Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like

    Question Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    I've been researching pixel controllers recently, specifically those with the densest pixel/channel output. So far I've found that the Falcon F16v3 and the Advatek PixLit16MkII seem to advertise the densest channel capacity for a single controller. With the Falcon showing 32,768 channels @ 40fps and 49,152 channels @ 20fps. The Advatek shows 49,152 - for now I'll just assume it too is at 20fps.

    My question for the community is this: Are there any other controllers or control options that have a greater channel output? I have a particular "prop" that will have about 110,592 3 channel pixels so that, by my calculations, would require about 11 F16v3's @ 40fps, or similar controller.

    I should add that I'm looking for something with an E1.31 input and at least a WS2811/12/12b output.
    Last edited by najetset; 01-11-2019 at 04:17 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sheboygan, WI
    Posts
    1,712
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    As far as I am aware those would be the highest output controllers available. Of those two I'd opt for the Falcon controller.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    West Bloomfield, MI
    Posts
    639
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    I don't think you'll find anything more here. You are talking industrial strength stuff. Assuming 12 volt pixels, you are going to need over 600 amps at 120 volts. That's more than three residences worth. You'll have a bigger issue with power supplies and cabling. If you are doing a pixel matrix using matrix panels, you should look at Colorlight or Lynsn cards for control.
    Ed
    Happily retired

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    Quote Originally Posted by tjetzer View Post
    As far as I am aware those would be the highest output controllers available. Of those two I'd opt for the Falcon controller.
    Yes I too would lean toward the Falcon, all else being equal I do like the fact that it can act as a remote, offloading a lot from the master. But that said, I do like the idea of the 'expanded mode' of the Advatek, which doubles the output count, but halves the channels/output - which to me seems like it may be able to perform better (read:higher fps) than the Falcon. I'm waiting to hear back from Advatek on their expected frame rates in expanded mode.

  5. Likes tbrenton liked this post
  6. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    Quote Originally Posted by ezellner View Post
    I don't think you'll find anything more here. You are talking industrial strength stuff. Assuming 12 volt pixels, you are going to need over 600 amps at 120 volts. That's more than three residences worth. You'll have a bigger issue with power supplies and cabling. If you are doing a pixel matrix using matrix panels, you should look at Colorlight or Lynsn cards for control.
    Power is of no issue for what/where I'm planning the display. I will research your control suggestions though, thanks!

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Plymouth, MN
    Posts
    9,140
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    You should maybe take a look at Stellascapes. With that sort of industrial-type need, you want appropriate gear. Andrew at Stellascapes has done SeaWorld, among others....

    http://www.stellascapes.com/

    http://digwdf.com/store/
    The DIGWDF Store has closed. Thanks to everyone who supported us through the nearly seven years we were open!
    The store will remain open for downloading documentation and other files, including Gerbers and DipTrace design files.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Framingham, MA
    Posts
    469
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    The most dense/most pixels would be the various BeagleBone based controllers. A BeagleBone can drive 48 strings, 750 PIXELS per string at 40fps. Drop to 20fps and you can double that.

    The problem is actually getting the data to the controller. For the most part, with BBB's, we would run them in remote mode with the data stored locally. If they have to be 1.31, you will definitely have issues. It can handle the 210 universes for the 750*48. 420 is more than the ethernet it has can handle. If you grab one of the SanCloud BBE's with the Gigabit ethernet, it may allow more, but I honestly haven't tried it yet.

    By shear coincidence, I was working on updating my F32-B design today. It has 32 ports local and another 16 via differential receivers. Haven't decided if I'll actually have any made or not.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Dan Kulp

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    Quote Originally Posted by dkulp View Post
    The most dense/most pixels would be the various BeagleBone based controllers. A BeagleBone can drive 48 strings, 750 PIXELS per string at 40fps. Drop to 20fps and you can double that.

    The problem is actually getting the data to the controller. For the most part, with BBB's, we would run them in remote mode with the data stored locally. If they have to be 1.31, you will definitely have issues. It can handle the 210 universes for the 750*48. 420 is more than the ethernet it has can handle. If you grab one of the SanCloud BBE's with the Gigabit ethernet, it may allow more, but I honestly haven't tried it yet.

    By shear coincidence, I was working on updating my F32-B design today. It has 32 ports local and another 16 via differential receivers. Haven't decided if I'll actually have any made or not.
    Agreed with the amount of data to pass by E1.31, at least during show time, which is why I was leaning toward the F16v3 as I believe it can act as remote thereby reducing the amount of E1.31 traffic.

    Regarding your F32-B, this might be the best of both worlds, near maximum channels per controller and still having remote mode - which the Advateks seem to lack.

    Should you do decide to proceed with the F32-B's (or perhaps even a F48-B :P)I would certainly be interested further.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    Quote Originally Posted by dkulp View Post
    The most dense/most pixels would be the various BeagleBone based controllers. A BeagleBone can drive 48 strings, 750 PIXELS per string at 40fps. Drop to 20fps and you can double that.

    The problem is actually getting the data to the controller. For the most part, with BBB's, we would run them in remote mode with the data stored locally. If they have to be 1.31, you will definitely have issues. It can handle the 210 universes for the 750*48. 420 is more than the ethernet it has can handle. If you grab one of the SanCloud BBE's with the Gigabit ethernet, it may allow more, but I honestly haven't tried it yet.

    By shear coincidence, I was working on updating my F32-B design today. It has 32 ports local and another 16 via differential receivers. Haven't decided if I'll actually have any made or not.
    Oh and I was going to add, subsequent to my research on various controller options, I've also been looking into DDP in place of E1.31 - seems to have some marked efficiency/performance improvements. So my original requirement of an E1.31 input might change to DDP. But still TBD.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    29
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Dense E1.31 Pixel Controllers

    No idea what you are building but it sounds massive. Please post pictures!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •