or not.
I would be against any desk-intelligence here. I didn't like what it did before: postponing the whole cue till it finished marking.

Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:49 am
by JohnGrimshaw
(Rob - Please correct me if I am wrong but...)
Here is an example - take a show with five cues

Q1 - VL3k fades up DSC
Q2 - VL3k Fades out (lots of noisy applause)
Q3 - other stuff happens
Q4 - other stuff happens
Q5 - VL3k fades up upstage in a new colour.

The console would normally MIB the VL3k after Q4, but the show is too quiet in Q3 and Q4. Ideally, we want to "mark" the new position after is has finished fading out in Q2.

...and without recording a special Q2.5 just to do this job (and putting an autofollow on Q2).

Makes sense to me.

Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:26 am
by RobertBell
who is to say that it's noisy after q2? Maybe it's noisy after Q3. If so, you should use MARK - not MIB, so you can determine where it goes. (we have to be consistent with the terms MIB and MARK function to follow this thread, OK)

My issue with MIB as soon as the light goes out is that you get noise happening all the time, not just before the big bright ART cue. Imagine a death scene that goes on for 5 cues, where it gets dimmer and dimmer throughout, then ends in a big bright angle scene in Q6. As each group of lights fades in Q1-5, you get noise (even as the audience is getting more and more involved in the scene - they are interupted over and over again in preperation for Q6.). If all the MIB happened at the end of Q5, at least you could control the volume by putting on a long MIB time and get it to happen all at once.

One question I need answered is this: Using MIB as designed - to set up the lights just before the big art cue, it currently waits until all fades are done on the previous cue - then we execute the MIB fades. What Bobby has wanted is for each light to move as soon as it, itself, reaches 0% - EVEN if there are parts of that same cue that have longer fade times. Considering this functionality - would you vote for MIBs to happen AS SOON AS THEY CAN as the previous cue is fading out (ONLY in the cue prior to the big ART cue)?

Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:19 pm
by RobHalliday
I was actually wondering if the follow-on part could happen more intelligently, ie:

you have:
cue 3 (run by go push)
cue 4 (run by go push)
cue 4.2 (auto-follow to cue 4)
cue 5 (run by go push)

Now what can happen is stage manager calls:
cue 3 GO - press go
cue 4 GO - press go
cue 5 GO - press go - BUT if the follow-on hadn't kicked in, the GO push would leave the console in 4.2 and nothing would then happen (until someone noticed that they were in the wrong cue). Worst case with a bad operator they'd be a cue behind for the next few cue.

My question was in this case, shouldn't the console say 'well, the go clearly CAN'T mean go to cue 4.2 because it's a follow-on so it must mean go on cue 5'.

Now this is one of those hard things because it makes an assumption, but would it usually be the right assumption?


(PS: I'm pretty sure that I'd now always use MARK now that it works properly ;-) However, if I did ever use MIB again I think I'd want it to happen as soon as possible as it could, and I think I'd want it to run once that light had gone out rather than once the entirety of the cue was done. Particularly with slow lights, having the light try to set between cues is never going to be succesful)

Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:22 pm
by JohnGrimshaw
RobertBell wrote:who is to say that it's noisy after q2?
Me. What I was trying to say was that, in the particular example given, the LD requires the light to prepare for Q5 after Q2. Then standard MIB position at the end of Q4 was not appropriate, but the moment it finished fading out in Q2 is perfect. It would be desirable to achieve this WITHOUT the need for a 2.5 cue to attached the "MARK" feature to - i.e. put the MARK into Cue 2 where is fades out.
RobertBell wrote:Considering this functionality - would you vote for MIBs to happen AS SOON AS THEY CAN as the previous cue is fading out (ONLY in the cue prior to the big ART cue)?
Would it be better to do what you are describing more globally? What if there was a "per fixture" option that, EVERY time a moving light went to zero, it would auto MIB the fixture to the position required for the next cue. If you did this, you would ALSO need to leave your "cue prior" MIB in place to catch those times when a light is moved by another cue list. It would mean there would be TWO moments when a MIB function could activate. This option would:
- catch the Rob H requirement if making the light ready the moment it fades out (and without messy additional cues)
- give a specific moment to do Bobby's "MIB When Ready function"
- leave the current MIB functionality and methodology in place

Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:25 pm
by RobHalliday
I suspect it may e as simple as, if you're using MIB you don't care about noise, if you're using MARK you do, which is why you want to be the 'control freak'.

I guess the advantage of having MIB happen as late as possible is that you get the best of both worlds - ie. you can let it do the work UNLESS there's a particular moment you care about, in which case you use MARK. You can't do that if the MIB happens early in the cue list and has already done its work.


Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:34 pm
by RobertBell
Exactly. It should be noted for those not playing
  • You can disable MIB on a cue List
  • On MIB disabled cue lists, you can ask for MIB to happen on a specific cue
  • On MIB enabled cue lists, you can disable MIB for a specific cue
  • On all cue lists, you can adjust MIB times
  • Setting a single fixture to 1% in disables MIB for that fixture
  • Mark and MIB can be used at the same time
  • If a light has been MARKED, it won't MIB (seems simple - but took some code
  • We still don't have the 'whoops - you caught me - I'm not suposed to be here - let me fix myself' functionality for lights that have MIBed but you want to use them (for this reason - we sill have Global MIB Supression which I'm dying to get rid of

Re: Mark

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:34 pm
by TaineGilliam
Two things to comment on. First - I like the idea of being able to mark on the cue the light fades out in. This would go something like:

Q1 light up
Q2 light out
Q3 stuff
Q4 stuff
Q 5 light on in new position

Right now we can MIB(will move after Q4) or Mark Q3. I'd like to be able to Mark Q2 - meaning the light would move after the light is out in Q2, so the timing of Part Z would include delays for each fixture equal to the fade time of the fixture + the default MIB delay.

The idea of having MIB work on a per fixture basis instead of for the Cue as a whole is also very cool.

Second - I think I'd like the option to have the behaviour Rob is asking for with auto follows but there are still cases where I'd want the option to have the 500 console behaviour of advancing the auto follow. So the two choices are:

Q1 time 5 Wait 10
Q2 time 5
Q 3 time 5

In the currently I hope that when I pressed Go 7 seconds after the Go on Cue 1 then Cue 2 would start right away (Cue 3 would require another Go).
If I understand Rob's idea, when I press Go 7 seconds after the Go on Cue 1 then Cue 3 would start and Cue 2 would still wait until 10 seconds after the first Go.
Both of these are valid and useful choices but I'd really hate to lose the first for the second.