Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Director's Cut of i-Robot Movie

Expand Messages
  • twcarroll@aol.com
    Hello SRS, A month or so ago I asked if anyone had seen a director s cut of the Will Smith movie: i-Robot. It was in with another question and never got
    Message 1 of 15 , Dec 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello SRS,
      A month or so ago I asked if anyone had seen a "director's cut" of
      the Will Smith movie: i-Robot. It was in with another question and
      never got answered. I was wondering if any of the scenes that
      contained some of the robots various people furnished for the movie (me
      included) were in the "cuts." I have a DVD that has some extra
      material such as directors talking about the making of the movie and
      selected scenes that are in the full-length movie, but no deleted
      scenes.
      I know several people around the country furnished "props" and
      would like to see if any were left on the cutting room floor.
      Tom Carroll
    • douglas_warren_bell
      I also learned the technique before encountering the tech note. I don t think Maxim invented the technique, but they ve coined a term for it which is useful
      Message 2 of 15 , Dec 2, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        I also learned the technique before encountering the tech note. I
        don't think Maxim invented the technique, but they've coined a term
        for it which is useful for talking about it, and the tech note
        provides an on-line reference.

        Do you know of an on-line example of this diagonal hookup you
        mentioned, or any other on-line description of what I've come to
        call Charlieplexing?

        For an art project for dorkbot, I've constructed a 44 x 27 array of
        7-segment LED displays, driven by 18 networked microcontrollers
        using Charlieplexing. Each microcontroller drives a 22 x 21 array of
        LEDs (22 x 3 displays) via 22 output pins. So far I have 1 of the 18
        sections wired, and I've been writing code for the one
        microcontroller to convince myself it's worth the trouble to wire up
        the rest of it.

        For displaying digits, it was convenient to construct an array of
        bit patterns for each digit value from 0 to F for the 8 types of
        digit connections that occur as the diagonal wiring discontinuity
        works its way across the 22 columns and three rows. There is also a
        table of wiring type for each column of each row.

        For alphanumeric fonts using multiple displays for each character,
        an array of bit patterns specific to each connection type would take
        way too much ROM, so I store patterns of segments to light, and
        calculate the bit patterns to apply to the output ports on the fly.

        For graphics, it's all calculated on the fly, the tables are
        application specific, not output port specific.

        Doug Bell

        --- In SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com, Alan King <alan@n...> wrote:
        >
        > The mentioned 56 with 8 is 8*(8-1) for a reason.. :)
        >
        > Actually if you draw it as a grid with a diagonal hook up, it is a
        > rolling bit pattern. Roll your bit pattern, roll it one more, put
        the
        > halves together, and blank the common bit for your common. It's
        very
        > easy to drive 7 or 8 segment LEDs with this.
        >
        >
        > Curious too, I thought Paul invented it before that tech note,
        since
        > what he was doing evolved from a high and low emitter follower
        > transistor diagram for driving LEDs, then went to duh you don't
        even
        > need drive transistors for PIC outputs with it for a lot of
        applications
        > I have a board with nine 8 segment LEDs (even with the 18
        transistors
        > for extra drive) driven in that pattern that I haven't even looked
        at in
        > 4 years. Not even on the current hard drive, I'll have to pull
        out some
        > of my old CD backups and refresh my memory on some dates. Not
        that it
        > couldn't have been first, but I think somewhere it'd need to be a
        bit
        > older than the dates in that note for that to be the case. There
        were
        > also 2000 people reading the conversations at the time with many
        Maxim
        > fans on the PIClist. IIRC no one mentioined an apnote..
        >
        > Never heard of Charlieplexing, or that app note.. Then again
        I've
        > tuned out about every subsequent conversation about it I've run
        into,
        > since having studied it fully then and having real dot matrix sign
        > experience well before that, I generally knew it better than the
        people
        > talking so didn't tend to pay complete attention..
        >
        > And having looked at it and recoded several times over the
        years, if
        > you have characters and only certain patterns to display, look up
        tables
        > and the above idea will work out. Less than 7 or 8 for N and
        individual
        > dot control, you may as well look up each display bit, and flip
        each
        > output bit from it. Prior to 7 or 8 bits, the chunks are small,
        and by
        > the time you do the adjustments within a loop it ends up being
        little to
        > no gain, with obtuse code in the bargain.. The 'look up display
        dot,
        > flip corresponding outputs' is actually easier to read and
        maintain..
        >
        > Alan
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > douglas_warren_bell wrote:
        >
        > >If you're considering driving an array of LEDs from a
        > >microcontroller, check out Charlieplexing. I learned how to do
        this
        > >at an Atmel seminar, then later found out it had been named and
        used
        > >by Maxim for some chips:
        > >
        > >http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/1880
        > >
        > >Instead of using the usual N + M outputs to drive N * M LEDs, if
        you
        > >can get individual outputs to tri-state, you can drive up to
        > >N * (N - 1) LEDs with N outputs.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
      • Doug Leppard
        This is not about technical but more people s response to the lights. I have shown the video all over the place, I just think it is great and just jealous I
        Message 3 of 15 , Dec 2, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          This is not about technical but more people's response to the lights.

