Is someone using the sequence function?
I find the sequence function not very usefull, we've already the chaser function and I would propose to delete it.
I don't see the benefits of it.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Giacomo, chasers and sequences are different things.
Sequences are fundamental for the Show function.
You don't see the benefits of it because you don't use the Show manager.
If you don't use it, just ignore it, but please don't propose to remove QLC+ functionalities you personally don't use.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
This question does suggest a documentation issue though. I have often found myself wondering what is the difference between a chaser and a sequence; when you would use one or the other. It's something I've not really found an answer for.
Perhaps it could be better explained somewhere?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
As written in the documentation:
A sequence is a special Chaser which is bound to a specific Scene. It means that all the created steps will control various channels of the same scene. When creating new steps in a sequence, no Function selection popup will appear, since a Sequence is a child of a Scene.
A sequence will appear in the Function Manager with a different icon than a Chaser.
What is not clear ?
Have you ever used the Show manager or read its page in the documentation ?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
No, I haven't ever used the Show Manager. Again, I think documentation.
You've not really explained why I'd use one or the other. In what situations would a Chaser be useful? How does this differ from the times in which I'd want a Show with a Sequence in it?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
If you haven't got the whole picture clear, how can you determine that the documentation has issues or things are not clear ?
If you have doubts on what one and the other does, you should first read the documentation and then eventually decide if you ever gonna need one or both.
Chasers are good when you want to reproduce a number of different function in a pre-determined sequence.
Sequences use always the same Scene for all the steps and can be placed anywhere in time in a Show (something you cannot do with Chasers)
Also a Show groups different tracks (Scenes) so you can playback multiple Sequences at the same time.
With Chasers you should need a Collection, but still you would have a hard time to sync them.
An example. You have 30 lights total and you need to have 100 perfectly timed scenes with different colors/transitions.
With Chasers you need 100 Scenes + 1 Chaser.
With Sequences you need 1 Scene and 1 Sequence.
I broke my back writing the Show manager and handling sequences and now you guys suggest to remove it cause it's not clear what they do (without having even tried them)
Nice,
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I for one wasn't suggesting removing them at all - by my own admission I don't know what they are for. I was simply trying to suggest "hey, some more detail in explaining is good".
The above wording is quite a bit of new interesting documentation I hadn't seen before, and I don't think could be found explained quite that way in any of the current docs. Perhaps the above could be added in somewhere to help?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I'm glad you speak about sequence, because of the french translation.
This term "sequence" means cuelist in french, so it brings a lot of confusion, as the UI is quite the same as the chaser UI, we still don't know what term use to translate sequence, it will be easier if the original term was diferent as it is not really a sequence but more a sort of time instance of a scene...
Reards !
PS : very nice last versions, the 2D view is a great step for mankind !
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Ok, I'm done with this forum.
I am clearly of no help here and most of the discussions are pointless ping-pong matches.
I do you a favour and take myself out of the equation. With this, I am convinced you guys don't even try to understand. You just like to complain and point your finger.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Anonymous
-
2014-04-08
I think that the only one that is pointing fingers is you, sorry but this it's not the way to answer people.
If you've ever used ADB, Strand, Etc or Chamsys, the ones I know but for sure I don't have the whole picture like you, you would find that it is exactly the contrary: a sequence it's a cue list and a chaser it's a number of steps from a choosen grup of lights. Maybe there is a reason because people find it confusing.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I'm not particularly familiar with any kinds of lighting software before. I've only ever used a simple 12/24 desk (a Eurolight) before this, so it's a big step up. Lots of new things, that look at first glance very similar.
I'm really not trying to point a finger of blame at anyone here. I'm trying to be constructive. My comment was that the documentation doesn't really explain what the real difference is between a Sequence and a Chaser in any detail. It certainly doesn't go as far as to explain to me how I would choose to use one or the other, for whatever effects I was looking for. My point here was to suggest "hey, here's a thing that could be added to the documentation".
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Giacomo, are you aware that you're talking about my spare time that I offer for free?
It's like if you took one year to build a house, then I see it and say "I don't understand what is its purpose, can you destroy it ?"
Your original post was quite unfair to me and to users that use the Show function.
If you think you can decide what features should stay or not in QLC+, you're wrong.
If you think you can decide how I should answer a question, you're wrong.
If you think QLC+ should work like the software you mentioned, you're wrong.
If anyone thinks that comments like "it's not clear" or "it's confusing" or "it doesn't work" are constructive, then guys, you're all wrong.
To me they're just complains without a constructive goal.
