search

bitfocus / companion-module-studiocoast-vmix

Studiocoast vMix module for Bitfocus Companion
MIT License
32 stars 10 forks source link

Multi target IP for one module vMix #110

Open Federico-Catelotti opened 3 years ago

Federico-Catelotti commented 3 years ago

Descrition It would be useful to assign multiple IP targets and ports for the vMix modules. Maybe only one will be able to give feedback status. Usecases The intent is to be able to have backup vMix with identical projects working simultaneously without having to duplicate the commands (module 1 module 2) for each button. :)

krocheck commented 3 years ago

I'll let the guys figure out if they want to go down this road, but the conversation has come up in the past about modules supporting "backup" instances. Companion is not able to support this at a core level because all the modules have different communication protocols, error reporting, etc. I am not aware of any modules that have gone ahead and added support like this. In the past this came up for software like Qlab and Playback Pro Plus.

McHauge commented 3 years ago

Well, I'm personally not totally sold on this, but I could see a backup ip and a backup enable being. A part of the config.

Actions would be simple to adapt, as it's just sending the same thing twice, but for feedbacks and variables, I'm not sure as

one way would be no support at all. Another have all the variables be normal + one ending on _backup. Feedbacks would still be weird

The last option would be an action / detection, the main system goes offline, or you press the action, then all feedbacks/variables switch over to the backup system.

Federico-Catelotti commented 3 years ago

The last option would be very useful! But for a first step to see if it can work well it could be to give only one of the instances a chance to have feedback etc.

McHauge commented 3 years ago

It would only be one instance in all cases, but I'm thinking it would work similar to the Facebook/YouTube's backup streams (that's the where that idea came from)

Federico-Catelotti commented 3 years ago

So until one instance falls, the other doesn't work?

McHauge commented 3 years ago

Well, depends on "work" all the actions would get sent to both machines, but feedback and variables would only follow the first machine

That's what I would call the first step, if that works we can look at the next step

Getting feedbacks and variables to swap over to the backup system based on a state or a variable. That way it could be affected by a trigger, another module, the user (action) or auto detected.

That would be the way i would se it made sense for an implementation. This would approach could also be adapted to other mixer/matrix systems like atem mixers/video hubs. But that outside of my scope.

Federico-Catelotti commented 3 years ago

Would be great! Do you see the first step as a long and difficult job?

McHauge commented 3 years ago

Small to Medium, I think, but for testing, I'll have to set some stuff up, it's not too normal that we have both our vmix machines set up at once, also currently I'm a bit booked, so don't expect it to be within the next week at least.

Federico-Catelotti commented 3 years ago

Perfect, keep me updated and thank you very much!

Federico-Catelotti commented 2 years ago

hey hi :) Is there any news on the feature?

Federico-Catelotti commented 2 years ago

Nothing?

McHauge commented 2 years ago

Haven't had time to look at it, no. But if anyone else wants to the ideas above still stands.

Federico-Catelotti commented 2 years ago

Who could do it in your opinion? Is this a function that no one would need?

McHauge commented 2 years ago

1 - @thedist would be a person who could do it or anyone with some coding knowledge that has the time on their hands

2 - you are the first to ask for it, even though there is a good amount of people using it the way it is currently with 2-4 systems at once. And the general guideline of "if someone needs it, others properly will too" still applies, but it's not really a high priority on my side, with only one request, for something I personally don't need/use. I think this has its place, but I still question if it should be a module thing or more of a core thing, where you could copy and paste one or more actions back and forth, what will give the best use, and after all, it's still a semi-large change the the "core" of the module, vs adding another action/feedback.

If you look at most of the things, I add in a quick phase, is stuff I personally use or will need at an upcoming job/event, or it might even be something added while on the said job, then pushed out when I get home.

Federico-Catelotti commented 2 years ago

Ok I understand. I thought it might be more useful for everyone. I didn't think I was the only one using 2 vMix in parallel for backup. I'll ask @thedist if he's interested. Thanks comuqnue

David-in-Philly commented 2 years ago

I'm very much in-favor of this for back-up/fail-over purposes. Given that use case, it would seem to be a pretty evident path forward.

Federico-Catelotti commented 2 years ago

I have tried in many ways but I cannot find a more functional solution than the one proposed. It would be a great feature!