Fixture exchange maps range values as relative percentage?
Posted: 13 Nov 2019, 13:14
Can anyone tell me what are the advantages of fixture exchange mapping range values as relative percentage rather than absolute and is there an option to change it? If the matching functions are defined as 0-100% ranges then it makes no difference but when the ranges are different the results from mapping by relative percentage are less desirable to me when compared to absolute value mapping.
Example:
With the source fixture having a zoom definition of:
And the destination fixture having a zoom definition of:
If a cue or palette has a zoom value of 14.0° for the source fixture, after fixture exchange the value for the destination fixture will be 17.63°, I would expect the zoom value to have remained unchanged at 14.0°?
Another example where this produces undesirable results is with framing blades. The blades of some fixtures cover just half of the aperture when fully inserted these I define as having an available range of 0-50%, others have their blades fully cover the aperture, these I define as having an available range of 0-100%. If a source fixture has a 0-50% range and a value of 50% in a cue or palette, if exchanged with a fixture that has blades with an available range of 0-100% the 50% in the original programming gets changed to 100% on the destination fixture because 50% on the source fixture is 100% of the blades available range.
There are many parameters where I would expect and prefer the mapping to be absolute, if the matching functions have ranges defined using different units then perhaps relative percentage is a better choice but I can't think of any other situation where absolute mapping would not be the preferred method?
Although I would not expect the visual result of absolute mapping to be exact, it can often be close enough and in a time crunch there would be no need to tweak it any further. I can work around the issue but having an option for absolute mapping would be better.
Example:
With the source fixture having a zoom definition of:
Code: Select all
<Function ID="1" Name="Zoom" Display="'%.1f°',5.5~47.6" Dmx="0~255"/>
And the destination fixture having a zoom definition of:
Code: Select all
<Function ID="1" Name="Zoom" Display="'%.2f°',12.00~40.00" Dmx="0~65535"/>
If a cue or palette has a zoom value of 14.0° for the source fixture, after fixture exchange the value for the destination fixture will be 17.63°, I would expect the zoom value to have remained unchanged at 14.0°?
Another example where this produces undesirable results is with framing blades. The blades of some fixtures cover just half of the aperture when fully inserted these I define as having an available range of 0-50%, others have their blades fully cover the aperture, these I define as having an available range of 0-100%. If a source fixture has a 0-50% range and a value of 50% in a cue or palette, if exchanged with a fixture that has blades with an available range of 0-100% the 50% in the original programming gets changed to 100% on the destination fixture because 50% on the source fixture is 100% of the blades available range.
There are many parameters where I would expect and prefer the mapping to be absolute, if the matching functions have ranges defined using different units then perhaps relative percentage is a better choice but I can't think of any other situation where absolute mapping would not be the preferred method?
Although I would not expect the visual result of absolute mapping to be exact, it can often be close enough and in a time crunch there would be no need to tweak it any further. I can work around the issue but having an option for absolute mapping would be better.