Mac Pros and Cons

In the recent announcement of the Mac Pro's new specs and pricing becoming officially public, I find myself disappointed with Apple's decision to raise the baseline price of a long-overdue product.

This announcement was coincidentally released alongside the fact that iLife, iWork and the new OSX Mavericks would be released free of charge for users of Snow Leopard+ (OSX 10.6+)

In almost precisely a year after it's quiet removal from the Apple Online Store, the Mac Pro reappears with baseline specs one can expect from a year's worth of silence on the market. Does the polish Apple is laying on the new Mac Pro really shine as brightly as they would have us believe? Mac Pro has always offered two tiers to start purchasing from. Taking a note for the progression of, over a years worth of technology, I will be comparing the spec's individual to these tiers based on the offered numbers from each listing.

October 16, 2012

For $2500, this time last year, you could be the proud owner of a 40 lb. customizable tower, with a standard assortment of ports and competitive specs for a Quad core tower of the time. 

First tier for $2500

3.2 Ghz quad core Xeon

6GB memory

1TB hard drive

and a single GPU 

Second Tier for $3800

2.4Ghz dual 6 cores

double the memory

same hard drive

same GPU

October 22nd, 2013

Come December (ending a 14 month dry-spell in the pro market for new machines,) what do we have to compare? A machine that weighs considerably less and is quieter than the mac pro tower of old and little to almost no ability to customize past your original order.

First Tier for $3000 (+$500)
3.7 Quad core Xeon (.5 Ghz "faster")
12 GB memory (double that of the 2012 model)
Dual upgraded GPUs (+1 GPU)
256 GB SSD (vs. 1TB internal drive)

Second Tier for $4000 (+$200)
3.5 Ghz 6 core Xeon processor (+1.1 Ghz & 1/2 the cores)
16GB memory (+4 GB)
Dual upgraded GPU's (+1 GPU, +1GB RAM/per)
256 GB SSD (vs. 1TB internal drive)

There are a lot of comparisons we could jump straight into, and there is a lot of discussion about what FirePro D300 offers over the dated Radeon 5770's Apple was offering in 2012 (which had been the same stale offering for the last few years,) or the differences between a Xeon E5 processor vs. a Xeon 1st gen. However, I feel that we can allow for the progression of technology over 14 months to balance these facts out in the wash.

What concerns me more, is that Apple seems to be doing its laundry in a different machine than the one I am. What seems to me to be a reasonable upgrade given the lapse in presence on the market, is asking for an additional investment of $500 more than it did last year for an entry level model. Given the fact that one can build their own machine with comparable specs for $1600 raises the appeal for "hackintosh" systems considerably, despite their current inability to hotswap Thunderbolt ports (which isn't really advised for most devices anyways,) and a complicated upgrade procedure for new OSX releases.

One of the perks that is being marketed openly is that the machine is made exclusively in the US. (How far this actually reaches remains to be determined, but for all the "recent" Foxcon press, I feel this is a smart move on behalf of the company, and would add to the premium of the machine.)

Considering that in their latest press release, Apple is marketing the new Mac Pro as the computer that you'll have for "the next ten years," the reccomendation follows that one could build a hackintosh once the Mavericks OS is cracked, and have the same decade proof machine for almost a full $1000 less than the baseline offering.

In business, the money that you pay a company that is above the understood markup is called the "goodwill" of that company. Given the alternatives in forming a comparable machine, it seems Apple may have overreached their initial pricing on these machines, given also that the company has previously held a strong policy of keeping their other products relatively price-locked, despite whatever new add-ons they may be offering in order to remain competitive with market trends. Do you think Apple's goodwill offering is worth what they're asking?

Systems Integration and Video Design for Contemporary Theater

In the theater community, there is a noticeable lack of education concerning video engineering & production. The normative role of the video designer has been heightened to an aesthetic, image based practice in the modes of lighting and scenic design, but has failed to keep pace with the engineering education demanded by scenic, acoustic and electrics engineers. Carpentry crew calls support the work of a scenic designer, electrics crews support the work of lighting and sound designers, but very rarely does a production ever employ the required breadth of support for a video designer, and quite often, the subsequent departments are left to pick up the slack for a field they have little to no understanding in while producers wonder why deadlines aren't being met, and shop supervisors quickly try to understand a menagerie of technologies that require a frequently underestimated learning curve to comprehend.

