Aux busses in the Switcher module

[zenvideo]

The internal routing mechanism in VidBlaster is a very powerful feature, allowing modules like the Video Effect and Video Output to take any other output as a source, including the outputs from the Program and Preview busses in the Switcher.

This selection method could be extended, fairly easily I suspect, by an option to add additional Aux busses to the switcher, emulating the multi-bank control surfaces of high-end studio vision mixers. How would this work, and why would it be needed?

It would be accessed via a menu item in the Module pop-up to “Add Aux Bus”. This would add another row of buttons below the Preview bus, including those sources in the Preview/Program busses, but also the Preview/Program bus outputs themselves. Busses would be auto-named as PINs Aux-1, Aux-2, etc, but also have a facility for a user designated label to appear in the Switcher module, to identify its intended function to the operator (eg Studio Monitor). Each Aux bus should have the option of it’s own Preview window, like those for the existing Program/Preview busses, although it would not always be needed.

These aux busses could be used as switched sources for effect and output modules, independent of the main Preview/Program busses. At present these modules can have their inputs switched via the module’s drop-down lists, but a bank of buttons in the switcher is easier to operate and a closer match to the control surface of a traditional hardware mixer.

What sort of scenarios might benefit from this? In a show with presenters and inserts (remote sources or pre-recorded video items) it is useful to have a presenter’s studio monitor. This monitor would show just player inserts or remote sources (either visible in camera, or positioned where only the presenters can see it) but never show the presenters themselves (because that’s distracting). If you want to be able to use the main Preview/Program bus for cutting together the main Program output, then you can’t use either of those outputs for feeding a Video Output module for the studio monitor, but you do need to be able to select what’s on the studio monitor at any time. You can do it with the drop-down list controls, but a switching bus just makes it so much easier.

You might also want to use another aux bus to select sources for PIP effects, which again is easier and quicker to do from a row of buttons than a drop-down list. And if the Preview bus is being used to pre-select the next shot, it can't also be used to select effect sources. And where you might have two PIP shots on a background, two Aux busses could be used to quickly select the two PIP sources.

[Johan Lundberg]

+1

Would be fantastic!

[QuinnQuality]

I do hope it is not to difficult to achieve.
+1

[weconverse]

I am just concerned that PCs powerful enough to manage this, and related modules (like for effects), are a few years ahead.
Those of you that have high end ambitions, ie (full) HD, what are your experiences so far? I have got the impression that your PCs (P67 mobo w i7 k2600, don't yet have one of my own) stumble. For example can't record as reported in another thread.

[zenvideo]

I am just concerned that PCs powerful enough to manage this, and related modules (like for effects), are a few years ahead.
Those of you that have high end ambitions, ie (full) HD, what are your experiences so far? I have got the impression that your PCs (P67 mobo w i7 k2600, don't yet have one of my own) stumble. For example can't record as reported in another thread.

I don't think the switching itself needs a great deal of processing power. The idea is to provide an easier to operate user-interface to modules like the Video Effect where you can already select different inputs, but have to do it via a drop-down menu. Having an Aux bus (or two) on the Switcher just makes it easier to switch effects inputs on the fly during a broadcast.

You can add lots of effect modules now (without any Aux bus feature in the switcher) and overload the CPU. That's a different issue from making it easier to switch inputs to modules like the Video Output and Video Effect, which is all I'm requesting. There's no implicit link between having more busses in the switcher and adding more CPU-heavy Effects modules.

[weconverse]

Well, perhaps I should not have pointed at CPU specs, when perhaps the mother board bus/mem speed are more relevant bottle necks. I have no idea, just a concern...
(in my cases CPU is OK, its the reported frame rate that goes down significantly).

Guess the initial question (to Mike) is, how would Martins idea rhyme with known bottlenecks (CPU, graphics card, bus design, ram speed)?

[zenvideo]

Well, perhaps I should not have pointed at CPU specs, when perhaps the mother board bus/mem speed are more relevant bottle necks. I have no idea, just a concern...
(in my cases CPU is OK, its the reported frame rate that goes down significantly).

Guess the initial question (to Mike) is, how would Martins idea rhyme with known bottlenecks (CPU, graphics card, bus design, ram speed)?

From what I've observed and worked out about how the system works, I'm hopeful that the answer would be little more than the increase in CPU usage which was needed to perfect the text anti-aliasing which, to quote Mike, was "none". :)

Adding additional Preview windows for each bus would increase the CPU load, but that should be an option and is not a basic requirement.

