Return-Path: X-Processed-By: Virex 7 on prxy.net X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2) with PIPE id 4135773; Sat, 14 Aug 2004 03:00:38 -0700 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #101 Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 03:00:19 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0-pre4 (2004-08-04) on prxy.net X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00, BIZ_TLD,INFO_TLD autolearn=ham version=3.0.0-pre4 X-Spam-Level: X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4a3 For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #101 1. Re: evacuation by Simon Shuker 2. Re: evacuation by Kevin Lee Allen 3. Re: designer/tech anniversaries by FREDERICK W FISHER 4. Re: Help with Spandex Shapes by FREDERICK W FISHER 5. Re: Moon box directions by Steve Larson 6. Re: CAD vs HAND by "Scott C. Parker" 7. Re: evacuation by "Alf Sauve" 8. Re: Help with Spandex Shapes by "C. Andrew Dunning" 9. Re: Help with Spandex Shapes by b d 10. Re: Help with Spandex Shapes by Mark O'Brien 11. Re: Help with Spandex Shapes by "Paul Schreiner" 12. Re: evacuation by "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" 13. Re: Help with Spandex Shapes by "Joe Golden" 14. CAD VS HAND by "RICHARD FINKELSTEIN" 15. Re: Hand Drafting et al. by "Paul Guncheon" 16. Re: Hand Drafting et al. by "Mike Burnett" 17. Re: CAD VS HAND by "Paul Schreiner" 18. Re: CAD VS HAND by "Booth, Dennis" 19. Re: evacuation by Boyd Ostroff 20. Re: CAD vs HAND by Bruce Purdy 21. Re: CAD vs HAND by Boyd Ostroff 22. cad vs hand by b Ricie 23. Re: cad vs hand by Mark O'Brien 24. Re: CAD vs HAND by Mick Alderson 25. Re: cad vs hand (long) by Mike Brubaker 26. Re: CAD vs HAND by "Jon Ares" 27. Re: CAD vs HAND by "Paul Schreiner" 28. Re: CAD vs HAND by usctd [at] columbia.sc 29. Re: CAD vs HAND by usctd [at] columbia.sc 30. Re: CAD vs HAND by "Paul Schreiner" 31. Re: CAD vs HAND by "Michael Finney" 32. Re: CAD vs HAND by Steve Larson 33. Re: designer/tech anniversaries by "Jack E. Wilkinson" 34. Re: CAD vs HAND by usctd [at] columbia.sc 35. Re: evacuation by usctd [at] columbia.sc 36. Garde Arts Center by Jeff Kanyuck 37. Re: evacuation by Kevin Lee Allen 38. How do I make it daylight? by BKHAIN [at] aol.com 39. Re: How do I make it daylight? by Chris Warner 40. Re: How do I make it daylight? by "Steven Haworth" 41. Re: CAD vs HAND (longish response) by "John D. Palmer" 42. Thanks for Help with Spandex Shapes by Greg Persinger 43. Re: How do I make it daylight? by Pat Kight 44. Re: CAD VS HAND by "Matthew Breton" 45. Re: How do I make it daylight? by "Joe Meils" 46. Re: How do I make it daylight? by "Elliott Family" 47. Re: CAD and the old way by Loren Schreiber 48. Re: CAD and the old way by Chris Warner 49. Re: CAD and the old way by "Scott C. Parker" 50. hurricane survival by StevevETTrn [at] aol.com 51. Re: CAD vs HAND by David Boevers 52. Re: CAD vs HAND by Joe *** Please update the subject line of your reply to use the subject *** line of the message you are replying to! Please only reply to *** one message subject in each reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:10:28 +0400 From: Simon Shuker Subject: RE: evacuation In-reply-to: Message-id: <0I2D003XMQXKFK [at] apmail3.emirates.net.ae> Good luck, hoping everything is ok -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of IAEG [at] aol.com Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 1:57 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: evacuation For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- well friends, it's that time, 5:50 am we are under mandatory evacuation by 6 am, we have a probably Category 3 Hurricane bearing down on us the house / office is about a mile from the water, , and about 10' above mean high tide, , they are expecting a 10 ' + storm surge, so technically we could be in a flood zone. tropical storm force winds should be hitting here at the house in about 2 hours. hurricane force possibly late this afternoon, early this evening. I will definately have myself out of here by then. not sure what the immediate future is like, I assure you we will make it through the storm, just not certain what we will find upon our return. not sure what phone / cell service will be like over the next couple of days, but I will send out an Email when all is clear and we know what we face for the immediate future. thanks for everyones best wishes, very best, Keith ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <0E6CEE50-ED11-11D8-82AD-003065D2C502 [at] klad.com> From: Kevin Lee Allen Subject: Re: evacuation Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:10:51 -0400 wow, mother nature is a scary thing when the human factor is=20 abstracted. Much more difficult when you "know" someone, even if only=20 via plain text. Be well. Be Safe. On Aug 13, 2004, at 5:57 AM, IAEG [at] aol.com wrote: > not sure what the immediate future is like, I assure you we will make=20= > it > through the storm, just not certain what we will find upon our return. > > not sure what phone / cell service will be like over the next couple=20= > of > days, but I will send out an Email when all is clear and we know what=20= > we face for > the immediate future. > ----- Kevin Lee Allen Production Designer http://www.klad.com 973.744.6352.voice 201.280.3841.cell klad [at] klad.com =F0 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:50:07 -0500 From: FREDERICK W FISHER Subject: Re: designer/tech anniversaries Message-id: <2182e2127d.2127d2182e [at] wiscmail.wisc.edu> > Sometimes I feel like Rodney Dangerfield. > > -- Jon Ares > Program Director, West Linn HS Theatre Arts > www.hevanet.com/acreative Jon, feeling like him is a lot better than looking like him. (Sorry, couldn't resist. Thanks for feeding me the straight line) Fred ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:56:23 -0500 From: FREDERICK W FISHER Subject: Re: Help with Spandex Shapes Message-id: <1e58191e59d5.1e59d51e5819 [at] wiscmail.wisc.edu> > > I was looking for two 6' x 6' or so three point shapes but would > consider4point. > > If you have any ideas please post them or email me at my address > below. > Thanks for your help. > > Greg Persinger > Vivid Illumination You could get the fabric, probably overnight from Production Advantage and cut the shapes yourself. It doesn't need hemming. Fred ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:12:36 -0400 Subject: Re: Moon box directions From: Steve Larson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Check the archives, this subject has been batted around for the past two or three weeks. Steve on 8/12/04 6:58 PM, erikminton [at] bellsouth.net at erikminton [at] bellsouth.net wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > im a student in high school who is head tech chief for the school and our fall > show is "To Kill A Mockingbird". my first project right now is to build a moon > box, but i dont know how to build one. im looking for any way to build it. > doesnt matter if its coming from the downstage side or the upstage side. just > looking for something to make a moon and maybe can use it from something else. > please send me directions > > > ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20040813073846.03f1bec0 [at] mail.hstech.org> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:21:27 -0400 From: "Scott C. Parker" Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND In-Reply-To: References: At 10:00 AM 8/12/2004, you wrote: >It also depends on what you think your students will be doing for their >career. I don't know about this one. Shouldn't it be: how well rounded and/or versatile you would want a future professional to be? I agree with much that has been said so far. I'd like to add this. When you're on the floor of the shop trying to explain something that a carpenter just doesn't get... Pulling out a scale ruler and pencil and drawing/drafting a quick visual explanation right in front of the confused individual seems to be more effective then running back to my office to CAD. However, I tend to CAD in 3D. So, taking the confused carpenter back to my office allows me to show him a rotated unit. When I started as a freelance TD, here in NYC, my work was in small off-off Broadway theaters in which we built the sets in the isles. I would receive drawings, from other recently graduated up and coming "professionals", which were either missing info, or were out right incorrect. (see story below) Fixing with pencil was the only way to go. Some have mentioned how almost everyone has or can afford a computer. Perhaps. But what about the plotter? When I first started CADD, I was printing out 8.5x11 sheets of paper and taping them together. Not as impressive as blueprints. Yes, you can take a disk to the printing place and have them print it. But, how many of us have plotted out a drawing, only to find mistakes and have to re-plot? Wasted trip to the printer. BTW: We all have our own thoughts as to the definition of drafting. Is it art? Is it solely cleanly "drafted" plates with sharp lines and measurements? I could go on and on. From the web: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=drafting No wonder we keep referring to making drawings in a bar.... http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=draughting Oh yeah, the story from above. I was negotiating a rate to build a show. For the fee they were offering, I said I could build exactly what was on the paper with no changes. I had taken a quick look to make shore I could build it in a week with the tools at hand. Agreed. The end of the week came and the set was up and done. I was packing. The designer showed up, took a look and said, "wait, the portal is off center!" I looked up and was surprised that I hadn't noticed it. He ranted a bit while I tried to tell him that I would take care of it... We went back to the drawings to find my mistake. AHA! It was drawn off center. (Really, I didn't notice. I simply built what I thought I was supposed to.) The look on his face was priceless. He asked what I intended to do to fix the problem. I intended to finish packing. He didn't like that plan. I then offered to let him use some tools that I would pack last. He didn't like that plan either. He then asked the producer to come and deal with me. I explained that the designer's plan would cost him more money. The producer liked my plan better then the designer's plan. I finished packing a left. The morale? Hand or CAD won't fix human error. Let's teach thinking first. Later all, Scott Scott C. Parker Production Designer/Technical Director High School Tech Production Web Site hstech~AT~hstech.org High Schoolers: come visit the HS Tech Web Site... http://www.hstech.org Our Mission: To assist High School Technical Theater students in their desire to learn about, create, and execute theatrical productions. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <05fa01c48130$c7008590$0600a8c0 [at] alf> From: "Alf Sauve" References: Subject: Re: evacuation Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:26:15 -0400 Don't mess with Mother Nature. To her you are both insignificant and bio-degradable. My in-laws and my Dad all live in Sarasota. Dad evacuated to Boston (hey if you got to go, might as well make an adventure of it.) In-laws went to visit #1 son in Boca Raton. ALf ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Lee Allen" To: "Stagecraft" Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 6:10 AM Subject: Re: evacuation For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- wow, mother nature is a scary thing when the human factor is abstracted. Much more difficult when you "know" someone, even if only via plain text. Be well. Be Safe. On Aug 13, 2004, at 5:57 AM, IAEG [at] aol.com wrote: > not sure what the immediate future is like, I assure you we will make > it > through the storm, just not certain what we will find upon our return. > > not sure what phone / cell service will be like over the next couple > of > days, but I will send out an Email when all is clear and we know what > we face for > the immediate future. > ----- Kevin Lee Allen Production Designer http://www.klad.com 973.744.6352.voice 201.280.3841.cell klad [at] klad.com  ------------------------------ From: "C. Andrew Dunning" Subject: RE: Help with Spandex Shapes Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:43:39 -0500 Organization: Landru Design In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Greg - Call Scott DeVos [at] 615-264-1682. He has some stock pieces and reps for a company who makes them. I believe that their turn-around is fairly fast. I hope you're behaving yourself these days. Best Regards - C. Andrew Dunning Landru Design - Nashville, TN - cad [at] landrudesign.com www.landrudesign.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20040813125209.97756.qmail [at] web20428.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:52:09 -0700 (PDT) From: b d Subject: Re: Help with Spandex Shapes In-Reply-To: Greg, You might want to look at: www.transformitdesign.com 207-856-9911 They are located in Maine. Hope this helps. Brian Dambacher Production Manager/Technical Director MeadowBrook Theatre Ensemble 120 Wilson Hall, Oakland University Rochester, Mi. 48309 248-370-3320 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1092402776.66d79dd676ed0 [at] www.email.arizona.edu> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:12:56 -0700 From: Mark O'Brien Subject: Re: Help with Spandex Shapes References: In-Reply-To: I have worked with this company before: Sonora Theatre Works. Tucson, AZ, 520-620-0846 They manufacture all sizes, shapes & colors. When we hung a bunch of those for a Casino, they would make them overnight, as needed. Call them, they are good folk. -- Mark O'Brien Opera Technical Director University of Arizona, School of Music Tucson, AZ 520/621-7025 520/591-1803 Mobile Quoting Greg Persinger : > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Hello All, > > I have a client that I am doing a lighting hang and focus for. They have > also requested the purchase of some white spandex shapes. > > Of course after telling them I would need 3 weeks lead time to pull it all > together they gave me a week and a half. > > Rose Brand can't manufacturer them for me in the time allotted. Does anyone > have a supplier that may have these sitting on the shelf or can produce them > in 2 or 3 days. > > Does anyone have some used shapes in pristine condition they want to sell? > > I was looking for two 6' x 6' or so three point shapes but would consider > 4point. > > If you have any ideas please post them or email me at my address below. > > Thanks for your help. > > Greg Persinger > Vivid Illumination > > Greg [at] Vividillumination.com > > > ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Help with Spandex Shapes Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:15:04 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A74AC22 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" > I hope you're behaving yourself these days. As one of my exes used to observe when told to behave... Good behavior or bad behavior, you're always behaving! ------------------------------ From: "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" Subject: RE: evacuation Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 06:20:25 -0700 Message-ID: <000601c48138$4bf9cbb0$726dfea9 [at] DrDoomsComputer> In-Reply-To: Been there. Lost our house and all our goods at Lake Charles, Louisiana in one of the big ones. Everything. Had to begin all over. It does occur. Hope and plan for the best. Doom ==================================================== A Masters Workshop for Entertainment Technicians, Riggers, Public Assembly Technicians, and Educational Performing Arts Personnel - Sponsored by Risk International & Associates, Inc. April 4, 5, 6, 2005 at ELCO Performing Arts Center, Elkhart, Indiana Brochure & Registration Form available at: www.riskit.com/workshops ==================================================== Risk International & Associates, Inc. - Dedicated to making the world a healthier & safer place. Website: www.riskit.com E-mail: rdavidson [at] riskit.com ==================================================== International Secondary Education Theater Safety Association (ISETSA) - Dedicated to the protection of every student in the performing arts. Website: www.isetsa.org E-mail: info [at] isetsa.org ==================================================== 960 E. Bonita #158, Pomona, CA 91767 Phone/Fax: (909) 625-5961 ==================================================== -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of IAEG [at] aol.com Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 2:57 AM To: Stagecraft Subject: evacuation For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- well friends, it's that time, 5:50 am we are under mandatory evacuation by 6 am, we have a probably Category 3 Hurricane bearing down on us the house / office is about a mile from the water, , and about 10' above mean high tide, , they are expecting a 10 ' + storm surge, so technically we could be in a flood zone. tropical storm force winds should be hitting here at the house in about 2 hours. hurricane force possibly late this afternoon, early this evening. I will definately have myself out of here by then. not sure what the immediate future is like, I assure you we will make it through the storm, just not certain what we will find upon our return. not sure what phone / cell service will be like over the next couple of days, but I will send out an Email when all is clear and we know what we face for the immediate future. thanks for everyones best wishes, very best, Keith ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Help with Spandex Shapes Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:22:22 -0700 Message-ID: From: "Joe Golden" You can take raw spandex and cut your shape and use garter clips to attach you pull lines, they are easy to move if you don't like they shape or direction of stretch. >=20 > I was looking for two 6' x 6' or so three point shapes but=20 > would consider 4point. >=20 > If you have any ideas please post them or email me at my=20 > address below. >=20 > Thanks for your help. >=20 > Greg Persinger > Vivid Illumination >=20 > Greg [at] Vividillumination.com >=20 >=20 >=20 ------------------------------ From: "RICHARD FINKELSTEIN" Subject: CAD VS HAND Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:36:21 -0400 Message-ID: I must admit first that I cringed when I saw this topic as it has been rehashed many many times already BUT I must commend the participants in the debate. This time the discussion has been rather substantive; reflecting the complexities of the issues; and all done in a courteous way without the usual name calling! Way to go! Indeed there are quite a few sub issues. Here's one that I have been grappling with on my own with no resolution. Hey! How many of YOU "took a class" in CAD? Is that how YOU learned? So the paradox is....if the teachers learned the software without a class, why are classes no considered to be the be-all and end-all of training possibilities NOW? Again I don't have "the answer" but it is a paradox. Given the implications though the discussion of hand drafting as providing for the foundational understanding of drafting is relevant. Additional thoughts to throw in: Many will be contravercial. So? 1. In teaching CAD cold one must follow two courses of study simultaneously: learning drafting and learning the software, and to do so in one semester. Aargh! 2. Since we are still stuck with screens of around 72dpi resolution it is quite hard to INITIATE many designs on the computer. Even in lighting design I first print out prints of the set plan, and that allows me to do basic layout and choices on paper and then transfer to the computer, doing this several times to "build" the plot. Doing it all straight on computer would not really allow me to "see the big picture" I'd have to keep scrolling around the tiny screen. So learning given the tiny window of the screen has double difficulty, especially for those who do not yet even know what the line types mean. 3. On the debate presented above "why a class" remember I said I don't have an answer, just a paradox. Here are some sub-issues that bother me. a. Those of us who learn software on our own, invest a considerable amount of time in that process. We immerse ourselves and in the process "really" learn the software. I find that when teaching students in a classroom, more often than not they just learn what they have to to get through that lesson. One semester of this would teach someone squat about using CAD! Again I don't know the answer but when I have had students that purchase software on their own and load on their home machines these students are the ones who have gone on in the profession. b. which brings to a second point. Having those computer labs at schools is great on a number of fronts, but here too there is a downside (which stands BESIDE the advantages, not negating them). HEY! I've had my personal computer since 1982, 22 years ago. At what point do we admit that a computer and