In most armed forces worldwide, there are two distinct career paths, that of the commissioned officer, and that of enlisted service-members. While officers command respect due to their station, officer's with a history of prior enlisted service are some of the most valuable members of military society due to their comprehensive and applied understanding of the actions resulting from their decisions. Having experienced this firsthand in my own service, this was a lesson I took to heart, and I truly believe that a designer (who operates in many capacities that are similar to a commissioned officer) will be the most successful in a career that is based on an comprehensive and applied understanding of the engineering that is involved with each of their design elements. (I would even go so far as to say that it is a designer's responsibility to have this understanding.) For scenic designers, this is an education born in the scene shop. Structural mechanics, material tensions ratings, and load bearing capacities flesh out this vocation. Basic Electricity, electrical safety and proprietary console programming are the primary fields of focus for a lighting designer. For the Sound Designer, an understanding of acoustics, dispersion, tuning, signal flow and systems integration all become players. For the video engineer; optics, IT/Networking, programming and systems integration.

Hold up, he just said systems integration... twice!? Whats up with that?

Formal systems integration is a relatively new concept to the world of theater. Scenic designers do not require their assistance until very high end scenic elements are being produced involving hydraulics, lifts and moving scenery. Lighting designers typically operate in proprietary console systems that lack open source operability, and therefore do not require much support from a systems integrator. Sound Designers, who very often employ devices such as timecode, MIDI Show Control and FFT analysis/tuning employ the skills of a systems integrator when they do so. Video departments, which are currently very open source, are perhaps the most involved in systems integration of any field. It is safe to say that systems integration is the most often underestimated/ignored position I see producers, designers and fellow peers fail to recognize as a major component of any show until it is, most often, too late. This is evidenced in a general aversion (on the part of some directors/designers) to working with video components, the frequent and drastic cutting/downsizing of video production past an original design, and the last-minute panics induced when a system is either not properly installed, or an engineer hasn't been hired to maintain said systems past their initial tech “run-in” period.

Beijing University's Introduction to Information Engineering Program defines Systems Integration as,

“...a breadth of knowledge rather than a depth of knowledge. These skills are likely to include software and hardware engineering, interface protocols, and general problem solving skills. It is likely that the problems to be solved have not been solved before except in the broadest sense. They are likely to include new and challenging problems with an input from a broad range of engineers where the system integration engineer "pulls it all together.”

A Systems Integrator is defined as,

“... a person or company that specializes in bringing together component subsystems into a whole and ensuring that those subsystems function together, a practice known as system integration. Systems integrators may work in many fields but the term is generally used in the information technology (IT) field, the defense industry, or in media.”

In video design, programs such as the PC based “Watchout” are respected for their ability to reduce the workload of a systems integrator, but very often this is not an option due to budgetary restrictions and/or not desired due to the tradeoff you get when you sacrifice control for ease of installation. One designer with a knack for programming in simple interfaces and a knack for computers can handle Watchout with ease, but is limited in the complexity of the system and the amount of control over the finer elements of video delivery.

PC based d3, (which costs substantially more than Watchout,) provides the level of control and stability (most times) that gives more in the field of control, but sacrifices for it in making the system harder to maintain, program and manage.

Mac based Isadora is a popular choice among most entry-level video teams due to its low cost and scalable form factor. The epitome of open source video programming, there is almost no component you aren't able to hook into “Izzy” on the fly, but the stability and level of computer science “know-how” required to program and connect a system stable enough to run a show makes the program less desirable to producers counting on a failsafe video delivery system for every show. Isadora systems perhaps benefit the most from the work of a systems integrator.

Speaking of stability, fail-safing is one of the primary responsibilities of a systems integrator. This occurs whenever a redundant system is designed to take over when one computer fails, or system/file redundancy habits are employed in a productions workflow, (yes, with paperwork too!)

While it is just as important to have an eye on a production that serves a collective narrative, it is also equally as important to have that narrative exist, with due respect, in reality. Western production society historically has placed an exorbitant amount of importance on the “ideas” we have, when in reality, it's the “doing” of those ideas that actually produces art. Knowing how to manifest an idea, however unshackled it originally may be, is quite literally a requirement placed on any artist who eventually needs to “make something of themselves.” It is not only necessary to design an inspiring idea, but it is also necessary to understand the implications your ideas have on the world around you. Working in opposition to this idea is irresponsible, and quite frankly, rude to those with whom you work, and rude to the work you yourself are trying to honor. The role of the systems integrator in relation to the fields of design is one that should be recognized from the very early stages of creative development. As technology capabilities increase and the demand/desire for these technologies is asked for in the arts, proper planning and support for these elements is required and the systems integrator will perhaps someday provide their own independent careers for engineers desiring to work in support of the arts. For now however, we must make sure to set a place at our tech tables for a voice which is constantly asking for more information, and requiring the support of the design teams we build that include video.

