My Holdman Star Prototype

[msiebri]

I just finished the prototype of my new Holdman star.  It consists of 178 Pixabulbs and a 4x8 sheet of coro.

I defined 3 custom models.  The first is the inner 4-point star that points diagonal (NE, SE, SW & NW if it were a compass).  The second is the outer 4 points that are up, down, left & right. The third is the 8 "spokes" that are in between the various points.  I then created a model group containing the 3 models.

I put a short video up of my first test with it.  https://youtu.be/idm8fxwUUls

I put a 2-color down bars effect on the 3 individual models.  In the video, watch the left point of the star and the left side of the bottom point of the star.  They don't seem to be drawing quite right.

I'm running a fairly old version of xLights (4.2.24).  Tomorrow I will update to the latest version (need to do that before Vegas anyway) and see if anything changes.

I do have an aesthetic question on the star.  I tried to mimic the original Holdman star as closely as I could on this.  But looking at it, I think the bottom point should be longer.  I thought it would appear to be a lot longer than the top point, but it doesn't seem to be.  Thoughts?

- Martin

[sean]

when i build my star this summer, i will amke bottom half longer than top half. feels better

[msiebri]

I updated xLights to 2016.13 and saw similar results.  I tried creating a single model for the entire star, but that didn't change anything either.

Here is a video of my laptop with the effect running.  The preview window looks just as it should.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xU2QHHpW6g

Here is a video of the lights on the star.  You can see the left point and the left side of the bottom point still aren't drawing right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf_4dQRX5Dc

The star is being run from an E6804, it's a pretty basic setup, so I don't think the problem is there.  So what could be causing those 2 parts of the star not to light up correctly?

[msiebri]

I forgot to include a picture of the model definition, here it is.

[Phrog30]

Sounds like mapping to me. I would test one pixel at a time. Make sure the correct pixels are coming on.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[msiebri]

That was a good suggestion, I finally found it.  I had the zigzag option turned on for an output in the controller that was causing the problem.

I do see what seems to be wrong behavior in the Test window.  Here is what I did and what I saw.
- Launch xLights
- Tools -> Test
- Click on the RGB Tab
- Click on the Background Only radio button
- Move the 3 Background Color sliders up to 255
- Click on the + next to Universe 51 on the controller
- Click the box for Channel 1

When I do the last step, the first pixel lights green instead of red.
I uncheck Channel 1 and check Channel 2, the first pixel lights blue.
I uncheck Channel 2 and check Channel 3, the second pixel lights red.
I uncheck Channel 3 and check Channel 4, the second pixel lights green.
And so on.

It seems like everything is off by 1.  Is this still a mapping issue?  Everything shows the correct colors in my test sequence, so my first inclination is that the mapping is good now.  Could this be a bug in the Test window?

[Phrog30]

I have never used the test tab, old or new, so I'm not much help.  I always use the sequencer, place an on effect at the node level.

So, try that. This will be a good test, and show if there are issues with the test stuff.

James

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[msiebri]

Putting an On effect at the node level gives the correct colors.  Has anyone else seen this issue with the Test window?

[jnealand]

It is well known that the old test tab uses chan 1 and every 3rd channel after that as red, likewise channel 2 and every 3rd one after that as green, etc.  The new test in the 2016 version is supposed to fix that.  That is the reason why folks test with sequences.  I solved that problem by adjusting my start channel so the the 3rd channel for a prop was always divisible by 3.  Now my colors work.  I'm looking forward to the new test routine so I don't have to do that anymore.