Your statement "I find the sequence function not very usefull" is one of them too, and it is what I consider "pointing a finger".
You work in theaters, so it's obvious you don't need Sequences. If you worked with a multitrack Show, with audio and sequences synced to a metronome, would you have proposed to remove the Cue list widget just because you don't use it ?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Guys, I have to agree with Massimo on this one. I've often looked at the sequence and wondered something similar, but I've always understood that they served a purpose and I've always assumed that they were there for a reason (and I never suggested removing them without having a full understanding of what they are for). Moreover, once Massimo explained (in further detail) what they do, I would think that someone might actually take the time to update the documentation if they find it insufficient with that information rather than continue going back and forth in this thread...
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The current discussion on Sequences prompted me to look more closely at them, having not paid much attention to them before as I haven't needed to use Shows to synchronise lighting to music.
I have programmed a number of flashing and colour changing effects for disco, party and “magic” scenes in various theatrical productions by building Chasers, but now see it would have been easier to use Sequences on a Show track and replay the Show by attaching it to a button or including it in a chaser step. This would have achieved the same things, but with a lot less clicks.
At the risk of repetition, a Sequence embodies an important and, I imagine, frequently used functionality of a Chaser but is far quicker to programme, as your example makes clear Massimo.
The issue of those users who have trouble understanding the differences between a chaser and a sequence and their applications has come up a number of times and it's obviously frustrating to keep on explaining the same thing over and over.
I suggest the following explanation of a sequence for the documentation (I'll sort it out in html if you're happy with it Massimo):
Sequence
A Sequence has some of the functionality of a Chaser, but can be programmed far more quickly. It is equivalent to a Chaser in which each step is a single scene and every one of those scenes controls the same set of channels. A Sequence is bound to one specific Scene, which means that all the steps of the Sequence can only control the various channels of that Scene. When creating new steps in a Sequence, no Function selection pop-up will appear, since a Sequence step cannot include other Functions, unlike a Chaser step. When a Sequence is created, a special sequence icon will appear in the Function Manager under the Scene to which it is bound.
As a result of my investigations into Sequences, I have a number of other points to raise which I will make the subject of a separate post.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi Michael, this is what I call a contructive post :)
I probably have troubles in explaining a concept in english to give exactly a clear idea that I have in mind.
The texting you proposed looks good to me, except for one little statement:
"A Sequence has some of the functionality of a Chaser, but can be programmed far more quickly."
The second part of this sentence is not true. There are cases where programming a Chaser is faster than programming a Sequence. For example if you have 50 different Scenes and you want to make a lot of combinations of them, it will take less time to create Chasers than Sequences. This is mainly cause of the Function selection window.
I am going to change the documentation now.
Thank you very much.
Last edit: Massimo Callegari 2014-04-11
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
So if someone could explain, how do I program a sequence? I am not using the shows feature, but it sounds like a sequence may be a less messy way to program a movement sequence than having to make a bunch of steps and then add them to a chaser.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Joe, create a Scene in the function manager, add the fixtures and enable the channels you want.
Then (with the scene still selected) click on the sequence button and start adding steps to it.
EDIT: With the show manager this is much more intuitive and visually easier
Last edit: Massimo Callegari 2014-04-11
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The speed of programming a Chaser hinges on "if you (already) have 50 scenes"! I overlooked this, I'm afraid.
Try this formulation:
A Sequence has some of the functionality of a Chaser, but can be programmed far more quickly if you don't already have a lot of scenes programmed for use in a Chaser.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Where is the loop option for a sequence? Seems a much better way to program in movements for scanners, but it doesn't really work if there is no loop.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Anonymous
-
2014-04-14
I had a similar problem of Joe (and few other of the points of Michael Clements) but I was believing that if the sequence has to become equivalent to a chaser in the possibilities then the distiction could have disappeared.
I was wrong because now they're implementing them, in the end this post has been somehow useful.
It's almost Easter and I'd like to be in peace with all you guys.
I really haven't appreciate being accused of demolishing houses or to not be a democratic person.
Isn't my first sentence asking if someone is still using the sequences?
If the answer is affirmative the post is answered.
I confirm that I'm not using the show manager, is it still allowed to do a mistake here?
2 statements I have to disagree with Massimo:
I'm really aware that qlc+ has not to be like other software and because of this reason in the past year I've asked just for 2 or 3 features, one was last summer, to ask for the patch, the second was for a waiting and a delay time in the cue list, more than one year ago (this has been rejected) and the third, but I don't remeber right now, was for the fixture groups. Without the first 2 features I couldn't even think to propose qlc+ in a professional theatre envinronment.
