Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: New open laser frame format?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Akron, Ohio USA
    Posts
    2,197

    Default

    You could always include a text file with your ILDA file with instructions as to how to use it. And you can encrypt using Zip with a password.

    The only reason to include FPS or PPS in a file would be if the file reader could make some automatic use of it. I can really only speak for LaserBoy since I wrote it, but I would assume that all applications have very different ways of getting to an optimized result.

    Also, once a file is open in LB as a frame set you could save it in any of the formats that LB supports... so there goes your encryption.

    James.
    Creator of LaserBoy!
    LaserBoy is free and runs in Windows, MacOS and Linux (including Raspberry Pi!).
    Download LaserBoy!
    YouTube Tutorials
    Ask me about my LaserBoy Correction Amp Kit for sale!
    All software has a learning curve usually proportional to its capabilities and unique features. Pointing with a mouse is in no way easier than tapping a key.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by james View Post
    The modified wave file format certainly has its merits as a frame set storage format even if you never use a modified sound card to play it.
    If you are using a frame-based DAC, I fail to see any benefit whatsoever to using an audio based file format. It just seems like an absurd waste of space and resources. Please fill me in on any benefits to converting frame based data to waveform data?

    My belief is that these two "types" of representations should remain separate and distinct. If someone wants to create conversions from one to the other, then that is fine - but a frame-based file format should absolutely not be encumbered with the overhead of a a "streaming" data format, like audio waveforms.

    But in general, I agree with Grix that something like he is proposing is absolutely necessary.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Akron, Ohio USA
    Posts
    2,197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueFang View Post
    If you are using a frame-based DAC, I fail to see any benefit whatsoever to using an audio based file format. It just seems like an absurd waste of space and resources. Please fill me in on any benefits to converting frame based data to waveform data?

    My belief is that these two "types" of representations should remain separate and distinct. If someone wants to create conversions from one to the other, then that is fine - but a frame-based file format should absolutely not be encumbered with the overhead of a a "streaming" data format, like audio waveforms.

    But in general, I agree with Grix that something like he is proposing is absolutely necessary.
    If the wave was created in LaserBoy from a frame set at a certain frames per second then that wave is both a stream-able source and a frames based storage format.

    I'm not saying wave is the best or only way to transport frame set data. I'm saying that a lot of development has gone into extending a wave's functionality to satisfy a lot of things needed for laser display.

    In the header of a LB formatted wave there is a lot of information about the wave that makes it work as a storage and transport file format. Among other things, there is a set of numbers that represent the sample shifts between the scanners and the color channels for proper timing (so it can be unshifted when it is opened) There is also the use of the least significant bit in the red color channel designating the end of a frame mark. And the LSB in the green channel indicates if the frame is a repeat of the previous frame. So you can open a LB formatted wave in LB (or other apps that read LB formatted waves) and get your original frame set back.

    PLUS, you can splice audio into the 7th and 8th channels and play the whole thing as one file in any generic wave player and get laser control signals with synchronized music.

    LB also lets you open unformatted waves most likely made from ADAT transcriptions and convert that data into a frame set, of sorts (predesignated number of points per frame).
    Last edited by james; 10-30-2016 at 16:51.
    Creator of LaserBoy!
    LaserBoy is free and runs in Windows, MacOS and Linux (including Raspberry Pi!).
    Download LaserBoy!
    YouTube Tutorials
    Ask me about my LaserBoy Correction Amp Kit for sale!
    All software has a learning curve usually proportional to its capabilities and unique features. Pointing with a mouse is in no way easier than tapping a key.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by james View Post
    If the wave was created in LaserBoy from a frame set at a certain frames per second then that wave is both a stream-able source and a frames based storage format.
    But that is the thing... We aren't talking about waveform data created by LaserBoy. We are talking about a generic frame-based file format for interchange of frame-based data (a frame being defined as a set of points to be drawn at a specified rate) - while addressing the issues that are lacking in the current ILDA specification - and those issues were clearly outlined by Grix in the OP.

    It seems you are talking about a completely different problem set and a completely different definition of a "frame".

    Problem set A (lets call this the vector format)
    A set of points in 2D or 3D space to be drawn by the laser in a specified amount of time

    Problem set B (waveform format)
    A continuous sampled waveform set of data that represents the voltage levels sent to the ILDA standard ports on a laser projector.


    I don't think those two problem sets should be combined. It is ok for there to be conversion utilities to convert between the two, but a single format that represents both types of data is a bad idea.

