NEXTORCH - 300 m long-shot E6        
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

  1. #1
    fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Maryland, Near DC, USA
    Posts
    6,397

    Default Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    One of my Oveready lights isn't responding to programming from the Lux-RC website. I'm trying to check the board to see if the light sensor is messed-up. I can't tell which component is the light sensor. Does anyone know?

  2. #2

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    My memory may be faulty on this but I seem to remember it being part of the auxiliary LED tower, and I have personally experienced that the programming doesn't work if said tower is damaged, the other thing of course is if the aux LED does work, you may need to make sure your screen brightness is all the way up. Does your bounce safety work on high?

  3. #3

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Just to make sure, this is a V5 module, correct? The one with a secondary led?

    I believe the way the v5 board works is that it uses the secondary led to provide a voltage feedback when there is a change in the ambient light. Hence why the programming screen needs to be bright enough to provide enough voltage difference to be detected. It's also the reason why other color leds can't be used. It just doesn't provide enough feedback. So I would think if the secondary led works, then the programming should also work.
    Who needs to see the light at the end of the tunnel when you have friends on CPF?
    My flashlight videos: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...9TIYcGeuBXa5m0

  4. #4
    fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Maryland, Near DC, USA
    Posts
    6,397

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Yes, it's a V5 module. Using a light emitter as a light sensor? What a strange design choice.

    Anyway, I guess I'll try maxing-out the brightness of my screen to see if that helps.

    EDIT: Removing the optic before programming did the trick. I guess the lense and optic were juuuuust opaque enough that the color LED wasn't responding to the blinky code well enough for the driver to read it reliably. Since I don't reprogram my lights multiple times a day for the heck of it, this isn't a major inconvenience.

    I really wish the NXS R1 driver were programmable without a computer, though. The light will continue to work once the Lux-RC website someday goes offline, but it will no longer be programmable when that happens.
    Last edited by fyrstormer; 12-03-2018 at 04:28 PM.

  5. #5
    Moderator
    archimedes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    CONUS, top left
    Posts
    10,992

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    .... I really wish the NXS R1 driver were programmable without a computer, though. The light will continue to work once the Lux-RC website someday goes offline, but it will no longer be programmable when that happens.
    I agree and had (still have, really) similar concerns.

    Do be aware, though, that you can prepare / record / save as many different programs as you like, however.

    Each program takes minuscule storage space, as I believe it is simply a magnified strobing single pixel.
    ... is the archimedes peak

  6. #6

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    I really wish the NXS R1 driver were programmable without a computer, though. The light will continue to work once the Lux-RC website someday goes offline, but it will no longer be programmable when that happens.
    That's my major complaint against developers who do not maintain source control/public code repository (i.e. GitLab or GitHub)...
    On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    Yes, it's a V5 module. Using a light emitter as a light sensor? What a strange design choice.

    Anyway, I guess I'll try maxing-out the brightness of my screen to see if that helps.

    EDIT: Removing the optic before programming did the trick. I guess the lense and optic were juuuuust opaque enough that the color LED wasn't responding to the blinky code well enough for the driver to read it reliably. Since I don't reprogram my lights multiple times a day for the heck of it, this isn't a major inconvenience.

    I really wish the NXS R1 driver were programmable without a computer, though. The light will continue to work once the Lux-RC website someday goes offline, but it will no longer be programmable when that happens.
    By the way, you can play with the sensitivity so it works properly with the optic.

  8. #8
    fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Maryland, Near DC, USA
    Posts
    6,397

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by archimedes View Post
    I agree and had (still have, really) similar concerns. Do be aware, though, that you can prepare / record / save as many different programs as you like, however. Each program takes minuscule storage space, as I believe it is simply a magnified strobing single pixel.
    This is true. And since there are a finite number of possible programs, hypothetically someone could generate a backup catalog of videos for all possible programs, to be made available in-perpetuity, without needing to know the internal structure of the programs they are cataloging. It would be a very tedious job to do that, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by IsaacL View Post
    That's my major complaint against developers who do not maintain source control/public code repository (i.e. GitLab or GitHub)...
    Hypothetically I agree, but my professional opinion as a software engineer is that most FOSS code I've seen is junk anyway. It gets modified in tiny bits and pieces by people who just need small adjustments made, and they don't have the time or resources to perform proper integration-testing for their small changes. Why? Because everyone involved with the project has to do something else for a living that's actually profitable, so they can pay their bills. (unless they work for a company like Red Hat who builds FOSS products "for free" and then makes money selling support contracts to their user base.)