software to a student is important enough to own? after 100 years? Imagine where we be if there wasn't a drive for students to own textbooks? My own best work in exploring computers often comes at 2am and I know this is true for many. Yet many "labs" have set and limited hours and other issues. Imagine if we always had to do our book reading in a library. Whatever, I find that the work of students who are able to continue thair computer studies on their own at home is far superior as a generality to those who only work in the labs. 4. Alas I have also run into teachers that only know how to do hand drafting. Sometimes they are even department heads. This too can be problematic on a number of fronts. One is the psychological message to students that "all education need stop with your diploma". that "the world was fine when _I_ was a student". We get this attitude all over the place in the academic world. Of course the flip side is that the old ways are also valuable ways. Here their IS an answer: Master the old AND learn the new! This is a requirement in all professions after all. 5. I also find a type of laziness that creeps in when the computer enters the training picture. Here too I don't have a real answer as we all can fall into the trap. Here's an example. When I last taught set design, the students got pretty vocal in their insistance that I just give them full-scale printouts of the (simple) theatre floorplan. Since whether by hand or introducing CAD, like piano exercises, the more time spent doing drafting, the better the development I thought it a shame how the students didn't want to do one second more drafting than they had to. Even drafting the simple stuff like the outlines of the stage, gives the starting student necessary practice. If these were advanced students I would better understand the heat. Even in my own professional work I often draft the theatre facility myself. It helps me to understand the space in ways I wouldn't if just given the plan, and alas many plans I have been "given" are just plain wrong! This situation reminds me of the days when we all had to and hated drawing drafting borders and title blocks. Boy it's great to have that automated in CAD. But so much of our developed abilities with controling line weight and quality came from this seemingly repetitive and mindless task of drawing these. Given the tendancies to be looking always for "the shortcut to education" we often miss the education itself. One final repitition of the disclaimer. I do not think that any of the points that I have expressed negate those expressed by others even on the opposite side of my points. My actual view is that this debate is chock full of paradoxes. RF ------------------------------ Message-ID: <002401c48144$f253e480$0202a8c0 [at] MyLastPC> From: "Paul Guncheon" References: Subject: Re: Hand Drafting et al. Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 04:50:58 -1000 > But one of the first things I learned > in drafting class, many moons ago, was that no one should EVER have to take > a scale rule to one of your draftings. True. Some things one is taught in school are simply not true or necessary. Some are the intructor's pet choice or peeve... dressed up to be a law. I don't think I'm going to waste my time trying to envisage every possible dimension the builder/installer is going to want or need. As far as hand drafting, my opinion is you should teach it although I don't think you have near enough time. CAD is real important too. I've made my position on this issue clear (I think) previously. I use both methods. CAD for space planning, hand for final drawings... way faster. Laters, Paul "Someone removed all the twos from this deck," Tom deduced. ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Hand Drafting et al. Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:49:45 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Mike Burnett" Or you could use a stylus on a digital tablet with a CAD program and have the best of both worlds. Mike Burnett, M.F.A. Chair, Department of Theatre =20 Huntington College Honoring Christ in Scholarship and Service =20 260-359-4279 office 260-359-4249 fax =20 mburnett [at] huntington.edu www.huntington.edu/theatre I always thank God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus. For in him you have been enriched in every way - in all your speaking and in all your knowledge. --1 Corinthians 1:4-5=20 "We are such stuff as dreams are made on and our little life is rounded with a sleep..." --The Tempest (IV:1, 156-157) =20 ------------------------------ Subject: RE: CAD VS HAND Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:54:12 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A74AC25 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" > Hey! How many of YOU "took a class" in CAD? Is that how YOU=20 > learned? =20 I actually took a semester-long independent study in hand drafting, then = followed that up with a semester-long course in AutoCAD (V12, if you = really wanna know). =20 > 1. In teaching CAD cold one must follow two courses of study=20 > simultaneously: learning drafting and learning the software,=20 > and to do so in one semester. Aargh! Exactly. ATST, remember that for an introductory drafting course, I don't really = see an issue with trying to teach, say, hand for the first half and CAD = for the second. Unless it's intended to be more than a mere = introduction, in which case I'd be pushing for breaking it up into two = parts (with hand drafting as a prerequisite). > when I have had students that purchase software on=20 > their own and load on their home machines these students are=20 > the ones who have gone on in the profession. This touches on (or is a subset of) an issue I've noticed for quite some = time now--and one that has been bemoaned in this forum more than a few = times in the past, as well. Most of us here--and a vast majority of established professionals--were = the ones, I'd venture to guess, who went that extra mile or four "back = in the days". Saturdays in college weren't for relaxing or shopping or = whatever, they were for building or hanging or painting. Evenings were = spent usually in rehearsal. We did homework during the day in between = classes instead of heading back to the common rooms to watch soaps = (well, at least some of the time). It's the rare student these days, in my observation, who goes to those = lengths. But were they (or were we) just as rare back then, or is our = perspective a bit skewed? ------------------------------ Subject: RE: CAD VS HAND Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:58:40 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Booth, Dennis" Here at North Carolina School of the Arts Design and Production, our curriculum for technical directors requires three terms (we're on quarter system) of drafting training using pencil and paper. CAD is taught as an elective, with three one-term levels; Beginning (basic AutoCAD operation), Intermediate (speed, style and complex 2d), and Advanced (3d and AutoLisp) I agree