          I have shown the video all over the place, I just think it is great and
          just jealous I didn't do it. I think maybe many in the group really
          appreciated what this guy did.

          But many people I show it to think it is over the top and my wife
          fearing rightfully I might do that said it would bug the neighbors.

          So to me the engineer I think it is cool and others think it is too
          much. I don't know if you had the same experience.

          Doug Leppard

          -----Original Message-----
          From: SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com
          [mailto:SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          douglas_warren_bell
          Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 5:19 AM
          To: SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [SeattleRobotics] Re: Christmas Lights run-Amok -
          Charlieplexing

          I also learned the technique before encountering the tech note. I
          don't think Maxim invented the technique, but they've coined a term
          for it which is useful for talking about it, and the tech note
          provides an on-line reference.

          Do you know of an on-line example of this diagonal hookup you
          mentioned, or any other on-line description of what I've come to
          call Charlieplexing?

          For an art project for dorkbot, I've constructed a 44 x 27 array of
          7-segment LED displays, driven by 18 networked microcontrollers
          using Charlieplexing. Each microcontroller drives a 22 x 21 array of
          LEDs (22 x 3 displays) via 22 output pins. So far I have 1 of the 18
          sections wired, and I've been writing code for the one
          microcontroller to convince myself it's worth the trouble to wire up
          the rest of it.

          For displaying digits, it was convenient to construct an array of
          bit patterns for each digit value from 0 to F for the 8 types of
          digit connections that occur as the diagonal wiring discontinuity
          works its way across the 22 columns and three rows. There is also a
          table of wiring type for each column of each row.

          For alphanumeric fonts using multiple displays for each character,
          an array of bit patterns specific to each connection type would take
          way too much ROM, so I store patterns of segments to light, and
          calculate the bit patterns to apply to the output ports on the fly.

          For graphics, it's all calculated on the fly, the tables are
          application specific, not output port specific.

          Doug Bell

          --- In SeattleRobotics@yahoogroups.com, Alan King <alan@n...> wrote:
          >
          > The mentioned 56 with 8 is 8*(8-1) for a reason.. :)
          >
          > Actually if you draw it as a grid with a diagonal hook up, it is a
          > rolling bit pattern. Roll your bit pattern, roll it one more, put
          the
          > halves together, and blank the common bit for your common. It's
          very
          > easy to drive 7 or 8 segment LEDs with this.
          >
          >
          > Curious too, I thought Paul invented it before that tech note,
          since
          > what he was doing evolved from a high and low emitter follower
          > transistor diagram for driving LEDs, then went to duh you don't
          even
          > need drive transistors for PIC outputs with it for a lot of
          applications
          > I have a board with nine 8 segment LEDs (even with the 18
          transistors
          > for extra drive) driven in that pattern that I haven't even looked
          at in
          > 4 years. Not even on the current hard drive, I'll have to pull
          out some
          > of my old CD backups and refresh my memory on some dates. Not
          that it
          > couldn't have been first, but I think somewhere it'd need to be a
          bit
          > older than the dates in that note for that to be the case. There
          were
          > also 2000 people reading the conversations at the time with many
          Maxim
          > fans on the PIClist. IIRC no one mentioined an apnote..
          >
          > Never heard of Charlieplexing, or that app note.. Then again
          I've
          > tuned out about every subsequent conversation about it I've run
          into,
          > since having studied it fully then and having real dot matrix sign
          > experience well before that, I generally knew it better than the
          people
          > talking so didn't tend to pay complete attention..
          >
          > And having looked at it and recoded several times over the
          years, if
          > you have characters and only certain patterns to display, look up
          tables
          > and the above idea will work out. Less than 7 or 8 for N and
          individual
          > dot control, you may as well look up each display bit, and flip
          each
          > output bit from it. Prior to 7 or 8 bits, the chunks are small,
          and by
          > the time you do the adjustments within a loop it ends up being
          little to
          > no gain, with obtuse code in the bargain.. The 'look up display
          dot,
          > flip corresponding outputs' is actually easier to read and
          maintain..
          >
          > Alan
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > douglas_warren_bell wrote:
          >
          > >If you're considering driving an array of LEDs from a
          > >microcontroller, check out Charlieplexing. I learned how to do
          this
          > >at an Atmel seminar, then later found out it had been named and
          used
          > >by Maxim for some chips:
          > >
          > >http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/1880
          > >
          > >Instead of using the usual N + M outputs to drive N * M LEDs, if
          you
          > >can get individual outputs to tri-state, you can drive up to
          > >N * (N - 1) LEDs with N outputs.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >






          Visit the SRS Website at http://www.seattlerobotics.org
          Yahoo! Groups Links
        • Alan King
          ... Oh little doubt coined by someone else reading the ap note, likely without even a second thought that it may have already been fairly common knowledge..
          Message 4 of 15 , Dec 2, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            douglas_warren_bell wrote:

            >I also learned the technique before encountering the tech note. I
            >don't think Maxim invented the technique, but they've coined a term
            >for it which is useful for talking about it, and the tech note
            >provides an on-line reference.
            >
            >

            Oh little doubt coined by someone else reading the ap note, likely
            without even a second thought that it may have already been fairly
            common knowledge..

            >Do you know of an on-line example of this diagonal hookup you
            >mentioned, or any other on-line description of what I've come to
            >call Charlieplexing?
            >
            >
            >
            Same as at the bottom of the ap note. Arrange your elements as a grid,
            column 1 is group 1, 2 is 2, etc, and your individual elements in each
            group are row 1, 2, 3, etc. Then, the pattern the wiring follows is the
            diagonal lines through the array, like in the table they have. Common
            and the other lines rotate through the group as you advance to the next
            group. Note that you can also keep your drive wires straight, change
            where the common point for the LEDs is, and have your element grid on
            the diagonal. Not doable with a fixed item like a 7 seg display, but
            works for other things. When I run back into my board, I'll upload a
            pic or two of it, looks pretty good for hand wired.

            Also, you can get input as well as output this way. Put a diode
            inline for each switch, and use instead of an LED, of course need pull
            ups and common ground or similar, and read it in. Need the diode on
            each, or they'll short out the reverse connected LEDs. Not really worth
            it to do a whole keyboard this way, better to use a shift register etc
            and get your other 8 outputs. But, if you're doing a LED array anyway
            and only need a group or two worth of switches, it works great.



            >For an art project for dorkbot, I've constructed a 44 x 27 array of
            >7-segment LED displays, driven by 18 networked microcontrollers
            >using Charlieplexing. Each microcontroller drives a 22 x 21 array of
            >LEDs (22 x 3 displays) via 22 output pins. So far I have 1 of the 18
            >sections wired, and I've been writing code for the one
            >microcontroller to convince myself it's worth the trouble to wire up
            >the rest of it.
            >
            >
            LOL, constructed is right, that's a lot of 7 segs.. Maybe you should
            start designing toilet seats too,
            http://www.kiss-textil.de/galactikaen.htm needs more light.. Was
            looking for the plexiglas wall with tons of LEDs, it looks like a good
            project for the plexing..



            >For displaying digits, it was convenient to construct an array of
            >bit patterns for each digit value from 0 to F for the 8 types of
            >digit connections that occur as the diagonal wiring discontinuity
            >works its way across the 22 columns and three rows. There is also a
            >table of wiring type for each column of each row.
            >
            >
            1 array instead of 8, bit pattern shifted to position, bit pattern
            shifted one more, common set high or low, left of common is pattern,
            right of common is shifted one more pattern. But if you've got the
            table space, the table is just as good.. You have 8 and patterns for 8
            bits, like 00011111 for bit 4. XOR with FF to get the pattern for the
            other side, then set bit 4 for the common using your same index. Codes
            up fairly well.

            >For alphanumeric fonts using multiple displays for each character,
            >an array of bit patterns specific to each connection type would take
            >way too much ROM, so I store patterns of segments to light, and
            >calculate the bit patterns to apply to the output ports on the fly.
            >
            >For graphics, it's all calculated on the fly, the tables are
            >application specific, not output port specific.
            >
            >Doug Bell
            >
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.