Video Engineering 101 - The CPU (laptops beware)

(Special thanks to David Bengali for his OmniGraffle wizarding & support)

Ok, so you want to build a video rig, and its on a budget. You need something portable, yet you also need performance. Something easy to use and something you know will get the job done and support the software you know is popular.

If we look at this list and decide, among the myriad of available machines, which one to go with, a lot of people might lean toward a Macbook Pro or an Ultrabook such as the Macbook AIR. With the super portability, available SSD's and no need for an external monitor, they offer a lot of convenience in the initial set up and tear down for tech booths that are already cramped for space in most theaters.

However, what these machines offer in ease of use is paid for, sometimes dearly, in function and performance.

A show requires from a computer, things we don't normally think about when operating a computer in our day-to-day tasks.

Things that are convenient and save on battery life for instance, such as auto-dimming screens, become a detriment to an operator trying to monitor a video control station and keep video performance stable.

Because of these types of things, laptops are a less than ideal choice for any theater trying to run video or audio.

If you're trying to run more than one video output, such as an additional TV or more than one projector, the problems start to stack quickly.

***

For comparisons sake, I am going to provide two systems that I believe represent the 

two ends of the spectrum from an systems engineering point of view. There are plenty 

of machines that fall in-between the specs of these two machines, but as far as 

hardware that has been proposed to me for use in shows, both of these units apply.

***

Let's take a look at a machine that was recently used in a production, off-broadway, for integrating two projectors and a camera:

Above is a machine with fully installed (and customizable) input and output solutions. 

PROS

1.) Fast, multi-core processor 

In this particular model, there were 12 cores. a Quad core is sufficient for our needs, and some savvy engineers can get away with running dual cores of sufficient speeds, but a single core processor suffers from an inability to multi-task in the way that multiple cores offer. 

2.) RAM with sufficient overhead 

While 32 GB isn't required for the rendering tasks the machine will likely be performing, it offers peace-of-mind in the fact that the machine won't be bogged down and lag/drop your frames during playback.

3.) A not-too-recent Operating System 

While having all the convenience and gesture support of the latest OS available is nice, new OS's often come with bugs that tend to especially hinder video performance. Working with more than one video output requires a UI that is stable and doesn't try and think "too much" based on what displays you have connected. We've found so far that Snow Leopard (10.6.8) provides the most stable video performance without forgetting or re-mapping display EDID's when powering your tower up and down.

4.) Swappable graphics cards 

The ability to change the function of this computer from  a machine that can handle multiple outputs (some impressive configurations have been managed,) to also handle video capture via HDMI is what really makes a tower shine. 

5.) Multiple port options 

It's a simple fact that the smaller your machine, the less room it has for more ports. In this tower, we not only have extra USB drives free (very useful for last minute content updates,) but we also have everything we need to manage and upkeep our system once its installed. A common short-sight in producing video systems for shows is that one tends to overlook how the system will be maintained once its installed and running. Having a NET port for attaching the computer to a network is a crucial feature that allows designers to not only manage their content and programming from remote locations reliably, but also to control and monitor accessories (such as display and projectors that also have these ports) and even control them. Firewire and USB ports are a must have now for most add-on units as well. Making sure that you have more than two of each is helpful to any video system, especially if you want to add additional capture cards, MIDI interfaces and run hubs in equipment such as Apple Pro-res monitors.

CONS

1.) Portability

The mac pro tower weighs in at just over 40 lbs. This makes storage and portability its largest detractor. On the plus side, it is easy to run from below a desk and can live in footspace as opposed to taking up valuable table space, and with the utilization of a LAN, remote access makes it to that the machine never has to move once loaded in.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Now lets take a look at a macbook air for comparison.

PROS

1.) Next-Gen Processor 

For the 2013 models specifically, everyone is excited about the performance upgrade in the new"Haswell" processors. While the core clock speed may not be that of a larger machine, it is made up for in performance of the new processors benchmark speeds. 

2.) Internal SSD 

When it comes to a content drive, you couldn't ask for anything faster. Write and Read speeds on SSD's are phenomenal, and, despite their limited capacities, provide most shows with enough space to run the video content of their shows.