    That being said, I do think all code that is abandoned by the original publisher should be considered open-source by default, the same way you forfeit all legal rights to the contents of your trashcan the instant the garbage man picks it up to toss in the garbage truck.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thetasigma View Post
    By the way, you can play with the sensitivity so it works properly with the optic.
    I can? I see a place to adjust the bounce-detection sensitivity, but I don't use that feature anyway. Where do I adjust the sensitivity for programming purposes?
    Last edited by fyrstormer; 12-04-2018 at 03:24 PM.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    This is true. And since there are a finite number of possible programs, hypothetically someone could generate a backup catalog of videos for all possible programs, to be made available in-perpetuity, without needing to know the internal structure of the programs they are cataloging. It would be a very tedious job to do that, though.

    Hypothetically I agree, but my professional opinion as a software engineer is that most FOSS code I've seen is junk anyway. It gets modified in tiny bits and pieces by people who just need small adjustments made, and they don't have the time or resources to perform proper integration-testing for their small changes. Why? Because everyone involved with the project has to do something else for a living that's actually profitable, so they can pay their bills. (unless they work for a company like Red Hat who builds FOSS products "for free" and then makes money selling support contracts to their user base.)

    That being said, I do think all code that is abandoned by the original publisher should be considered open-source by default, the same way you forfeit all legal rights to the contents of your trashcan the instant the garbage man picks it up to toss in the garbage truck.

    I can? I see a place to adjust the bounce-detection sensitivity, but I don't use that feature anyway. Where do I adjust the sensitivity for programming purposes?
    That is exactly the setting, the bounce-detection sensitivity, it adjusts the optical "sensor" threshold.

  10. #10
    fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Maryland, Near DC, USA
    Posts
    6,397

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    It controls the sensitivity when reading programming codes too? That seems dangerous; if you turn down the sensitivity too far you might never be able to change the programming again.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    It controls the sensitivity when reading programming codes too? That seems dangerous; if you turn down the sensitivity too far you might never be able to change the programming again.
    I think it does but I could be mistaken, that would be a serious issue of course

  12. #12

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    This is true. And since there are a finite number of possible programs, hypothetically someone could generate a backup catalog of videos for all possible programs, to be made available in-perpetuity, without needing to know the internal structure of the programs they are cataloging. It would be a very tedious job to do that, though.

    Hypothetically I agree, but my professional opinion as a software engineer is that most FOSS code I've seen is junk anyway. It gets modified in tiny bits and pieces by people who just need small adjustments made, and they don't have the time or resources to perform proper integration-testing for their small changes. Why? Because everyone involved with the project has to do something else for a living that's actually profitable, so they can pay their bills. (unless they work for a company like Red Hat who builds FOSS products "for free" and then makes money selling support contracts to their user base.)

    That being said, I do think all code that is abandoned by the original publisher should be considered open-source by default, the same way you forfeit all legal rights to the contents of your trashcan the instant the garbage man picks it up to toss in the garbage truck.

    I can? I see a place to adjust the bounce-detection sensitivity, but I don't use that feature anyway. Where do I adjust the sensitivity for programming purposes?
    I don't know whether lux-rc software is high or low quality, but I am certain of one thing: open sourcing wouldn't make it worse.
    And my experiences with open source are totally different from yours - good part of closed source code that I've seen was junk. I've seen open source junk as well, but that happens much more rarely...

  13. #13
    fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Maryland, Near DC, USA
    Posts
    6,397

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Open-sourcing the Lux-RC website wouldn't make it worse in the short term. It's anyone's guess what would happen after a few years of maintenance by unpaid volunteers.

    Open-source code can be very good, but it requires dedicated full-time developers who don't have to worry about how to pay their bills. Same as any other complex engineering project, really. A lot of companies that produce open-source software make their money via partnership deals with other companies (e.g. Android), or they sell enterprise tech-support contracts (e.g. Red Hat), or they distribute the latest version of their code for free in exchange for users agreeing to let their computers submit automatic bug reports to save money on paid beta-testers (e.g. Red Hat again), or they sell must-have optional add-ons built on separate closed-source codebases that people will eagerly pay for (e.g. VMware and other "freemium" software). So yeah, there are ways to make it work, but they require a paying customer base somewhere in the product lifecycle. I use Firefox and LibreOffice and VMware Player on a daily basis and they are great products, because they've figured out how to make money without having to sell the software itself. But smaller, lesser-known projects are often pretty horrifying on the inside, and unlike badly-written proprietary code, it isn't anyone's job to fix it, so it almost never gets fixed. Combine the "how to make money" problem with the problem of codebases getting "forked" by developers who want to maintain creative control over their contributions rather than adding them directly to the original codebase, and it becomes clear that open-source is only sustainable in "impure" implementations. If you've managed to avoid working with open-source code that never makes it out of beta, then you have been quite fortunate and I want to steal your job.