with the comment that drafting is a skill, and CAD is a tool. DGB Dennis Gill Booth, Technical Director North Carolina School of the Arts=20 School of Design and Production=20 1553 South Main Street=20 PO Box 12189=20 Winston-Salem, NC 27117-2189=20 * Voice: (336)770-3232 x127=20 * FAX: (336)770-3213=20 * Email: boothd [at] ncarts.edu=20 * D&P URL: http://www.ncarts.edu/ncsaprod/designandproduction/=20 * Faculty URL: http://faculty.ncarts.edu/dandp/booth/ -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of RICHARD FINKELSTEIN Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 10:36 AM To: Stagecraft Subject: CAD VS HAND For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- <> ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:11:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Boyd Ostroff Subject: Re: evacuation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: My thoughts are with you and others down there Keith. About a month ago we had a storm of "Biblical" proportions here in Medford NJ where I live - 11 inches of rain in less than 12 hours. I was fortunate enough not to have any real damage beyond a wet spot on my rug and a messy garden. But many others suffered terrible losses when multiple dams broke and released a torrent. It really made me think about how I have often seen tragedies like this on the news and thought it could never happen here... Boyd Ostroff ooo Opera Company of Philadelphia Director of Design & Technology ooooooo 1420 Locust St, Suite 210 ostroff [at] operaphilly.com ooooooo Philadelphia, PA 19102 http://tech.operaphilly.com ooo (215) 893-3600 x225 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:42:45 -0400 Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND From: Bruce Purdy Message-ID: In-Reply-To: > And the idea that computers are expensive and people can't afford them is > so outdated a concept that surely it doesn't even need discussion. Sorry, > but as someone who actually has to work with drawings this is a pet peeve > for me. Teach your students how to draft effectively on the computer. It > will make the world a better place. OK, I have to weigh in on this. Working in what is primarily a road house, I don't often have need to draw lighting plots, but occasionally I do. As rarely as it is needed, and being a non-profit theatre there is no way that the Theatre is going to buy the (Not inexpensive) CAD software. Heck, I'm working on an old 66mhz Mac with System 7 OS and am happy to have that because it was a donation. When I need a better computer for a project I bring my iMac in from home. If I want CAD software (And I do actually), I'll have to spring for it out of my own meagre income. (Did I mention Non-profit?) As little as I'd actually NEED it, I can't justify that kind of expense. Someone compared it to multiplying numbers on a calculator. You need to understand the basics of working with numbers before you progress to the convenience of calculators. Too many kids today learned on a calculator and have no real "sense" of numbers. They are lost if they get put in a position of making change without a register to tell them how much change to give. If someone initially learns to draft in CAD, I doubt that they will ever go back and learn how to do it by hand. They will not have a good grounding in the basics. Learn to walk before you run. It's nice to imagine that all your students will go on quickly to a position such as the Director of Design & Technology for an organisation like the Opera Company of Philadelphia. The truth is, they may go in many different directions, and end in divergent places. CAD may not always be the most appropriate way to go, so they should know the basics. But then that's just my opinion. -- Bruce Purdy Technical Director Smith Opera House ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:50:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Boyd Ostroff Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Scott C. Parker wrote: > Some have mentioned how almost everyone has or can afford a computer. > Perhaps. But what about the plotter? I have never had a plotter, never missed it. My printer handles 13x19 paper which is enough for quite a bit of what I do (and remember, we build big operas also). When I want large output, I print at either 11x17 or 13x19, take the hardcopy to Kinko's and enlarge 200%. It quick and easy, the machines are self-service. An original printed at 720 dpi and enlarged 200% is still much higher resolution than your hand draftings... Boyd Ostroff ooo Opera Company of Philadelphia Director of Design & Technology ooooooo 1420 Locust St, Suite 210 ostroff [at] operaphilly.com ooooooo Philadelphia, PA 19102 http://tech.operaphilly.com ooo (215) 893-3600 x225 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20040813160113.32135.qmail [at] web50607.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:01:13 -0700 (PDT) From: b Ricie Subject: cad vs hand In-Reply-To: Just a few thoughts... 1st is I can draft by hand without electricity, not so with cad. 2nd, although cad may be faster, easier and more accurate I also feel it is a bit lazy. Just one look at modern day architecture is enough to see that cad is not capable of the grandeur of yester-year. All over the good ole USA I see antiseptic, homogenized, and featureless buildings. It seems that aesthetics have gone by the way of quick and easy, and I blame cad for this. When I draft my selection of tools and symbols is only limited to my imagination and not binary code. ===== Brian Rice b_ricie [at] yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1092413310.6985bd086fffc [at] www.email.arizona.edu> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:08:30 -0700 From: Mark O'Brien Subject: Re: cad vs hand References: In-Reply-To: I disagree about the looks of a CAD drawing. I can draw strip malls by hand too. While looking at Figaro sets, I came upon Boyd's at OTP. The sets, AND the drawings were wonderful, plus very easy to read. If only my drafting looked like that... (sigh) -- Mark O'Brien Opera Technical Director University of Arizona, School of Music Tucson, AZ 520/621-7025 520/591-1803 Mobile Quoting b Ricie : > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Just a few thoughts... 