Ripple New

[Darzoom]

Describe the bug
When using New Ripple with the value curves, Timing Track Toggle, Timing Track Fixed Fade or Timing Track Proportional, a single pixel it lite up on the model in model preview. This does not happen when setting Cycle CNT to a number value.

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Add a Ripple (new) on a matrix
2. Select one of the above value curves for Cycle Cnt
3. The pixel will appear.
4. Set the CYcle CNT to a number value, pixel will not be seen

Expected behavior
No pixel when using value curves.

Versions (please complete the following information):

• OS: Mac Intel Processor Monterey 12.6.7
• xLights version 2023.10 wxWidgets 3.3.0

[merryoncherry]

I may not be seeing what you are seeing, or understand what you are trying to do.

When I do what you say (In a new sequence, put Ripple set to "Lines Both") on a small matrix, cycle count set to timing track value curve, I see a pixel with very small red circle around it.

This is not what I see with cycle count 1, which shows an explode, but is exactly what I see when I set cycle count to 0.

If I set it to "Implode", I see a big circle that doesn't move, in both cases.

I get similar results with "Old" render style - there is no movement and the shape stays very small or very large depending on implode/explode.

So this is consistent with the idea that the timing track value curve is returning 0 when there's nothing interesting in the timing track.

Now, personally I have trouble with some of the things like "Cycle count" having the value curve; it would have been better to have a "cycle phase" instead. This is why I added a "None" movement with "Scale" to it, which allows you to just change the size over time.

But what is your goal... what effect are you trying to achieve with the timing track?

[Darzoom]

I am expecting the value curves to work without the small dot as the number value in the Cycle Count does. The numbered Cycle Count starts without the dot. I’d expect the same thing with value curves.

…

On Jul 17, 2023, at 9:20 PM, merryoncherry ***@***.***> wrote: I may not be seeing what you are seeing, or understand what you are trying to do. When I do what you say (In a new sequence, put Ripple set to "Lines Both") on a small matrix, cycle count set to timing track value curve, I see a pixel with very small red circle around it. This is not what I see with cycle count 1, which shows an explode, but is exactly what I see when I set cycle count to 0. If I set it to "Implode", I see a big circle that doesn't move, in both cases. I get similar results with "Old" render style - there is no movement and the shape stays very small or very large depending on implode/explode. So this is consistent with the idea that the timing track value curve is returning 0 when there's nothing interesting in the timing track. Now, personally I have trouble with some of the things like "Cycle count" having the value curve; it would have been better to have a "cycle phase" instead. This is why I added a "None" movement with "Scale" to it, which allows you to just change the size over time. But what is your goal... what effect are you trying to achieve with the timing track? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3880 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ATP2FZG7TZNQHJ46CAY3RA3XQXQHFANCNFSM6AAAAAA2NKQMCE>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.

[derwin12]

I think there is a zero being produced on the value curve or something.. A picture ..

[merryoncherry]

Yeah, I think the cycle count doesn't "work without the small dot", I think the "small dot" is the beginning of the cycle and you just don't see it because it isn't there for very long.

But I know with the single strand chase effect, people do like that it starts out invisible. What could we do that didn't break the way it works now, but would make it easier to use for whatever user purpose is in play here?

[AzGilrock]

What are you guys calling the “small dot”? The period in a floating point value?

[merryoncherry]

:-D The single white pixel from the 0-size shape, plus the red (by default) rings around it if it ripples outwards from there.

[Darzoom]

There is a single pixel that lights up. Hence, “small dot”.

…

On Jul 18, 2023, at 5:04 PM, merryoncherry ***@***.***> wrote: :-D The single white pixel from the 0-size shape, plus the red (by default) rings around it if it ripples outwards from there. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3880 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ATP2FZGWENDTFKDI4OMKYJ3XQ326BANCNFSM6AAAAAA2NKQMCE>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.

[AzGilrock]

Ah ok. Yeah I kind of agree about the value curves on a Cycles parameter. I was just adding a Cycles field to my new Moving head effect I'm working on and was thinking it didn't make sense to change the cycles in the middle of the effect. With a moving head your probably not gonna want it to make the jump that would happen when the cycles curve keeps causing the position to recalculate due to the progress not being linear. I will probably remove the curve I have there now. I had problems getting the call to get the value to work and while investigating I saw other effects that use the cycles as an input to get the effect progress position and other effects that grabbed the progress first and used it as an offset to grab the cycles value. Totally inconsistent.