[weconverse]

BTW Martin, have you seen Mike's announcement of video streams routing?
http://forum.vidblaster.com/showthread.php?t=1309&highlight=pin+routing

[jonesdeere]

+1

Auxillary video busses would be very advantageous to churches since many congregations have 2 or 3 front screens, a stage display (confidence feed), broadcast a web stream, and send a video feed to other areas within the building (ie: nursery), and record for archiving. the front screens don't always need live video image enlargement of the pastor, but the separate video feed and the web stream do. Another example is the video overlay with the church logo.
I could see allowing a maximum of six auxillary busses which would be limited only by cpu power and expansion slot availability.

I also see the possiblity of converting VidBlaster to a nodal application and use multiple netwoked pcs similiar to a render farm in a hollywood studio. This would allow virtually unlimited busses and video input/ outputs.

Thanks,

Steven

[jonesdeere]

I can see modifying the current video output module (or creating a new video output module 2, like the camera2 module) where it would automatically create a new line of buttons in the switcher for each video output module. This would allow the operator to easily change output sources. You could make this an option where the operator could select an either a fixed output source (like the current video output module where it a selectable via a drop down list) or a new line in the video switcher module. This would make the modified video output module (or newly created video output 2 module) equivalent to an auxiliary bus. It is currently equivalent to aux bus except that it does not have ability to use transitions when changing sources and it is not as simple to operate as the current user interface (with either the cut and transition buttons on the home and pro versions or the video mixer module on the studio and broadcast versions).
The current video out modules, in my opinion, are equivalent to the auxiliary busses that many people, including me, have requested. They aren't as easy to use because of their user interface, but they serve the desired functionality since they allow the operator to send a customizable video mix to an external device. Mike, Thanks for being so involved with the customers that use your products. I know that I probably got off the original topic, but I thought it related directly to the topic of this thread. If you have any questions, pm me and we can Skype to discuss my ideas.
Thanks,

Steven Jones

[zenvideo]

I can see modifying the current video output module (or creating a new video output module 2, like the camera2 module) where it would automatically create a new line of buttons in the switcher for each video output module.

You could make this an option where the operator could select an either a fixed output source (like the current video output module where it a selectable via a drop down list) or a new line in the video switcher module. This would make the modified video output module (or newly created video output 2 module) equivalent to an auxiliary bus.

Yes, that's pretty much what I had in mind, and is one way of achieving it. Automatically creating the aux bus in the switcher, tied to a particular (type 2) Video Out module would, on the one hand, be quick for the user to initialise but, on the other hand, be less flexible that the more modular approach that I had in mind. For example, how would you select the positioning of the row of buttons in the switcher that were associated with a particular Video Out module, if they were created automatically? In my version, you create the button rows (Aux Busses) in the switcher first, and then have the existing Video Out module(s) link to a particular aux bus using the existing PIN system, so you can choose which Aux Bus is linked to a Video Out, for example, and which is linked to the input of a Video Effect (or the same Aux Bus could feed both). The only automatic bit would be the allocation of the PIN names to the Aux Busses, according to vertical position.

On the subject of positioning, I would suggest two types of Aux bus could be added, Upstream and Downstream of the main Preview/Program busses.
The Upstream busses would be positioned below the Preview/Program bus, and be mainly used for selecting inputs to Video Effect modules, and would include the same sources as Preview/Program. The Downstream busses would be positioned above the main Preview/Program, be mainly used for feeding Video Out modules, and additionally include the Preview & Program busses as video sources.

If it all sounds a bit complicated, then that's because the whole concept of aux busses and routing is a bit complicated and not the sort of thing that a basic user is going to need. Those who know why they want it shouldn't have much trouble being able to use it.

[Mike]

I can't implement this yet as all modules need to support the pin structure. I have now implemented this for the video switcher, which was the most difficult part, but I'll need to do a lot of testing (https://twitter.com/#%21/MikeVersteeg/status/88173360005132288). When that's out of the way, I can build nice things like this.

[PeterHazenberg]

Mike, how are the stability test doing? I'm interested in the "aux" feature to send different sources (mostly players) to individual SDI outputs of my Decklink Quad.

[Mike]

If you are using v2.04, you are running the stability tests :). How are they going?

[PeterHazenberg]

I hooked up a smal team ;-) to do some extensive testing :-) The stability is very ok!

- Twice we had some "loss" of feedback to the Launchpad while it kept working properly. The first time the "red" buttons didn't go off anymore when switching to an other source (while the "greens" did) So after using all sources all buttons are red :-)

The second time they all (red and green) went off after prox. 15 min. Restating VB solved both incidents. So far we can not reproduce it.

[Light & Music]

+1
I didn't find this request, so I start theme in general discussion. I add some picture so you can see at
http://forum.vidblaster.com/showthread.php?t=2865
and all my explanation are there. I am glad that I am not only one that need this.

[Alfredvdh]

Auxillary buses +1