1st is I can draft by hand > without electricity, not so with cad. > 2nd, although cad may be faster, easier and more > accurate I also feel it is a bit lazy. Just one look > at modern day architecture is enough to see that cad > is not capable of the grandeur of yester-year. All > over the good ole USA I see antiseptic, homogenized, > and featureless buildings. It seems that aesthetics > have gone by the way of quick and easy, and I blame > cad for this. When I draft my selection of tools and > symbols is only limited to my imagination and not > binary code. > > > ===== > Brian Rice > b_ricie [at] yahoo.com > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <411CEE1D.8050301 [at] uwosh.edu> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:36:45 -0500 From: Mick Alderson Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND Jon Ares wrote: > I hate to see hand drafting skills go away - sort of like being able to > multiply in your head without the use of a calculator - an excellent skill. > But I can't see how you can cover both hand drafting AND CAD efficiently in > one semester. Now, if it were a 2-semester class...... > > Just my tuppence. And there's the rub. Around here, there is no separate "CAD" class. It is a unit of a "design skills" class for designer wanna-bes. They also learn some sketching, rendering, water color, etc. skills in the same semester. Teach them CAD right out of the gate? We'd do nothing else. I wish we COULD teach it as a separate course, but there just aren't the resources. I love CAD. I use it almost daily, and much prefer it to hand drafting. But I've been using it for years and I'm still learning! Even if you know computers, CAD has a steep learning curve over and above basic "drafting" skills. You have to learn to think like the folks who wrote the program. Programs today are very powerful, but I'd hate to be just starting out. Talk about deep end of the pool! When we teach hand drafting, we don't teach "high end" technical drawings, just enough to get their ideas on paper in a readable form. Students already understand pencil and paper, so they can soon concentrate on concepts like "what should be included on a ground plan". But when we introduce them to CAD, they spend all their time wrestling with the program just to get a few meaningful lines on paper. The computer skills they know from MS Word just don't translate. When the course is over, the acties and directies go back to their classes, and the real technicians stick with it, and evenually they learn the way I did- by bashing their heads on the computer doing a "real" production. The bit about cost is rather misleading, too. Computer prices HAVE come down a lot, and most students have one. BUT the software prices have gone way up! So now they are out of school, no longer have access to a license for programs they used in class or to those nice academic discounts, don't yet have a job but have lots of student loans, and they are now looking at a drawing program costing more than a brand-new computer (or several months' rent)? I think I've not served them very well if I haven't taught my students how to get by without all the pretty toys. It is still about getting a show on the stage, after all, no matter what resources you have available. If I lost my present job tomorrow and had to give back my copy of Vectorworks (I don't own the site license, the school paid for it), _I_ couldn't afford to buy it. I'd probably go back to Quickcad, because its only $50, or try to get by with the drawing module of OpenOffice, because it's free (it's NOT a real CAD program, but can be forced to do basic scale draftings). Or, I could hand-draft, because I still know how. And now I'm signing off for a few days. My university is switching to a new mail server at 4:00 this afternoon, and I'll be without Stagecraft e-mail until sometime next week. Darn! -- Mick Alderson TD, Fredric March Theatre University of Wis. Oshkosh ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.1.1.1.0.20040813111145.01c18008 [at] mail.insightbb.com> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:49:53 -0500 From: Mike Brubaker Subject: Re: cad vs hand (long) In-Reply-To: References: I would contend that "antiseptic, homogenized, and featureless buildings" are far more a product of the dollars that owners are willing to spend (budgets) and changing tastes than the tool that is used to create their construction drawings. To take an extreme example, the buildings designed by Frank Geery (Experience Music Project, Guggenheim, etc). Whether you like the buildings or not, I believe it would be hard to argue that they are antiseptic, homogenized, or featureless. Because of their complex shapes, there are *no* drawn plans--they are built entirely (or nearly) from 3-dimensional computer models. About as far from hand drawn as you can get. They are also far more expensive to construct than your average Wal-Mart or Home Depot store. Give creative architects some credit. Take a look at some of the projects that are featured in publications such as the Architectural Record (http://archrecord.construction.com/), Auditoria magazine (http://www.auditoria.tv/), on web sites of architectural firms, including some of the largest. They probably draft using CAD. Look at URS (http://www.urscorp.com/), Thompson Ventulett & Stanback (http://www.tvsa.com/home.htm), Hellmuth Obata Kassabaum (http://www.hok.com/). Here's some smaller ones that have done some very attractive buildings: Ratio Architects (http://www.ratioarchitects.com/), PGAV (http://www.pgav.com/), and TMP Architecture (http://www.tmp-architecture.com). To bring this back to theatre, take a look at the projects featured on some theatre consultant's sites: Theatre Projects (http://www.tpcworld.com/index.asp), Artec (http://www.artec-usa.com/), Jones & Phillips (http://www.jonesphillips.com/), Schuler & Shook (http://www.schulershook.com/), and Auerbach Pollock Freidlander (http://www.auerbachconsultants.com/). It takes creativity and, to some greater or lesser extent, an appropriate budget, to create exceptional architecture. The tool that is chosen to express that creativity and to communicate the ideas to the construction team is irrelevant. Once again, I would suggest that both your hands and CAD are simply tools. The final product is a means of communicating the ideas in the designer's head to the construction team that is charged with creating them. CAD is a tool, not a design. You can create in CAD a set of drawings that will get you the same building that you would have gotten by hand-producing the drawings--if you can afford to construct the building. The detailing that makes yester-year's buildings so exceptional is also, in the modern United States, often prohibitively expensive (more than the owner wants to spend). This is not true of other parts of the world. The company that I work for is designing buildings in Kuwait City and in the UAE that are stunning--because the owners are willing to invest the resources to have the craftsmanship and the materials that are necessary to make this happen. Sorry for the long post. Mike Brubaker At 11:01 AM 8/13/2004, b Ricie wrote: >at modern day architecture is enough to see that cad >is not capable of the grandeur of yester-year. All >over the good ole USA I see antiseptic, homogenized, >and featureless buildings. It seems that aesthetics >have gone by the way of quick and easy, and I blame >cad for this. When I draft my selection of tools and ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000c01c48155$e12e07b0$0600000a [at] BRUTUS> From: "Jon Ares" References: Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:52:11 -0700 > If I lost my present job tomorrow and had to give back my copy of > Vectorworks (I don't own the site license, the school paid for it), _I_ > couldn't afford to buy it. I'd probably go back