Second, I find not usefull that qlc+ has to invert the meaning of concepts established in the lighting world, chaser vs cue list, but I guess this is mostly an heritage from the original qlc than a choice of Massimo.
Have a good week and peace
giacomo
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Giacomo, now that the temperature has fallen here, I come in peace too.
Your support in the past has been precious, especially for the cross-fading and live editing, so I got surprised when you came out with this proposal of removing sequences.
I am not a lighting expert so the terminology used by QLC+ might not respect the common language used by lighting technicians since many years.
However, this might not stop someone to have the curiosity to learn a new way to design a light show or new words to name a functionality.
Chasers are a QLC inheritance. Honestly I don't even know what chaser mean. in fact I haven't even translated it in italian.
I chose "sequence" one year and a half ago cause nothing better came in my mind at that time.
Regarding requests, I know many of you asked for the "wait" time on Chaser steps. It's not rejected. It's just a major change to do.
Since I am the collector of each request, I have the responsibility of choosing what can be the best for everyone. QLC+ has many different usages so I do not concentrate on a single one, but I try to mediate between every need and hope to make everybody happy.
This of course doesn't happen, since every user understands only the part they use, so they complain when something is not like they expect.
For example the changes for live editing, broke some scenes of my band's project. I don't complain, cause if live editing makes 100 users happy then for a greater good I will find another way to fix my problems.
As for documentation, I am aware sometimes it lacks of details, but since I spend most of my time coding new features or fixing existing ones, you have to be patient with it and eventually ask nicely for improvements with constructive proposals.
On the other hand, I think you can count on your fingers the number of non-profit open source projects with 130 pages of documentation. (and more than 2 hours of video tutorials)
Most of them just leave it to forums or users self-learning.
To conclude, my goal is to make everybody happy and bring QLC+ to a competitive level. In my opinion, complaining about this project is useless. It just discourages me to do better than this.
Last edit: Massimo Callegari 2014-04-14
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Is someone using the sequence function?
I find the sequence function not very usefull, we've already the chaser function and I would propose to delete it.
I don't see the benefits of it.
Giacomo, chasers and sequences are different things.
Sequences are fundamental for the Show function.
You don't see the benefits of it because you don't use the Show manager.
If you don't use it, just ignore it, but please don't propose to remove QLC+ functionalities you personally don't use.
To answer your question: I use sequences. My band's project is 2.8MB big and use only sequences. There are 187 of them in it.
Last edit: Massimo Callegari 2014-04-07
This question does suggest a documentation issue though. I have often found myself wondering what is the difference between a chaser and a sequence; when you would use one or the other. It's something I've not really found an answer for.
Perhaps it could be better explained somewhere?
As written in the documentation:
A sequence is a special Chaser which is bound to a specific Scene. It means that all the created steps will control various channels of the same scene. When creating new steps in a sequence, no Function selection popup will appear, since a Sequence is a child of a Scene.
A sequence will appear in the Function Manager with a different icon than a Chaser.
What is not clear ?
Have you ever used the Show manager or read its page in the documentation ?
No, I haven't ever used the Show Manager. Again, I think documentation.
You've not really explained why I'd use one or the other. In what situations would a Chaser be useful? How does this differ from the times in which I'd want a Show with a Sequence in it?
...and this is when I get it personal...
If you haven't got the whole picture clear, how can you determine that the documentation has issues or things are not clear ?
If you have doubts on what one and the other does, you should first read the documentation and then eventually decide if you ever gonna need one or both.
Chasers are good when you want to reproduce a number of different function in a pre-determined sequence.
Sequences use always the same Scene for all the steps and can be placed anywhere in time in a Show (something you cannot do with Chasers)
Also a Show groups different tracks (Scenes) so you can playback multiple Sequences at the same time.
With Chasers you should need a Collection, but still you would have a hard time to sync them.
An example. You have 30 lights total and you need to have 100 perfectly timed scenes with different colors/transitions.
With Chasers you need 100 Scenes + 1 Chaser.
With Sequences you need 1 Scene and 1 Sequence.
If you're still not happy read these:
http://qlcplus.sourceforge.net/usage_theatre.html
http://qlcplus.sourceforge.net/usage_sync.html
Do you understand the difference ?
I broke my back writing the Show manager and handling sequences and now you guys suggest to remove it cause it's not clear what they do (without having even tried them)
Nice,
I for one wasn't suggesting removing them at all - by my own admission I don't know what they are for. I was simply trying to suggest "hey, some more detail in explaining is good".