    As an analogy, think of the difference between .svg files and .png files. Vector image files have their own format because vector images are inherently very different than raster image files. The working committee did not force a vector format into .png or .bmp file formats because it just didn't make sense.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Akron, Ohio USA
    Posts
    2,197

    Default

    Like I said... I'm not saying that wave is the best choice but it can be a solution for both A and B.

    A LaserBoy formatted wave is a set of time optimized vector coordinates clocked at the sample rate of the file, usually 48KHz. There is even room for Z data in the 6th channel. And coordinates are in exactly the same format at ILDA, 16 bit signed integers. And since it has end of frame markers, yes it is a frame oriented storage format.

    James.
    Creator of LaserBoy!
    LaserBoy is free and runs in Windows, MacOS and Linux (including Raspberry Pi!).
    Download LaserBoy!
    YouTube Tutorials
    Ask me about my LaserBoy Correction Amp Kit for sale!
    All software has a learning curve usually proportional to its capabilities and unique features. Pointing with a mouse is in no way easier than tapping a key.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by james View Post
    If the wave was created in LaserBoy from a frame set at a certain frames per second then that wave is both a stream-able source and a frames based storage format.

    I'm not saying wave is the best or only way to transport frame set data. I'm saying that a lot of development has gone into extending a wave's functionality to satisfy a lot of things needed for laser display.

    So you can open a LB formatted wave in LB (or other apps that read LB formatted waves) and get your original frame set back.
    How many 'other apps that read LB formatted waves' are out there?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Akron, Ohio USA
    Posts
    2,197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dchammonds View Post
    How many 'other apps that read LB formatted waves' are out there?
    Well I think YOURS does!

    James.
    Creator of LaserBoy!
    LaserBoy is free and runs in Windows, MacOS and Linux (including Raspberry Pi!).
    Download LaserBoy!
    YouTube Tutorials
    Ask me about my LaserBoy Correction Amp Kit for sale!
    All software has a learning curve usually proportional to its capabilities and unique features. Pointing with a mouse is in no way easier than tapping a key.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by james View Post
    Well I think YOURS does!

    James.
    Is there a link for that?

    Perhaps a LIST chunk could be added to the beginning of an LB ASCII frame that can include all manner of background info- and the rest spells out a minimized amount of 2 or 3d points
    at the specified resolution to define the drawing together with a frame time parameter, and if time is set to zero, then the drawing can proceed at the max speed a given system
    can allow. Let the end user figure out how to optimize within given time constraints and hardware since 'There are no standards for optimizing'.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    My momentum is too precisely determined :S
    Posts
    1,777

    Default

    What is this, a discussion about formats and I'm not invited???

    Quote Originally Posted by Grix View Post
    Just something I have been thinking about. Right now the only commonly supported, open format for laser show software to transfer data from one another is the ILDA format.. But I think we can all agree that it has a lot of problems. To name some:

    - No good way of storing full info on title, author etc, just a couple of tiny, fixed 8 byte fields
    - No info on timing (scanrate, frames per seconds etc)
    - No backwards compatibility between formats, some projectors and software etc can still only read legacy format 0 without full RGB data
    - No compression
    - No encryption
    - Ambiguity when separating frames into different projectors/layers
    - No possibility to store audio as well

    This has arguably contributed a lot to the state of the market we are seeing now, with the leading company all but abandoning the ILD format in favor of their own proprietary formats that don't work with any other software, leading to less consumer freedom and less innovation.

    I'm wondering if maybe there is interest in a community effort to come up with a new format to fix most or all of the problems with the ILDA formats. The authors of most of the software used in the scene are members here so we could get it widely supported if we really want to.
    There's the wave format used in f.ex. LaserBoy, which fixes a few of the problems but far from all, and its biggest strength, that it can be played directly on sound cards is maybe less relevant these days now that sound card dacs are less popular.

    Just throwing it out there. It would require quite a bit of work and most developers are probably very busy as is, but I think it would be very beneficial to the community if executed well.

    Bonus laugh: https://xkcd.com/927/
    I'd like to add to that list: the ability to store pure art in svg-like vector format (with splines, circles and similar shapes) instead of only point based. Points and frames are great for streaming to a DAC but not great for storing art. See Bluefang's comment.

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnYayas View Post
    Also, I think the proposed IDN standard is an attempt to address at least some of these concerns.
    True. You could also store IDN's byte stream as a file and use it in that way to store laser art.

