Status of VisualDMX for Mac OS X

[majortom]

Once again, I am curious about the status of VisualDMX for Mac OS X. Our biggest issues for our next event are supporting multiple universes and more than 24 fixtures.

Multiple Universes, more fixtures. For our first setup, 24 will be fine, but for our event in May of next year, I expect that will not be sufficient. Also, controlling multiple universes is also important. Ethernet-based control surfaces, especially those that are application aware like those from Euphonix, are also important to me (I hope you will add them to Cuelux). As part of that, supporting motorized sliders would be great.

Finally, support for other kinds of control (joystick, track ball) where appropriate would be great.

All these are still true. :-)

I have only spent a small period playing with Cuelux, having not gotten my dongle yet.

After 6 months of use, we like cuelux, but really need some of these enhancements and so are quite interested in VisualDMX

Thanks in advance.

[Maarten Engels]

hi there,

In the mean time the 24 limit is increased to 48. Motorfaders are supported on the BCF-2000 and the US-2400. I haven't created any support for Euphonix yet, main reason for this is that I got the impression these (very nice) controllers only work on Mac OS !? So far i have given priority to cross-platform units. However, I am not disregarding them; it's just a matter of priorities.

But for multiple universes would really need a bigger controller than Cuelux. We have started the development of the next VisualDMX which will be inline with Cuelux including being cross-platform. I think this will hit market in perhaps 12 months time.

[majortom]

How about supporting Mackie's Ethernet controller protocol?

[Maarten Engels]

That would be worth reading more about. I don't think I would manage to implement it on a short term.

[majortom]

Just checking to see if you have given any more though to Mackie's ethernet protocol.

/carmi

[Maarten Engels]

hi,

To be honest I have not made any progress on the Mackie's support. I would need to finish my main priorities for the moment first, to be able to dive into this ethernet protocol. I still think it would be a very nice to have feature.

cheers,
Maarten

[majortom]

I haven't created any support for Euphonix yet, main reason for this is that I got the impression these (very nice) controllers only work on Mac OS !? So far i have given priority to cross-platform units. However, I am not disregarding them; it's just a matter of priorities.

Euphonix was purchased by Avid and is now cross-platform.

But for multiple universes would really need a bigger controller than Cuelux. We have started the development of the next VisualDMX which will be inline with Cuelux including being cross-platform. I think this will hit market in perhaps 12 months time.

How goes your visual dmx development? We would to have it by April, so we can integrate it for our May event.

[Maarten Engels]

Euphonix was purchased by Avid and is now cross-platform.

That's good news.

How goes your visual dmx development? We would to have it by April, so we can integrate it for our May event.

We are trying very hard to get it ready for April; but I can't guarantee it... :-)

[majortom]

We are trying very hard to get it ready for April; but I can't guarantee it... :-)

Any update? We are quite interested in participating in beta testing this.

[Maarten Engels]

hi,

The hardware is still scheduled for April, however, the software will be more like September. When a beta version is available I would very much like to share it with you.

Maarten

[AVLScotland]

As usual following the VDMX 2 (& OSX) chat closely.

This post has scared me a little when you speak of new hardware in April. I hope our existing hardware will be compatible when VDMX 2 arrives.

September seems so far away now but I really hope it's worth the wait. I'm sure it will be.
Reading job ad's you've posted, I get the feeling something very exciting is coming (from a control point of view perhaps?)

Ross

[majortom]

Just checking on the status again. Any news on VisualDMX? Ethernet controller support? Euphonix support?

[Maarten Engels]

hi Majortom,

We have just released the CueCore, this unit is stand-alone controller, but it will also become the DMX-interface for VisualDMX2. After the summer we continue coding on vdmx2. As it looks now, it will not be finished before April 2012. So as usual everything took more time than expected, but if you like the CueCore then I think you will like the vdmx2 software as well. Just imagine what the software can do with all the connections on the CueCore.

Maarten

[majortom]

We have just released the CueCore, this unit is stand-alone controller, but it will also become the DMX-interface for VisualDMX2. After the summer we continue coding on vdmx2.

Thanks for the quick reply. I want to make sure I understand, to use VisualDMX, I have to first buy a $1,000 web-based standalone controller? That seems like duplication given that we already have art-net capable Ethernet to DMX interfaces and a reliable computer from which to control them.

As it looks now, it will not be finished before April 2012.

I will take a look at it when you release it, but I am no longer sure you are heading in a direction that will end where we want to be.

...but if you like the CueCore then I think you will like the vdmx2 software as well. Just imagine what the software can do with all the connections on the CueCore.

Unfortunately for us, it is exactly the opposite of what we want. We want multiple universes over IP because we want to be able to use our existing IP infrastructure to extend our DMX control system. This model requires us to run DMX everywhere, using none of our existing infrastructure and requiring much more expensive cabling. While I am sure your market research shows this is what many of your customers want and need, it does not really fit our model.

I wish you continued success.

[Maarten Engels]

Thanks for your reply.

Well, the fact that the software will be accompanied by a DMX interface doesn't mean it will have no Art-net capability. It will, similar to Cuelux, duplicate any DMX universe also on Art-net.

A software controller needs some sort of dongle and DMX interface to go with it, so it better be a box with lots of connections and even standalone capabilities. At least, that's our reasoning.

I understand you have a set-up that at the moment requires only software and Art-net. Other users will have different specific requirements. We strive to design a product that covers various scenarios, so it's likely that when we design a DMX interface you would not need every connection it features. The key thing here is - I think - that the product is intuitive and has a good value-for-money ratio.

Let's wait until we are little further down the line and I can reveal more details about the complete package. Of course, it's my goal to design such a nice controller that it keeps you interested :-)

Best regards,
Maarten