Author Topic: Has anybody used fewer pixels at the top of a megatree when it gets cramped?  (Read 2778 times)

Offline JonB256

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 832
    • View Profile
    • My Christmas Website
I used Pixabulbs and Boscoyo strips (4" spacing") for my megatree.
Resolution was not great for pictures or text but worked as expected. I have P10 and matrices for pictures and text.

But, it is so crowded at the topper with the bigger bulbs and wider strips. What I'm thinking about doing is just putting 48 pixels on every other strip (but still leaving the xLights model and F16v2 that it is 50).

It would help with congestion and the pixels wouldn't care since they are on individual outputs, not zig zag.

Anyone done that? Just curious. I could pull the top two out and let them hang, then see how it looks. (tree comes down tommorrow)

Offline ocanada1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Jon

We had the same problem.  Are you going to the NTX meeting on Saturday?  I have some thoughts on this that we could discuss F2F.

Anne

Offline jnealand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
    • View Profile
In last nights Wed conf, Clyde Lindsey stated that he uses a 360 top and a 180 bottom  which makes the top smaller and keeps the node count the same on all strand.  I do something a little similar in that I use about 210 at the top and 180 at the bottom.  Thinking about adding a couple more strands this year and just using a bigger degree top but staying with a 180 on the bottom.  You might look at some of his videos and see what you think about that approach.
Jim Nealand
Kennesaw, GA

Offline JonB256

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 832
    • View Profile
    • My Christmas Website
I have considered doing a 360 top if only to distribute the load better.

My Boscoyo topper was badly bent down this year by only having load on the front 20 holes. Even adding a line at the back was not sufficient to keep it level.

Offline pixelpuppy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
Jon, I have thought exactly the same thing, but haven't tried it yet.   I agree with the logic, just waiting to see how it looks in practice.

I have done the 210-top/180-bottom method like Jim described on my bullet trees.  For 2017 I am adding a Pixabulb tree and going to experiment with both methods at the topper since the larger bulbs cause more crowding at the top[.  It may end up being a combination of both.  Just gotta try it after my pre-sale orders start arriving  8)