    But what was the reaction of the industry?
    "You don't really think we're going to implement a standard???"

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnYayas View Post
    ILDA could be doing a lot to fix this but instead they are having cruises and laser show contests. Lame.
    Well they did create IDN. Say what you want about it, but at least an attempt was made!

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueFang View Post
    But that is the thing... We aren't talking about waveform data created by LaserBoy. We are talking about a generic frame-based file format for interchange of frame-based data (a frame being defined as a set of points to be drawn at a specified rate) - while addressing the issues that are lacking in the current ILDA specification - and those issues were clearly outlined by Grix in the OP.

    It seems you are talking about a completely different problem set and a completely different definition of a "frame".

    Problem set A (lets call this the vector format)
    A set of points in 2D or 3D space to be drawn by the laser in a specified amount of time

    Problem set B (waveform format)
    A continuous sampled waveform set of data that represents the voltage levels sent to the ILDA standard ports on a laser projector.


    I don't think those two problem sets should be combined. It is ok for there to be conversion utilities to convert between the two, but a single format that represents both types of data is a bad idea.

    As an analogy, think of the difference between .svg files and .png files. Vector image files have their own format because vector images are inherently very different than raster image files. The working committee did not force a vector format into .png or .bmp file formats because it just didn't make sense.
    I agree with your statement. As for problem set B, IDN has a continuous mode that allows exactly that.

    For set A, how would you see that format? I'm imagining curves described by parameters that can change in time, instead of a set of points. A system could then decode the curves and decide on the optimal distance between points, colour correction and scanner inertia correction.

    I believe j4cbo tried something like that a couple years ago:

    https://github.com/j4cbo/benzene

    not sure how useful/complete it is but it's an idea.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Karlsruhe, Germany
    Posts
    28

    Default

    I'd like to answer to some points too... :-)

    First - the title is about a laser frame format. Then the wish list extends to timing, encryption, multiple projectors and audio... This more looks like a format to store shows (and by the way - how can this be open if encryption is on the list).

    IDN indeed covers most of the needs/demands and the more people join, the better it could get.Your bonus laugh is a great one :-) but in this case - it's not too much that competes.

    The existing IDTF standard is good for frames. This is what it was developed for, this is what it can be used for. Backwards compatibility is always a problem and I'd not blame the extension of a standard that covers new features to not be backwards compatible - than rather software not staying up to date. Else, converters could be used to make old software run with the new files.

    The planned, new IDN file format is essentially what you're looking forward to with regard to storage of films/shows.

    - No good way of storing full info on title, author etc, just a couple of tiny, fixed 8 byte fields
    IDN files will have plenty of room for this. Although - the information will be file-based (stored in a global file header)

    - No info on timing (scanrate, frames per seconds etc)
    There was extensive research in what scheme would be best to cover all use cases (streaming, recording, storage - of all possible media types) - and it works quite well.

    - No compression
    IDN doesn't cover this (yet). Because disk space and bandwidth meanwhile is not a critical factor any more (think of video) - this was not a main focus.

    - No encryption
    This is a point on it's own. To make it short - there truly are use cases for encryption. When talking about open systems however it's very doubtful. What would it be used for? Generally - of what I can say with regard to this business - it's more about making people anxious and bind them to certain suppliers/companies - which is just about the opposite direction...

    - Ambiguity when separating frames into different projectors/layers
    IDN can store/handle up to 64 simultaneous streams per universe.

    - No possibility to store audio as well
    IDN can do this (although - there is no profile yet).

    This has arguably contributed a lot to the state of the market we are seeing now, with the leading company all but abandoning the ILD format in favor of their own proprietary formats that don't work with any other software, leading to less consumer freedom and less innovation.
    Hmmm - I'd want to argue against this. When being too large, companies try to save their makets by binding customers. Open standards would not help since the company could have worked on a standard and share it. The bad thing here is that all the little companies fight against each other by copying the behaviour of the large one (thinking they might succeed) - instead of staying together and using an open standard.

    I'm wondering if maybe there is interest in a community effort to come up with a new format to fix most or all of the problems with the ILDA formats. The authors of most of the software used in the scene are members here so we could get it widely supported if we really want to.
    I'd differenciate between file formats that are used by software systems. While having open formats there (for import/export) is a good thing - a standard might be not. These software systems are unique and store unique data - and they can do it in a unique way. What is needed is a standard way of sharing whole shows (that too could be imported/exported). That's where IDN comes into play. Like IDTF is for single frames - IDN is for complete shows.