3.) Thunderbolt Port 

This is both a pro and a con really. While thunderbolt is both fast and chainable, it is the machine's only dedicated port for both high speed data transfer and external displays. Hard drive array's such as RAID towers are what really benefits from the speed of thunderbolt, and they have been known to corrupt when chained inline with other devices such as displays and other hard drives. This daisy-chaining also makes it hard to troubleshoot and manage external display networks.

4.) Portability 

Probably the best perk about this machine is its portability. There's no denying that, when compared to a 40 lb. machine, the Macbook AIR has the appeal. With a show computer that lives alone in a theater after everyone goes home however, portability might not always be the best option.

CONS

1.) Haswell processor 

The Haswell processor, at least as of its recent release has caused a lot of frustration, especially concerning video performance due to its repeated display failure rate. A recent Apple discussion thread covers these issues. In addition to failed video performance and shifting volume levels during video playback, the thread also cites numerous problems with wifi connectivity.

2.) No LAN Port 

Without a LAN connection port, this machine loses almost all of its ability to network and interface with other machines. This is severely limiting to the ability of the machine to perform as a unit that exists alongside other computers and displays. With dodgy wifi, it's easy to see why working on a small machine like this can start to lose its appeal rather fast.

3.) Only 2 USB ports & No Firewire 

Attach a software USB authorization key and a thumb drive and you're done with this machine. Feel like attaching a content drive, MIDI interfaces, external video cards for capture or additional outputs and you're out of luck. Also, with no firewire port, you lose the ability to work with most audio interface cards such as MOTU's and FirePRO cards. 

4.) Recent Operating System 

Like we addressed earlier, having the most recent operating system has been the cause of video system headaches for at least the last decade of video production. Newer systems come with bugs and workflow changes that provide incompatibilities with otherwise stable software, and increases the likelihood of a critical system failure.

5.) No Hardware Flexibility 

You have one graphics card with one video output, that is shared with your external display port. No chance to crossgrade or upgrade without getting a new machine. While it may fulfill a specific task at the given time, trying to upgrade this machine will leave you with no other choice than to buy a new one.

6.) Portability 

I know I listed this as a pro initially, but without a kensington lock port and no 3G connection, the macbook AIR is the easiest item in the apple lineup to steal. Without the ability trace it unless it is attached to a wifi network, and with a form factor that lets it slip easily away, combined with no locking ability, this machine and its appealing form factor make it a prime target for theft in spaces where 24/7 monitoring is very often not possible, and multiple people are in and out of the space for many different reasons. Even with Kensington locks, theft in theaters is something I am all too familiar with. Perhaps having a 40 lb. machine under a table isn't so bad after all?

7.) Unstable Power 

A common failing with anything that is battery powered is that batteries die. Even when plugged into a power source, a small bump is all it takes to take this little guy off the grid. Even with the fact that you can snap it right back on, laptops completely switch their internal power management settings when unplugged. They're designed to preserve their lifespan by cooling down once in awhile. So even if you push the settings to the 9's, you're not only reducing the life of your machine, but still running the risk that internal setting will change in the event of a battery failure or disconnect. With a hard wired system, such as a tower, you know when it turns on and when it doesn't, and nothing else changes. Definitely a plus when trying to keep a stable and maintainable system running.

8.) Touchpad between user and keyboard 

Another problem with the design of this machine is that there is a touch sensitive pad directly between your operator and the spacebar. Since the spacebar is one of the most common buttons for activating cues, it doesn't really serve to have a mouse that responds to touch between your operators and their main GO button. A solution for this is adding an external keyboard, (which a tower coincidentally uses by default.)

iMovie Pro X or, how Apple left the Pro Video market.

or as you may have guessed, Final Cut Pro X.

Yes, i'm going to add to the already healthy amount of complaints about Final Cut Pro X, but possibly from a more humanistic standpoint than others. In short, the idea and workflow of Final Cut Pro X is centered around a single user creating content as a self-titled professional. It is geared for someone who doesn't mind picking up filmmaking as a "new user" and does not have professional training in how media is sorted, logged, captured, edited, reviewed and delivered.