The above wording is quite a bit of new interesting documentation I hadn't seen before, and I don't think could be found explained quite that way in any of the current docs. Perhaps the above could be added in somewhere to help?
I'm glad you speak about sequence, because of the french translation.
This term "sequence" means cuelist in french, so it brings a lot of confusion, as the UI is quite the same as the chaser UI, we still don't know what term use to translate sequence, it will be easier if the original term was diferent as it is not really a sequence but more a sort of time instance of a scene...
Reards !
PS : very nice last versions, the 2D view is a great step for mankind !
A bit harsh maybe Massimo? I too, did not know the difference between the chasers and sequences. It's not clear in the manual.
Last edit: Joe 2014-04-08
Ok, I'm done with this forum.
I am clearly of no help here and most of the discussions are pointless ping-pong matches.
I do you a favour and take myself out of the equation. With this, I am convinced you guys don't even try to understand. You just like to complain and point your finger.
I think that the only one that is pointing fingers is you, sorry but this it's not the way to answer people.
If you've ever used ADB, Strand, Etc or Chamsys, the ones I know but for sure I don't have the whole picture like you, you would find that it is exactly the contrary: a sequence it's a cue list and a chaser it's a number of steps from a choosen grup of lights. Maybe there is a reason because people find it confusing.
I'm not particularly familiar with any kinds of lighting software before. I've only ever used a simple 12/24 desk (a Eurolight) before this, so it's a big step up. Lots of new things, that look at first glance very similar.
I'm really not trying to point a finger of blame at anyone here. I'm trying to be constructive. My comment was that the documentation doesn't really explain what the real difference is between a Sequence and a Chaser in any detail. It certainly doesn't go as far as to explain to me how I would choose to use one or the other, for whatever effects I was looking for. My point here was to suggest "hey, here's a thing that could be added to the documentation".
Giacomo, are you aware that you're talking about my spare time that I offer for free?
It's like if you took one year to build a house, then I see it and say "I don't understand what is its purpose, can you destroy it ?"
Your original post was quite unfair to me and to users that use the Show function.
If you think you can decide what features should stay or not in QLC+, you're wrong.
If you think you can decide how I should answer a question, you're wrong.
If you think QLC+ should work like the software you mentioned, you're wrong.
If anyone thinks that comments like "it's not clear" or "it's confusing" or "it doesn't work" are constructive, then guys, you're all wrong.
To me they're just complains without a constructive goal.
Your statement "I find the sequence function not very usefull" is one of them too, and it is what I consider "pointing a finger".
You work in theaters, so it's obvious you don't need Sequences. If you worked with a multitrack Show, with audio and sequences synced to a metronome, would you have proposed to remove the Cue list widget just because you don't use it ?
Guys, I have to agree with Massimo on this one. I've often looked at the sequence and wondered something similar, but I've always understood that they served a purpose and I've always assumed that they were there for a reason (and I never suggested removing them without having a full understanding of what they are for). Moreover, once Massimo explained (in further detail) what they do, I would think that someone might actually take the time to update the documentation if they find it insufficient with that information rather than continue going back and forth in this thread...
The current discussion on Sequences prompted me to look more closely at them, having not paid much attention to them before as I haven't needed to use Shows to synchronise lighting to music.
I have programmed a number of flashing and colour changing effects for disco, party and “magic” scenes in various theatrical productions by building Chasers, but now see it would have been easier to use Sequences on a Show track and replay the Show by attaching it to a button or including it in a chaser step. This would have achieved the same things, but with a lot less clicks.
At the risk of repetition, a Sequence embodies an important and, I imagine, frequently used functionality of a Chaser but is far quicker to programme, as your example makes clear Massimo.
The issue of those users who have trouble understanding the differences between a chaser and a sequence and their applications has come up a number of times and it's obviously frustrating to keep on explaining the same thing over and over.
I suggest the following explanation of a sequence for the documentation (I'll sort it out in html if you're happy with it Massimo):
Sequence
A Sequence has some of the functionality of a Chaser, but can be programmed far more quickly. It is equivalent to a Chaser in which each step is a single scene and every one of those scenes controls the same set of channels. A Sequence is bound to one specific Scene, which means that all the steps of the Sequence can only control the various channels of that Scene. When creating new steps in a Sequence, no Function selection pop-up will appear, since a Sequence step cannot include other Functions, unlike a Chaser step. When a Sequence is created, a special sequence icon will appear in the Function Manager under the Scene to which it is bound.