    ...what were we talking about? I've forgotten.
    Last edited by fyrstormer; 12-06-2018 at 04:00 PM.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    Open-sourcing the Lux-RC website wouldn't make it worse in the short term. It's anyone's guess what would happen after a few years of maintenance by unpaid volunteers.

    Open-source code can be very good, but it requires dedicated full-time developers who don't have to worry about how to pay their bills. Same as any other complex engineering project, really. A lot of companies that produce open-source software make their money via partnership deals with other companies (e.g. Android), or they sell enterprise tech-support contracts (e.g. Red Hat), or they distribute the latest version of their code for free in exchange for users agreeing to let their computers submit automatic bug reports to save money on paid beta-testers (e.g. Red Hat again), or they sell must-have optional add-ons built on separate closed-source codebases that people will eagerly pay for (e.g. VMware and other "freemium" software). So yeah, there are ways to make it work, but they require a paying customer base somewhere in the product lifecycle. I use Firefox and LibreOffice and VMware Player on a daily basis and they are great products, because they've figured out how to make money without having to sell the software itself. But smaller, lesser-known projects are often pretty horrifying on the inside, and unlike badly-written proprietary code, it isn't anyone's job to fix it, so it almost never gets fixed. Combine the "how to make money" problem with the problem of codebases getting "forked" by developers who want to maintain creative control over their contributions rather than adding them directly to the original codebase, and it becomes clear that open-source is only sustainable in "impure" implementations. If you've managed to avoid working with open-source code that never makes it out of beta, then you have been quite fortunate and I want to steal your job.

    ...what were we talking about? I've forgotten.
    If you don't trust forks, why would you use any version other than the official one? If there's just the same developer working at the official, why would open sourcing make it worse? It could make it better - because the maker could get improvements from others. As long as the original author is at helm open sourcing won't make a project any worse. And afterwards...I guess we agree that open source would be better than nothing.

    As to full timing...
    My friend wrote a project that's possibly on billion of devices already. Hard to tell with open source, so many projects incorporate it. Closed source ones as well.
    At the time when he started he was not a full time developer. Actually he was a programming beginner with entirely different career path.
    Now he's indeed a full-time coder hired by a major internet company and he indeed works on this project (mostly maintenance, it's pretty much done) and similar ones.

    I had bad experiences with both open source and closed source. I fixed like 7 crashes and deadlocks in a part of Python stdlib. We just used it in uncommon way and bugs that were one-in-a-hundred-years for others were one-in-a-week for us. I have no idea if the project has commercial stewardship, but I'm certain that this kind of bugs wouldn't be noticed by them. I worked with an always-beta library and my colleague rewrote 80% of it eventually.
    With open source you can at least fix the bugs. With closed source you need to avoid the most buggy paths. Which are harder to identify when you don't have the code....I've decompiled closed source before because I couldn't make it work otherwise. You can sometimes ask the code owner to fix it. But sometimes you're not their customer but a third party affected by its bugs. Sometimes the business relationship is bust and nobody can fix stuff. I use much more open source software than closed source one but it's the closed source that tends to cause me more headaches.

    ...what were we talking about? I've forgotten as well.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    This thread reminds me of why I love working with devs. You guys kill me!
    On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux.

  16. #16
    fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Maryland, Near DC, USA
    Posts
    6,397

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agpp View Post
    If you don't trust forks, why would you use any version other than the official one? If there's just the same developer working at the official, why would open sourcing make it worse? It could make it better - because the maker could get improvements from others. As long as the original author is at helm open sourcing won't make a project any worse. And afterwards...I guess we agree that open source would be better than nothing.

    As to full timing...
    My friend wrote a project that's possibly on billion of devices already. Hard to tell with open source, so many projects incorporate it. Closed source ones as well.
    At the time when he started he was not a full time developer. Actually he was a programming beginner with entirely different career path.
    Now he's indeed a full-time coder hired by a major internet company and he indeed works on this project (mostly maintenance, it's pretty much done) and similar ones.

