LSX or FB3 ?

[laserLips]

Each time Swamidog posts his latest master piece on youtube a little piece of confidence in my decision to get an FB3 is chipped away and I am left wiping the saliva from the keyboard and typing in the word LSX.

I used to have the FB3 when I had my lasers so I know how to use it and what the software packages can do.

(Stupid question) Does LA Studio, Showrider and the abstract generator still come with it along with QuickShow?

To people that have played with both, can you compare the abstract generators, timeline tools and que trigger tools.

Anything one lacks that the other offers?

Huge apologies if this is already covered somewhere. Just post a link.

Thanks ;-)
Graham

[norty303]

I don't believe that they do come with FB3 anymore, although most have functionality within QS anyway. I believe that some of the software was removed due to abuse/cracking. However, I'm sure someone could supply the software if you wanted to look at it.
The only one I really used was Draw3D due to LivePro not having a frame editor.

I'm not sure what QS abstract generator is like but the Beyond one is pretty well featured.

[absolom7691]

The thing with LSX vs FB3 QS/Beyond is the learning curve. I have both, LSX and FB3 QS/Beyond. The complex and beautiful abstracts that Swami comes up with are not easy to make. I have tried a lot and have failed miserably. That is not to say that they can't be done but LSX has a VERY steep learning curve. My problem is, I don't have enough time to spend with it because it is not something that can be learned in an evening or even a weekend. With Beyond, I can whip out some pretty nice abstracts pretty quickly. As far as timelines go, I think they are pretty comparable.

[swamidog]

agreed. some of my shows take an embarrassing number of hours. on the other hand, i'm not using any clip art or canned effects. the sequencing part of the show creation is pretty easy. creating eye melty effects is time consuming.

i give pangolin a lot of credit on making quickshow easy to use. it's not as flexible or powerful, but it's much easier to get started making pretty light with. i have pangolin systems, but i find lsx to be just more fun to use. it does have a learning curve, but once you start to get the knack of it, your head explodes with possibilities and you get lost in the light for a while.



cmb made some excellent video tutorials on getting started with LSX and i strongly recommend giving them a go. also, there's a bunch of us LSX users that hang out in the photonlexicon chat room. we're always happy to provide some help.

The thing with LSX vs FB3 QS/Beyond is the learning curve. I have both, LSX and FB3 QS/Beyond. The complex and beautiful abstracts that Swami comes up with are not easy to make. I have tried a lot and have failed miserably. That is not to say that they can't be done but LSX has a VERY steep learning curve. My problem is, I don't have enough time to spend with it because it is not something that can be learned in an evening or even a weekend. With Beyond, I can whip out some pretty nice abstracts pretty quickly. As far as timelines go, I think they are pretty comparable.

[White-Light]

Each time Swamidog posts his latest master piece on youtube a little piece of confidence in my decision to get an FB3 is chipped away and I am left wiping the saliva from the keyboard and typing in the word LSX.

I used to have the FB3 when I had my lasers so I know how to use it and what the software packages can do.

(Stupid question) Does LA Studio, Showrider and the abstract generator still come with it along with QuickShow?


Thanks ;-)
Graham

Graham you can download additional software here:

http://www.pangolin.com/UpdateFiles.htm

There's LiveQuick and TraceIt.

The other programmes you mentioned seemed to have been withdrawn.

[Pangolin]

Hi Graham,

I agree with what has been written here. I only know LSX is passing, but it's one of (what seems like many pieces of) software built upon work done by Lennart Weitzski who wrote LDS while he was a phd student in university. Lennart did an impressive job as a student, but I don't think his goal was to create easy-to-use software that could be instantly used by unsophisticated users. (Not that I am saying that you are unsophisticated, but the starting point for all software development should be to ask the question "who is your intended audience".)

The goal of QuickShow was to do exactly what its name implies -- allow people to create laser shows quickly. Moreover, the intended audience for QuickShow is people who have absolutely no experience using a laser and can't even spell the word "laser" correctly (i.e. people who spell it with a Z). On the other hand, my impression is that Lennart derived LDS from his observations of the Lasergraph DSP and our LD/QM32 system -- both platforms intended for experienced laser users.