    ILDA could be doing a lot to fix this but instead they are having cruises and laser show contests. Lame.
    Well - I'm not sure about whether you know what ILDA is and how it works... It's an association and it's business-driven. When new standards mean that any business could be in danger - well then - who would be working on that standard? In any case you're invited to participate. IDN is a start - it needs people to really work.

    I'd like to add to that list: the ability to store pure art in svg-like vector format (with splines, circles and similar shapes) instead of only point based. Points and frames are great for streaming to a DAC but not great for storing art. See Bluefang's comment.
    I would have wanted too - but let's start IDN this way. It can be extended :-)

    But what was the reaction of the industry?
    "You don't really think we're going to implement a standard???"
    Well - single companies is not the industry. There are (and will be) new approaches, new softwares systems, niche markets...


    Best Regards
    --Dirk

    - - - Updated - - -

    I'd like to answer to some points too... :-)

    First - the title is about a laser frame format. Then the wish list extends to timing, encryption, multiple projectors and audio... This more looks like a format to store shows (and by the way - how can this be open if encryption is on the list).

    IDN indeed covers most of the needs/demands and the more people join, the better it could get.Your bonus laugh is a great one :-) but in this case - it's not too much that competes.

    The existing IDTF standard is good for frames. This is what it was developed for, this is what it can be used for. Backwards compatibility is always a problem and I'd not blame the extension of a standard that covers new features to not be backwards compatible - than rather software not staying up to date. Else, converters could be used to make old software run with the new files.

    The planned, new IDN file format is essentially what you're looking forward to with regard to storage of films/shows.

    - No good way of storing full info on title, author etc, just a couple of tiny, fixed 8 byte fields
    IDN files will have plenty of room for this. Although - the information will be file-based (stored in a global file header)

    - No info on timing (scanrate, frames per seconds etc)
    There was extensive research in what scheme would be best to cover all use cases (streaming, recording, storage - of all possible media types) - and it works quite well.

    - No compression
    IDN doesn't cover this (yet). Because disk space and bandwidth meanwhile is not a critical factor any more (think of video) - this was not a main focus.

    - No encryption
    This is a point on it's own. To make it short - there truly are use cases for encryption. When talking about open systems however it's very doubtful. What would it be used for? Generally - of what I can say with regard to this business - it's more about making people anxious and bind them to certain suppliers/companies - which is just about the opposite direction...

    - Ambiguity when separating frames into different projectors/layers
    IDN can store/handle up to 64 simultaneous streams per universe.

    - No possibility to store audio as well
    IDN can do this (although - there is no profile yet).

    This has arguably contributed a lot to the state of the market we are seeing now, with the leading company all but abandoning the ILD format in favor of their own proprietary formats that don't work with any other software, leading to less consumer freedom and less innovation.
    Hmmm - I'd want to argue against this. When being too large, companies try to save their makets by binding customers. Open standards would not help since the company could have worked on a standard and share it. The bad thing here is that all the little companies fight against each other by copying the behaviour of the large one (thinking they might succeed) - instead of staying together and using an open standard.

    I'm wondering if maybe there is interest in a community effort to come up with a new format to fix most or all of the problems with the ILDA formats. The authors of most of the software used in the scene are members here so we could get it widely supported if we really want to.
    I'd differenciate between file formats that are used by software systems. While having open formats there (for import/export) is a good thing - a standard might be not. These software systems are unique and store unique data - and they can do it in a unique way. What is needed is a standard way of sharing whole shows (that too could be imported/exported). That's where IDN comes into play. Like IDTF is for single frames - IDN is for complete shows.

    ILDA could be doing a lot to fix this but instead they are having cruises and laser show contests. Lame.
    Well - I'm not sure about whether you know what ILDA is and how it works... It's an association and it's business-driven. When new standards mean that any business could be in danger - well then - who would be working on that standard? In any case you're invited to participate. IDN is a start - it needs people to really work.

    I'd like to add to that list: the ability to store pure art in svg-like vector format (with splines, circles and similar shapes) instead of only point based. Points and frames are great for streaming to a DAC but not great for storing art. See Bluefang's comment.
    I would have wanted too - but let's start IDN this way. It can be extended :-)

    But what was the reaction of the industry?
    "You don't really think we're going to implement a standard???"
    Well - single companies is not the industry. There are (and will be) new approaches, new softwares systems, niche markets...


    Best Regards
    --Dirk

Posting Permissions

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