to Quickcad, because its > only $50, Hopefully no one will knock QuickCAD -- I use it almost daily! It's owned by AutoDesk, and it's really stable, and works very much like AutoCad - but obviously doesn't have all the features. But, being from AutoDesk, I've never had a problem swapping files with "the big boys" with AutoCad. I don't do 3D drafting, except for faux, old-fashioned isometric callouts and such with QuickCAD. (It's a 2D program anyway, which is all I use for shop drawings.) And I'm old fashioned anyway - I'm always drawing in a 'paper space' mode anyway. I like to see my whole drawing like it's a large piece of paper. I've been using Vectorworks Spotlight at school for light plots (because they have it, and no classes to teach it) - and since I grew up learning AutoCad, I struggle with Vectorworks a lot. Sometimes it feels so "Fischer-Price" because it's so 'easy,' but then there are things I keep going, "Why can't you do that? QuickCAD can do that!" (And Vectorworks probably can, but it's a different mindset, and the function is probably called something else, and I can't find it.) I was self-taught on AutoCad, first with one of those 3rd party tomes for Ver. 10, then with Rich Rose's book on drafting for theatre with Ver. 10. -- Jon Ares Program Director, West Linn HS Theatre Arts www.hevanet.com/acreative ------------------------------ Subject: RE: CAD vs HAND Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:03:40 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A74AC26 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" > I've been using Vectorworks Spotlight at school for light=20 > plots (because > they have it, and no classes to teach it) - and since I grew=20 > up learning > AutoCad, I struggle with Vectorworks a lot. =20 I know the feeling. It's been eleven years since I played with AutoCAD, = but I still find myself thinking about CAD drafting based on that = mindset, and I still sometimes have trouble wrapping my brain cell = around the VectorWorks approach. Which brings up another point in this whole discussion...if you're going = to teach CAD exclusively, what platform do you use? What's the = criteria? This industry is split pretty well between the two biggies = for larger budgeted venues, with a smattering of lower-end software for = those who can't afford the big boys, and there's enough differences = between each and every one of those that confining the class to a single = software package without a firm grasp of the basics that underlie them = all can be detrimental to the students. And those underlying basics, IMO, should be taught in hand drafting; = that's the mindset that is as close to cross-platform learning as we can = currently get. Identifying the concepts with "how to do it in = AutoCAD/VectorWorks/MS Paint" trains the brain to think in terms of the = particular program the student learns in...and that's a training that is = difficult to unlearn when faced with different software at different = venues. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <3196.129.252.241.105.1092421353.squirrel [at] webmail.columbia.sc> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:22:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND From: usctd [at] columbia.sc Wow, I never expected this to get so much air time. I appreciate all of your comments greatly. They have helped my realize a few things: 1. I feel that CAD is just as much a drafting tool as a T square is. There is no difference, it is just a different mind set. I am teaching MFA students who were born in the 80's. BORN IN THE 80'S! I don't think they will see CAD as limiting in their design style. In fact I think they will see it as a huge springboard for their designs. They will be able to use more "designerly" programs like Photoshop to ultimately create the looks and textures that they want. 2. I disagree with those that say that creativity is drowned by the program. You just have to learn how to make the tool work. This is true in any case. I will grant you that the likelyhood that a design will look more "geometric" is potentialy more true of someone that uses CAD. However, this is a function of not having learned all that the program can do. This will pass with time. 3. One semester is not enough time, and we realize this. There are issues that I am not going to go into now that have led to this decision. This class is the first step. As they go through the program they will be continuously challenged on their work. I make a point of reviewing and critiquing all the plates that they produce for clarity and style. (I couldn't design a set if my life depended on it, so I leave that criticism to the design faculty) 4. The students have separate classes in hand drawing. We understand that this is an invaluable tool they will need to suplement their repertoire. I am a big fan of the "napkin design". It has saved me once or twice. 5. The students all have their own computers and a copy of the program. The academic version of Vectorworks is about $200. Students can spend more on books for one class. Access is not a concern. 6. Yes, Longstreet Theatre still desperately needs a renovation. We are working on that! I am sure there will be more from me later. I have to get back to work. Once again thanks much for all the traffic! -- Eric Rouse TD-University of SC, Columbia Freelance Foyboy ------------------------------ Message-ID: <3208.129.252.241.105.1092421592.squirrel [at] webmail.columbia.sc> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:26:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND From: usctd [at] columbia.sc I have used AutoCAD for 10 years now. I will be teaching Vectorworks. This seems to be the general standard for lighting and scene designers. I encourage TD's to stick with ACAD. I still encounter the same issues you brought up. They are so very different. My biggest hurdle is setting up drawings. I see the plot as the final product and none of the Vectorworks books realy discuss the ins and outs of setting up a multi plate drawing. -- Eric Rouse TD-University of SC, Columbia Freelance Foyboy > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > >> I've been using Vectorworks Spotlight at school for light >> plots (because >> they have it, and no classes to teach it) - and since I grew >> up learning >> AutoCad, I struggle with Vectorworks a lot. > > I know the feeling. It's been eleven years since I played with AutoCAD, > but I still find myself thinking about CAD drafting based on that mindset, > and I still sometimes have trouble wrapping my brain cell around the > VectorWorks approach. > > Which brings up another point in this whole discussion...if you're going > to teach CAD exclusively, what platform do you use? What's the criteria? > This industry is split pretty well between the two biggies for larger > budgeted venues, with a smattering of lower-end software for those who > can't afford the big boys, and there's enough differences between each and > every one of those that confining the class to a single software package > without a firm grasp of the basics that underlie them all can be > detrimental to the students. > > And those underlying basics, IMO, should be taught in hand drafting; > that's the mindset that is as close to cross-platform learning as we can > currently get. Identifying the concepts with "how to do it in > AutoCAD/VectorWorks/MS Paint" trains the brain to think in terms of the > particular program the student learns in...and that's a training that is > difficult to unlearn when faced with different software at different > venues. > ------------------------------ Subject: RE: CAD vs HAND Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:31:55 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A74AC27 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" > I have used AutoCAD for 10 years now. I will be teaching=20 > Vectorworks.