(Conan O'Brien's team has this to say in "support" of the program. )

This is evident in such features as:

"Sharing" instead of saving

"importing" and "exporting" with a nearly optionless workflow

requiring the purchase of third-party add ons to add functionality for features Apple deems unfit for the core program.

creating in a "storyline" instead of working in a timeline

Never having to "save" and having no backups to speak of in progressive editing

eliminating the indispensable "Bin" form of file-sorting for iMovie's "Events" and "Projects" system

The filmmaking industry has several practices that allow for a TEAM of people to work together to accomplish blockbuster hits that we know and love in additon to well trained individuals to accomplish respectable work on their own smaller projects. Yes, it is possible to create a low-budget film with an impressive story. No, not all films should strive for this. (ie: Apple's $300 price-point compared to AVID and Premiere Pro.)

In short, you get what you pay for.

If you are a one man band, or a poor collaborator, Final Cut Pro X is the right tool for you. You can instantly "share" your works straight to Youtube, Facebook and Vimeo or to your own apple devices (the major default options the program gives you to work with right off the bat.) Can't really get more self centered than that. I'm pretty sure if Instagram did video, it would be up there too. The layout essentially screams "look at me, look at me" like some attention starved prepubescent teenage blogger.

Also, finding your files is a nice walk in the park, good luck finding old proofs of videos you've edited with a client.

If you actually ask for a clients feedback and collaborate over multiple edits of lets say, a sizzle reel, DO NOT USE THIS PROGRAM PERIOD. It uses constant state saving and eliminates the "tedious" need for saving your files.

Yes, losing tons of work due to a system crash is/was annoying

NO, do not constantly overwrite my work while i'm working, that's worse.


If you deliver content to clients on a regular basis, good luck keeping your editing window clean. You have to fool Final Cut with extra folders so that it doesn't see your previous work if you want to keep your navigator from clogging with the unseemly organized folders that also lack a bin.

"Events" are now carried forward from iMovie, and "Projects" are as well. The automatic "mac handles all the messy file-sorting" for you has carried forward as well. Geared for a user looking for a point and click solution, mixed with a dash of "work with this and feel like a pro" are the two main ingredients in the making of this program.

Also, another fun bug, even if you do duplicate a project, and had previously exported a version of that project for a client, the export is DELETED as soon as you render out a new project. It seems almost too stupefying to be the case, but I actually had to go to vimeo and download a low-quality export that had been saved there for review in order to get a 5 minute sizzle reel that I had edited down to a 2 minute reel just so that I could recut my master in order to make the changes I needed.


The sheer fact that Apple is using a marketing campaign to shift support in their favor, instead of a software re-release, is proof enough that they're heading down all the wrong channels.

Their solution? Numerous updates and patches that fix the complaints of the community of people using their software based on said complaints. Oh wait... that's called a beta. In Apple's case, a public, pay to participate beta.

But we've seen this before...

Not too long ago, gaming giant Square-Enix release a disturbingly awful (but good-looking,) installment to it's popular Final Fantasy series of games entitled "Final Fantasy XIV." Sound familiar? You know what Square-Enix did when the public responded to the poor design, high processor demand and unfinished quality of the game as a whole? Fired a shit to of people, got a new director and made the game free for over a year while they worked on a new version that beat the pants off the original. In addition to this, they created an event with a scheduled "in-game demolition" via a worldwide "cataclysm" (complete with a stunningly produced video,) that also became canon with the overall narrative and placed the servers on standby for the new overhaul, while launching a developer's and director's blog, updating consumers on the steps being taken to redesign the game from the ground up, and doing all this based directly on fan forums and surveys.

Now THAT's how to work with a "storyline" Apple.

Build your own Scroller Projection Douser

Building a Scroller Projector Douser 

There are many advantages to a douser, specifically when used with projectors that do not contain an internal iris. Even if your projector does have an iris, the idea of dousing with a "wipe" or a "dissolve" is still an appealing one. For a wipe effect, a standard "flapper douser" can be utilized, but for a smoother wipe with more of a feathered edge, a scroller douser is quite appealing. These units were used in conjunction with 9 projectors on a back wall, meshed to create one large image. The design of the gels seen here and the general design of the unit and wall was created by Peter Nigrini's video shop for the production of "Far from Heaven" at Playwright's Horizon's, with engineering by David Bengali and my company, Lucid Design.

What you'll need:

A scroller casing with operational drums, motors and DMX control*

(*RDM scrollers are not recommended as they are harder to manually control.)

A gel with the desired fade pattern printed on it.

Silver tape

3M 850 Color Scroller Marker Tape 12mm x 3m - Silver

Gaff tape

1 3/4" J-Lar tape

Foamcore & Black foil tape (for shutter cuts, if desired)

C-Clamp 

L-Bracket (used for mounting strip lights)

Plywood shims (cut to size as needed.)

