Art-net hardware device detectable for LJ 2.95


#1

Hi all, thanks for support.
There is any chance to output to Art.net from LJ2.95? If yes how I can proceed with that?
Thank you


#2

You will need to use a DMX to ArtNet converter…

LJ does not support ArtNet directly from the program


#3

LJ has not other protocol option besides DMX.


#4

Ok thanks for reply. I’ve found in RAM the locations where LJ wrote and update the DMX values, I closed and reopened the program again and with surprise I see it’s the same location. Probably after reboot it will change. If I can map those locations to Artnet I can fulfill my mission…


#5

You are violating the terms of use.

If you would enable LJ to be used without Martin hardware you would have hacked the software and could be liable for legal action.

Please do not post any of your efforts to circumvent Martin hardware in this forum.


#6

What I did??? I just opened the RAM!!! Shame on you to threaten who is here to help enhance your software!
I payed for my licence, you got my money, that’s the respect you give your clients!


#7

Matthias go to the Police and report them I opened the RAM and see your DMX values! Say them I’m a threaten to the world, give them my IP!
Then offer them a coffee for the time you took them, haha


#8

There is no need to be hostile, nobody is threatening you.

Actually you paid for using Martin hardware, which acts as a dongle to LJ, and no other use is officially allowed. It may enhance the software, but it also may allow LJ to be used without any purchase from Martin which of course we could not accept.
Software licensing is not always clear to everybody, but even though you own the hardware you do not own the right to the software, and trying to read out how it works is reverse engineering which is not allowed, no matter how easy it may be for you. While you think you are enhancing it you could accidentally take away our way to profit from the software if there is no need to purchase a genuine Martin device if you share your “discovery”.

Whatever you do on your own is up to you, but don’t share it publicly.


#9

I suggested it probably ten years ago, and I still do not understand why with the migration to One-Key, Martin doesn’t separate the hardware from the software. Even if it required at $200-300 boost to the cost of the license, there is no reason to not support the use of third-party hardware output devices or IP output, other than “it is no longer supported.”


#10

There is no further development possible for LJ. The architecture is outdated and would require a complete rewrite (which is the reason why no artnet output was added and no new features were done) and we are focused on M-Series only going forward. The OneKey change was done to block illegal copies of the USB DMX box from functioning.
LJ and M-PC are sold in the same box, so users that like LJ can continue to purchase it as long as we can get it work on newer Windows versions, and we provide library support for it.


#11

I USED BOTH, BECAUSE NOT EVERY ONE GETS M-PC, If you look at M-PC it does support Art-net and 3rd part units. Besides everytime buy one it keeps the team in a job and therefore can support your questions.

d