As a result of my investigations into Sequences, I have a number of other points to raise which I will make the subject of a separate post.
Hi Michael, this is what I call a contructive post :)
I probably have troubles in explaining a concept in english to give exactly a clear idea that I have in mind.
The texting you proposed looks good to me, except for one little statement:
"A Sequence has some of the functionality of a Chaser, but can be programmed far more quickly."
The second part of this sentence is not true. There are cases where programming a Chaser is faster than programming a Sequence. For example if you have 50 different Scenes and you want to make a lot of combinations of them, it will take less time to create Chasers than Sequences. This is mainly cause of the Function selection window.
I am going to change the documentation now.
Thank you very much.
Last edit: Massimo Callegari 2014-04-11
So if someone could explain, how do I program a sequence? I am not using the shows feature, but it sounds like a sequence may be a less messy way to program a movement sequence than having to make a bunch of steps and then add them to a chaser.
Joe, create a Scene in the function manager, add the fixtures and enable the channels you want.
Then (with the scene still selected) click on the sequence button and start adding steps to it.
EDIT: With the show manager this is much more intuitive and visually easier
Last edit: Massimo Callegari 2014-04-11
The speed of programming a Chaser hinges on "if you (already) have 50 scenes"! I overlooked this, I'm afraid.
Try this formulation:
A Sequence has some of the functionality of a Chaser, but can be programmed far more quickly if you don't already have a lot of scenes programmed for use in a Chaser.
Where is the loop option for a sequence? Seems a much better way to program in movements for scanners, but it doesn't really work if there is no loop.
I had a similar problem of Joe (and few other of the points of Michael Clements) but I was believing that if the sequence has to become equivalent to a chaser in the possibilities then the distiction could have disappeared.
I was wrong because now they're implementing them, in the end this post has been somehow useful.
It's almost Easter and I'd like to be in peace with all you guys.
I really haven't appreciate being accused of demolishing houses or to not be a democratic person.
Isn't my first sentence asking if someone is still using the sequences?
If the answer is affirmative the post is answered.
I confirm that I'm not using the show manager, is it still allowed to do a mistake here?
2 statements I have to disagree with Massimo:
I'm really aware that qlc+ has not to be like other software and because of this reason in the past year I've asked just for 2 or 3 features, one was last summer, to ask for the patch, the second was for a waiting and a delay time in the cue list, more than one year ago (this has been rejected) and the third, but I don't remeber right now, was for the fixture groups. Without the first 2 features I couldn't even think to propose qlc+ in a professional theatre envinronment.
Second, I find not usefull that qlc+ has to invert the meaning of concepts established in the lighting world, chaser vs cue list, but I guess this is mostly an heritage from the original qlc than a choice of Massimo.
Have a good week and peace
giacomo
Giacomo, now that the temperature has fallen here, I come in peace too.
Your support in the past has been precious, especially for the cross-fading and live editing, so I got surprised when you came out with this proposal of removing sequences.
I am not a lighting expert so the terminology used by QLC+ might not respect the common language used by lighting technicians since many years.
However, this might not stop someone to have the curiosity to learn a new way to design a light show or new words to name a functionality.
Chasers are a QLC inheritance. Honestly I don't even know what chaser mean. in fact I haven't even translated it in italian.
I chose "sequence" one year and a half ago cause nothing better came in my mind at that time.
Regarding requests, I know many of you asked for the "wait" time on Chaser steps. It's not rejected. It's just a major change to do.
Since I am the collector of each request, I have the responsibility of choosing what can be the best for everyone. QLC+ has many different usages so I do not concentrate on a single one, but I try to mediate between every need and hope to make everybody happy.
This of course doesn't happen, since every user understands only the part they use, so they complain when something is not like they expect.
For example the changes for live editing, broke some scenes of my band's project. I don't complain, cause if live editing makes 100 users happy then for a greater good I will find another way to fix my problems.
As for documentation, I am aware sometimes it lacks of details, but since I spend most of my time coding new features or fixing existing ones, you have to be patient with it and eventually ask nicely for improvements with constructive proposals.
On the other hand, I think you can count on your fingers the number of non-profit open source projects with 130 pages of documentation. (and more than 2 hours of video tutorials)
Most of them just leave it to forums or users self-learning.
To conclude, my goal is to make everybody happy and bring QLC+ to a competitive level. In my opinion, complaining about this project is useless. It just discourages me to do better than this.
Last edit: Massimo Callegari 2014-04-14