8 - 10 Drywall screws

Electric Drill

Bit extender

A fresh Xacto blade

A clean, dust free cutting surface 

Gentle, acid-free cleaning solution (1 part dishsoap to 10 parts water works well)

Latex or thin cotton gloves

Prepping the scroll: 

*When handling gel, always wear gloves to keep the oil from your skin off the gel. The cleaner the gel before you mount it, the smoother your fade will be. Oil reflects light in a unique way, and will show as an artifact on slower fade sequences.*

On the far side of the scroll, a window needs to be cut that allows the projector beam to shine through without distortion or loss of light. This hole should be cut approx. 2" wider than the space from drum to drum inside the scroller unit, and the tops and bottoms of the hole are reinforced with J-Lar to prevent tearing. 

*Make sure that you tape wider than the hole you cut so that the reinforcement distributes the full strain of the scroll when it starts to turn. Only one side is necessary.*

 !IMPORTANT! - NEVER CUT A CORNER INTO GEL, ALWAYS USE ROUNDED EDGES. (Any small tear made while cutting your window will snap the gel material when it is in use.)

Place your first piece of Silver tape on the bottom corner of the furthest side of the window, this provides the stopping point for the sensor on the scroller housing. This piece of silver tape should be anywhere from 2 - 3" in length since the scroller registers this end at a high speed. Only use completely transparent scotch tape when moving this silver tape around, and DO NOT put it under the J-LAR. You will most likely be adjusting it's location once you've loaded your gel into the scroller.

Building your frame:

Cut your plywood into three pieces, one will be the width of the scroller unit, and the other two will serve as extension arms that will allow you to adjust the scroller right or left from a pipe for a more precise focus.

(Note: the above configuration was utilized successfully for three projectors vertically on a wall with a pipe installed for the urpose of holding these scroller mounts. It will likely be necessary for a different mounting method to be devised for each show's needs, but the mounting mechanics should still be the same.)

After the wood is cut, affix the l-bracket to the C-Clamp and attach the plywood as shown below.

Once the arm is prepped, attach the two arms to the scroller housing (this part is tricky because of the drums, and a bit extender was required to reach the vents used to mount the screws.) Be sure to use only one screw for this as it will likely want to rotate on the point you use, but be sure to tighten the screw enough that it holds the housing against the shim firmly.

*Do NOT perform this step with the gel loaded on the drums, pictures below are of a disassembly*

 

After this is secured, go ahead and attach the c-clamp and adjust left or right as needed. We already adjusted the distance from the pipe on the shim below and it needed to go closer for this particular projector.

Loading the scroll:

This is the perfect time to clean your scroll of any fingerprints you may have put on it (they will show.) Using the gentle cleaning solution, remove any tape residue or oil on the gel before mounting.

 After removing the cover of the scroller housing, use a single piece of gaff tape to fix the far end of the scroll to the right hand drum (this is best done flat on a table, picture above is for illustration only.) 

note: the right hand drum is the one furthest from the light tape sensor in this model. 

Now, carefully rotate the gel onto the scroller drum until you reach the end. (It helps to have a second person on hand with this part to hold the gel in place while you tape.) To affix the scroll properly, you have to look up the tension tables for your particular scroller. For us, we had to wind the left drum 5 times due to the length of our scroll. It may be more or less depending on what brand scroller you obtain, but finding how many gels your scroll print represents and adjusting tension appropriately is important to keep your scroll from tearing or bunching up while under operation. If you have trouble with this part, review your instruction manual's directions for loading a scroll as each brand describes it a little differently. The only difference with a scroll you print yourself is that it is likely shorter than an average scroll designed to provide many different colors. 

Calibrating your scroll:

This part will change depending on what software you are using to control your scroller, but the MIN and MAX values are determined by the location of the silver tape you place on your scroll. A shorter piece of silver tape should be placed on the far side of your scroll before the solid black runs out, this will stop it from scrolling back into the clear section. Attaching the scroller to a PSU at your test table before mounting will verify that your MIN and MAX values are set correctly. Adjust the tape as needed before mounting the scroller in place.

Masking your scroller: (optional)

Another desirable function of the scroller unit is the ability to mask your beam due to its proximity to the lens. Cutting foam core and using black foil tape will ensure this masking does not fall off. (The vents on the unit will remove regular gaff tape after a few days.) Make sure when taping that you don't cover all of the motor vent ports since this will overheat the scroller's internal components.

Happy scrolling!