QuickShow has an easy-to-use abstract generator. However, one thing about the abstract generator is that it is truly unlimited. You can keep on adding oscillators, modulators, and color modifiers. There are no limits here. But it is still simple and -- moreover -- all abstract work I know of requires a lot of experimentation, something Swami clearly has time and passion for.

Since the title of your post is "LSX or FB3", well LSX is software, while the FB3 is hardware that can be used with several pieces of software. As such I'll transition this discussion to other software that is usable with the FB3.

In contrast to QuickShow, we have BEYOND, which is software intended for experienced laser users. In addition to what QuickShow has to offer for abstracts, BEYOND includes many more sources for the "base shape" in the Abstract Generator from QuickShow, and many more modifiers. BEYOND also adds the "Abstraction" generator included in LivePRO which was derived from LAStudio and then expanded. And BEYOND can play (but currently not edit) all abstracts made in the LD2000 series of software.

One thing to keep in mind is that all of these sofwares are only tools, and there are no such thing as good tools or bad tools, only tools that would be applied appropriately. QS is designed to get people going quickly, but as our lowest-priced software intended for unsophisticated users, there are limitations that are purposely imposed to avoid confusing people. LD2000 and BEYOND (and in my opinion LSX) are intended for experienced users. The learning curve for all of these is steeper. However, BEYOND is built on the user interface philosophies of QuickShow and so the learning curve should not be so hard for people to go from QuickShow to BEYOND.

Graham, please contact me privately to discuss this further. I want to make sure all people who use Pangolin software and hardware are happy with their purchase decisions.

Best regards,

William Benner

PS: If you haven't already done so, check out some of the abstract shows in the Pangolin Shows Portal, including Tom Sawyer. I think the work done by Mike Dunn at least rivals what Swami does. Both Mike and Swami are experienced abstract creators, and so by looking at the shows, it will illustrate what these tools are capable of, when given experienced and passionate users with time on their hands

[VJ AIWAZ]

i think this is the oldest version its called lasecon (but there are earlier revisions with the lascon title)
but lascon ,lds,pheonix,lsx (there are more i cant think of) are all the same basic software but each dev team did add some new stuff to there respective version


i had one of these systems that is why i went with phoenix originally the lascon was originally networked and you needed a headless dos pc to run the dac in and the interface ran on another pc with xp or 2000 over the network or i have seen versions in back plane rack cases with mutli single board pc's and dac's


http://www.laserpro.nl/lcnpro%20description.htm

[dzodzo]

http://www.laserpro.nl/lcnpro%20description.htm

huh i wonder what lasers do they user in their "laserpro games" they seem quite high powered from the video http://www.laserprogames.nl/index.php?id=13 wonder if those hotbeams are safe for kids

[swamidog]

thank you for the excellent post, bill. i am a huge fan of the mike dunn "tom sawyer" show. it absolutely sets the abstract bar very high. there also incredible abstracts in laserium and old avi shows (check out the led zepplin show), and the stuff coming out of digisynth.

i watch a lot of these shows for inspiration.

fundamentally, creating abstracts on any package is the same. you're going to spend hours twiddling virtual oscillator banks, wave forms, rotational transforms, and color modulation effects while listening to the same damn 20 second snippet of music over and over and over again.


note: every single button can also be controled via midi, audio, or lsx's equation editor.

i can't speak about Beyond. it looks interesting. i'd like to spend some time with it. my frustration is it locks you into a pangolin ecosystem and i'm platform agnostic. this may or may not be an issue for you.


lsx is timeline based, and provides audio waveform analysis that makes it easy to do incredibly precise synching of events to music.





these examples are from the show i'm currently working on. notice how simple the timeline is? that's because lsx allows you to nest events. you don't have to, but i prefer things to be uncluttered. it makes it much easier to edit the show.. especially when you're cut and pasting, or dragging effects around.

here's one of my nested events:




none of these packages have a "press the button for mind exploding abstracts". i wish they all did. regardless of the tool you select, there will be learning curves, there will be many many hours burnt, and there will be pretty light.

it's also important to talk about costs. i primarily use lsx and an etherdream dac. the combined price for these two items is roughly the same (or less) than the cost of a fb3 with quickshow. the price for beyond is not listed on pangolin's website, but the intro version of LD2000 is ~1500$ (the pro-version is ~5k$) and requires either a desktop computer or the qm.net which is an additional 700$.

at the end of the day, they're all tools and any one will get the job done. do you prefer the green screwdriver, or the blue one.

