Q Light Controller+

WOW! a great summ of news in 4.5.0 version!!

but the users are ever unsatisfied...

about Raspberry Pi the first question that jump in my mind was :

could QLC+ in raspberry version use the GPIO interface to output directly a dmx signal?
maybe we need an hardware shield to have more dmx ports for inputs and outputs?
could QLC+ run on raspberry only in server mode without a graphical interface remoted controller only via web interface?

about the web interface, I need to download and try the new version but for now my mind figure that under the web interface and the GUI, there is some sistem of signals that drive the engine of QLC+. It's mean that there is a sort of language that connect the GUI and the engine and maybe could be used to write some macro to have some sort of automation...
I'm totaly crazy or is it possible?

well... at the end, Thank for ALL! thanks for your work, thanks for your time, and thanks for your passion!!!

So many questions Willy...
Like we say in Italy "you give them a hand and they take the whole arm"!

Now to answer you:

> but the users are ever unsatisfied...
Users or just you ?

> could QLC+ in raspberry version use the GPIO interface to output directly a dmx signal?
You know, writing software is like painting. You can paint something in an infinite number of ways. You can paint something, leave it there and then improve it. You can add any detail you want with any colour and any shade.
In software terms: everything is possible, but reinventing the wheel, in my opinion, is something that I try to avoid as much as I can.
There are plenty of USB-DMX interfaces supported by QLC+, and the Raspberry has 2 USB ports.
So, any very-low-level implementation of DMX signalling won't happen on the Pi unless strictly necessary.
Moreover cause I'm not a company with 15 people working on QLC+. I am one and I do what I can with the time I have

Don't take me wrong. I'm just explaining my point of view as an embedded developer with 12 years of experience.

> could QLC+ run on raspberry only in server mode without a graphical interface remoted controller only via web interface?
Yes, this is feasible and I already thought about it. But let's see what happens after the port on Qt5, OK ?

> I'm totaly crazy or is it possible?
For now the web interface can load projects and can control the Virtual Console widgets through HTTP and websockets. Of course it can be improved and I count on users feedbacks to understand what are the most requested needs.

One is of course very tempted by all those GPIO pins. From what I have seen you would need an add-on board. This you either make yourself or have it hand-made, low volume, so I suspect at quite a cost. But with a bare bones usb inteface available from about UK 16.50 what would be the point. Also as Massimo says, the pi processor is limited so anything that can be fobbed off to sub-systems is better.

See: http://www.robot-electronics.co.uk/htm/ ... 5_tech.htm There may be others.

I plan to experiment with something like that to build a remote artnet controlled pi using wifi and this (or similar dongle).

I agree that bit-banging GPIO at 250kbaud is a non-starter. FTDI interfaces are better, but I've still had problems, presumbably because the buffer isn't big enough to hold a whole DMX frame. So instead I recommend an Anyma-based unit, which is compatible with QLC+ and contains its own microprocessor dedicated to producing frames in a timely manner. An example of such a thing is [here](http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/161054055637) but what it says about isolation is a lie - you need to add a DC-DC converter to achieve that.

well, everyone that know me, know that I love eat arm and shoulders too!!!
and obviusly I'm ever unsatisfied!!! uh.. I'm not a normal user? I'm not normal??? I'm not??? lol!!!

about the RasPi GPIO, I'm not an electronic engineer, and with my limited information, I've figured that have a direct dmx output from GPIO could be less expensive in resources than use an usb driver to drive an usb/dmx interface. Obviusly it's a money problem... if an usb/dmx dongle could be buyed for less than 50€ and the resource drain is less for a dongle than a GPIO or FTDI drive, it's obviusly that it's become more interesting.

in my dreams, I've seen a little shield with 2 or more dmx ports, to have dmx inputs and outputs for more universes, with a buffer for more than one dmx frames and maybe an IR receiver to drive with a simple ir remote controll the recorded sequences... (I don't know if this implementation would be connected via GPIO, FTDI or USB, if needs a second controller maybe based on arduino or so on... was a confused dream )

and if the problem is the resource drain to drive the GPIO or FTDI connection, maybe 2 raspberry connected trough an ethernet connection (maybe with a wireless/wired router to add quickly a wireless connection) can work well together in a cheap couple where one of them drive the dmx interfaces, maybe trough OLA, and the other run the QLC+ server, drived remotely with the web interface...

I'm only a dreamer and a light technician, I have a lot of dreams about a lot of things, and writing about it I want only stimulate who want read my words... maybe someone that can develop the driver to use the GPIO or the FTDI interfaces to have a dmx outputcould read my words and decide to spend some time on it...
or maybe someone can decide to develop a shield like that I've seen in my dreams... who know?
and maybe if no one say me that are only dreams because there are limits about what I can figure, I'll continue to dream something of impossible... and loose my time

Massimo, continue to paint, and use all the colors that you want, the world need more painters