    I had bad experiences with both open source and closed source. I fixed like 7 crashes and deadlocks in a part of Python stdlib. We just used it in uncommon way and bugs that were one-in-a-hundred-years for others were one-in-a-week for us. I have no idea if the project has commercial stewardship, but I'm certain that this kind of bugs wouldn't be noticed by them. I worked with an always-beta library and my colleague rewrote 80% of it eventually.
    With open source you can at least fix the bugs. With closed source you need to avoid the most buggy paths. Which are harder to identify when you don't have the code....I've decompiled closed source before because I couldn't make it work otherwise. You can sometimes ask the code owner to fix it. But sometimes you're not their customer but a third party affected by its bugs. Sometimes the business relationship is bust and nobody can fix stuff. I use much more open source software than closed source one but it's the closed source that tends to cause me more headaches.

    ...what were we talking about? I've forgotten as well.
    I agree as long as the original developer continues to admin the development, open-sourcing the code will almost certainly have no negative effect. Presumably the original developer will maintain the same standard for quality regardless of who is actually writing the code. It's when the original developer abdicates authority, or throws a brand-new product out into the wild for other people to care about and maintain, that bad things start to happen.

    It's cool that you've been able to contribute to open-source projects to improve them. In my line of work, neither I nor my company owns my work product, so we can't just give it away for free, and our clients won't run non-standard implementations of major open-source products anyway. So basically I build necessary workarounds into the closed-source-but-publicly-owned products I develop, whether the products I'm integrating with happen to be open-source or closed-source. At least with closed-source products I can send official requests for bugfixes to be prioritized; with open-source products, bugfixes are prioritized for reasons that have nothing to do with the size or clout of the people reporting the bugs.

    Quote Originally Posted by IsaacL View Post
    This thread reminds me of why I love working with devs. You guys kill me!
    What is your job?
    Last edited by fyrstormer; 12-07-2018 at 04:13 PM.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    I agree as long as the original developer continues to admin the development, open-sourcing the code will almost certainly have no negative effect. Presumably the original developer will maintain the same standard for quality regardless of who is actually writing the code. It's when the original developer abdicates authority, or throws a brand-new product out into the wild for other people to care about and maintain, that bad things start to happen.

    It's cool that you've been able to contribute to open-source projects to improve them. In my line of work, neither I nor my company owns my work product, so we can't just give it away for free, and our clients won't run non-standard implementations of major open-source products anyway. So basically I build necessary workarounds into the closed-source-but-publicly-owned products I develop, whether the products I'm integrating with happen to be open-source or closed-source. At least with closed-source products I can send official requests for bugfixes to be prioritized; with open-source products, bugfixes are prioritized for reasons that have nothing to do with the size or clout of the people reporting the bugs.



    What is your job?
    I did not say I contributed that fixes back. The employer didn't want to go through the process of polishing the patches to make them upstreamable. Oh those quality standards...
    The job was HA clusters. And problems were with SSH library when one would pull the wire. Depending on what the code would be doing at the time, the code would return failure as it should....or sometimes it would not.

    I left that job several years ago. Now I do embedded stuff. Rarely microcontrollers though, f.e. now I'm programming streetlamps - that's my most capable embedded platform so far, dual cores and 4 GB RAM.

  18. #18
    fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Maryland, Near DC, USA
    Posts
    6,397

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    I studied embedded/realtime systems programming in college, but I haven't done anything with that knowledge in my career -- except for writing occasional "black box" code that nobody except me is allowed to touch, because it handles raw bits and bytes in an "unsafe" manner so it can do a specific job much faster than framework-supported high-level code could. Naturally I pay extremely close attention to what I'm doing when I write code like that, to ensure it doesn't accidentally flip a bit where it shouldn't and cause the whole system to crash -- or worse, upload the entire contents of RAM to some Chinese hackers. But the potential risk is totally worth it when I run my "black box" code and it blasts through a complex operation 10x faster than the "safe" code it's replacing.

  19. #19
    Moderator


    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Posts
    6,789

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    *cough* topic *cough*

    Did anyone perhaps try contacting Oveready or Lux-RC directly to inquire?
    "Rage, rage against the dying of the light..."

  20. #20
    fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Maryland, Near DC, USA
    Posts
    6,397

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    Why yes, I did think of that! I contacted both of them, in fact, before starting this thread. Lux-RC never responded, but Oveready eventually confirmed what Thetasigma said.

  21. #21
    Moderator


    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Posts
    6,789

    Default Re: Where is the light sensor on the NXS R1 driver board?

    I figured you had, but I'm sure you're familiar with what happens when one assumes. If you've nothing else, I'll close this...
    "Rage, rage against the dying of the light..."

Posting Permissions

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