Fixture definition broken?

[siegmund]

Hey guys,

I noticed an irregularity with a fixture: It's the Cameo LED RGBW PAR64 18x8W. See the attached workspace, when raising the slider (only controls the master dimmer) the light shown in the 2D monitor is red. No other color is possible. Although DMX values are fine, this is very strange.. Is there something wrong with the fixture definition?

Tried this with QLC+ 4.10.3 RC on Xubuntu 14.04 64Bit Qt5. It happens with 4.10.2b as well.

[janosvitok]

Good catch! There is indeed problem with the definition: The 7 channel mode uses Color Macros definition but should use Effect-Programs (7ch) instead.

In addition:
- Effect-Programs (7ch) and Effect-Programs (3ch) are almost identical; I'd drop the 7ch and use 3ch for both cases
- I'd change the group for that channel to Colour (so that 2d View catches the colors)
- I'd change the name of the channel to "Colours/Effects"
- the RGB values between Color Macros and Effect-Programs do not match.

[siegmund]

I updated the fixture definition according to your recommendations and to completely match the specs http://adamhall.invaliddomain.de/out/me ... _IT_PL.pdf

- the RGB values between Color Macros and Effect-Programs do not match.

This is not a problem because indeed these channel values are different.
I got one problem: in 3-channel mode1 if I move the color/effects slider the colors aren't properly displayed in the 2d monitor, only some red is flickering. What did I do wrong?

[janosvitok]

RGB values: Do you have the fixture at hand to chcek? What I meant is that in both channels, the same color name should have same rgb value.
For example: Blue #0000ff vs. #0800ff
Compare:

<Channel Name="Color Macros">
...
<Capability Min="34" Max="50" Color="#0000ff">Blue</Capability>
...
<Capability Min="102" Max="118" Color="#e20074">Magenta</Capability>
<Capability Min="119" Max="135" Color="#ff85d1">Pink</Capability>
<Capability Min="136" Max="152" Color="#55ff7f">Bright Green</Capability>
<Capability Min="153" Max="169" Color="#b57edc">Lavender</Capability>
<Capability Min="170" Max="186" Color="#ffaaff">Pale Pink</Capability>
...
<Capability Min="238" Max="255" Color="#ffe1b7">Warm White</Capability>
</Channel>
<Channel Name="Colors/Effects">
...
<Capability Min="16" Max="20" Color="#0800ff">Blue</Capability>
...
<Capability Min="36" Max="40" Color="#ff007f">Magenta</Capability>
<Capability Min="41" Max="45" Color="#ff8fe7">Pink</Capability>
<Capability Min="46" Max="50" Color="#aaff00">Bright Green</Capability>
<Capability Min="51" Max="55" Color="#aa55ff">Lavender</Capability>
<Capability Min="56" Max="60" Color="#ffb2ff">Pale Pink</Capability>
...
<Capability Min="76" Max="80" Color="#ffec9c">Warm White</Capability>
...
</Channel>


Other than that, the 2D monitor works fine for me (QLC+ 4.10.2b, Windows 7).
The color starts to blink if Strobe channel is > 0.

[siegmund]

RGB values: Do you have the fixture at hand to chcek?

Not at the moment, I could check this in a few weeks...

Got it, thank you for your explanation. When defining the colors, there came up a question to me: Is there a "pool" for colors and it's respecting RGB values you use for all of the fixtures? For example, Magenta exists in many variations. Is there a consensus which color one should pick for specific color names in fixture definitions (for QLC+)?

[janosvitok]

Is there a consensus which color one should pick for specific color names in fixture definitions (for QLC+)?

1. sometimes the values are specified in the manual.
2. when I did definition for GLP Volkslicht, I used two fixtures to match the color wheel to RGB (for one fixture I set e.g. red with colorwheel channel and tried to achieve the same color on the other with RGB channels)

3. we can use web color names (http://www.w3schools.com/colors/colors_names.asp) or X11 names (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X11_color_names) or Qt names (which are taken from SVG http://www.december.com/html/spec/colorsvghex.html). Qt names are most convenient, since QLC+ is written in Qt. This issue was not discussed before.

[siegmund]

This issue was not discussed before.

Is this worth opening a new thread?