Hi Graham,

I agree with what has been written here. I only know LSX is passing, but it's one of (what seems like many pieces of) software built upon work done by Lennart Weitzski who wrote LDS while he was a phd student in university. Lennart did an impressive job as a student, but I don't think his goal was to create easy-to-use software that could be instantly used by unsophisticated users. (Not that I am saying that you are unsophisticated, but the starting point for all software development should be to ask the question "who is your intended audience".)

The goal of QuickShow was to do exactly what its name implies -- allow people to create laser shows quickly. Moreover, the intended audience for QuickShow is people who have absolutely no experience using a laser and can't even spell the word "laser" correctly (i.e. people who spell it with a Z). On the other hand, my impression is that Lennart derived LDS from his observations of the Lasergraph DSP and our LD/QM32 system -- both platforms intended for experienced laser users.

QuickShow has an easy-to-use abstract generator. However, one thing about the abstract generator is that it is truly unlimited. You can keep on adding oscillators, modulators, and color modifiers. There are no limits here. But it is still simple and -- moreover -- all abstract work I know of requires a lot of experimentation, something Swami clearly has time and passion for.

Since the title of your post is "LSX or FB3", well LSX is software, while the FB3 is hardware that can be used with several pieces of software. As such I'll transition this discussion to other software that is usable with the FB3.

In contrast to QuickShow, we have BEYOND, which is software intended for experienced laser users. In addition to what QuickShow has to offer for abstracts, BEYOND includes many more sources for the "base shape" in the Abstract Generator from QuickShow, and many more modifiers. BEYOND also adds the "Abstraction" generator included in LivePRO which was derived from LAStudio and then expanded. And BEYOND can play (but currently not edit) all abstracts made in the LD2000 series of software.

One thing to keep in mind is that all of these sofwares are only tools, and there are no such thing as good tools or bad tools, only tools that would be applied appropriately. QS is designed to get people going quickly, but as our lowest-priced software intended for unsophisticated users, there are limitations that are purposely imposed to avoid confusing people. LD2000 and BEYOND (and in my opinion LSX) are intended for experienced users. The learning curve for all of these is steeper. However, BEYOND is built on the user interface philosophies of QuickShow and so the learning curve should not be so hard for people to go from QuickShow to BEYOND.

Graham, please contact me privately to discuss this further. I want to make sure all people who use Pangolin software and hardware are happy with their purchase decisions.

Best regards,

William Benner

PS: If you haven't already done so, check out some of the abstract shows in the Pangolin Shows Portal, including Tom Sawyer. I think the work done by Mike Dunn at least rivals what Swami does. Both Mike and Swami are experienced abstract creators, and so by looking at the shows, it will illustrate what these tools are capable of, when given experienced and passionate users with time on their hands

[White-Light]

I can't say I have much success with abstracts as its simply not my thing - I never make anything decent! But one thing that would interest you in Beyond Swami is the fact that you can import abstracts into Synth files and then apply all the usual manipulations from there. I didn't know this myself until Bill pointed it out in response to a question I raised.

Specifically, I remember you posting a 6 coloured Abstract the other day and saying I wish I could do that. In Beyond its simple (at least once you've created a base abstract in the 1st place). You import the abstract into the synth file. Clone it 5 times to make 6 versions. Then apply positional and colour effects to each one to separate them out positionally and by colour, and then you have a 6 colour discrete abstract. Obviously the initial abstract has to not be too cluttered if you're making 5 copies to keep both clarity and frame rates up, but it does show the power of synth. Every single effect available to synth can be applied to the abstract once imported. So it opens up some possibilities.