=20 > This seems to be the general standard for lighting and scene=20 > designers. I > encourage TD's to stick with ACAD. Why would you encourage TDs to stick with AutoCAD if it's been your = experience that more scenic designers use VectorWorks? ------------------------------ Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:58:17 -0700 Message-ID: From: "Michael Finney" Boy, this is probably going to sound a little strange coming from me, considering that I live and die by CAD anymore, but: I'd suggest spending a week (maybe 2) on the basics of hand drafting. Nothing fancy - just sheet layout, basic line work (including line weights), dimensioning, and very simple lettering. Probably a single exercise in taking a shape of some kind and drafting 3 views of it would be fine. I've got a few reasons for that (purely based on my personal experience): 1) I think a basic understanding of the *concepts* of drafting is a little easier for many people to grasp when the mechanics are simplified as much as possible. Drawing a line by hand (aided by tools) is pretty darned simple. Personally, I've found that having the kinesthetic feedback of hand drafting seems to help the learning curve as well. There are studies out there that seem to indicate that physical involvement helps the learning process for these kind of integrated left brain/right brain activities, but I don't think that plays into this too much. 2) I'm such a CAD geek that I have my full CAD set-up on my laptop, and it travels everywhere with me. I've spent quite a few hours in hotel rooms in strange places redrafting projects on the laptop. And I *still* end up having to do simple hand drafted details (because of simplicity, because I *don't* have the computer with me in the middle of the lake (I swear to god!), because I've killed my third battery of the day and there's no AC, or because the demons of stupidity have infected my hands). Again, nothing fancy - but it sure helps to be able crank out a simple, clear drawing by hand. 3) If you go into an area where you interface with architects and engineers on construction jobs, it's not uncommon to be handed drawing sets to be reviewed and redlined. A lot of times, these are hard copies - which means that you'll need to make the notes and any revisions by hand. Yet again, nothing fancy - but it helps if you've learned clear lettering and basic drafting conventions. 4) Personal opinion: I really like having people working for me in fabrication who can dash off a quick drawing on their own if they need to use it on the shop floor (or in installation). I can't count the number of times a guy doing fab for me has come up to me with a very quick sketch that was done on graph paper to communicate how they want to build an element. Sometimes it's an elaboration of an existing drawing, sometimes it's a change, sometimes it's a sub-assembly that they want to farm out to somebody else. In any case - if they can sketch it cleanly by hand, it's a huge advantage. Even if it's on a bar napkin! 5) This one is more psychological - there are a lot of designers who aren't using CAD. A lot of them never will. Personally, I've found that it really helps the collaborative process with an all-hand designer if you can also work with them a bit (in meetings anyway) by hand. It removes one more of those design/technical barriers - and that's always a good thing. =20 Just my 2 yen! Michael Finney Thinkwell Design & Production mfinney [at] thinkwelldesign.com =20 http://www.thinkwelldesign.com =20 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:08:38 -0400 Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND From: Steve Larson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Good discussion. Instruction at college SHOULD include Photoshop. It is an integral part of my designwork. I can take a photo that I shot and easily convert it to a line drawing in Photoshop, scale it to the proper size and then build it. I can even take the colors and textures in the photo and change them to whatever I want to paint. Steve on 8/13/04 2:22 PM, usctd [at] columbia.sc at usctd [at] columbia.sc wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Wow, I never expected this to get so much air time. I appreciate all of > your comments greatly. They have helped my realize a few things: > > 1. I feel that CAD is just as much a drafting tool as a T square is. > There is no difference, it is just a different mind set. I am teaching > MFA students who were born in the 80's. BORN IN THE 80'S! I don't think > they will see CAD as limiting in their design style. In fact I think they > will see it as a huge springboard for their designs. They will be able to > use more "designerly" programs like Photoshop to ultimately create the > looks and textures that they want. > > 2. I disagree with those that say that creativity is drowned by the > program. You just have to learn how to make the tool work. This is true > in any case. I will grant you that the likelyhood that a design will look > more "geometric" is potentialy more true of someone that uses CAD. > However, this is a function of not having learned all that the program can > do. This will pass with time. > > 3. One semester is not enough time, and we realize this. There are issues > that I am not going to go into now that have led to this decision. This > class is the first step. As they go through the program they will be > continuously challenged on their work. I make a point of reviewing and > critiquing all the plates that they produce for clarity and style. (I > couldn't design a set if my life depended on it, so I leave that criticism > to the design faculty) > > 4. The students have separate classes in hand drawing. We understand that > this is an invaluable tool they will need to suplement their repertoire. > I am a big fan of the "napkin design". It has saved me once or twice. > > 5. The students all have their own computers and a copy of the program. > The academic version of Vectorworks is about $200. Students can spend > more on books for one class. Access is not a concern. > > 6. Yes, Longstreet Theatre still desperately needs a renovation. We are > working on that! > > I am sure there will be more from me later. I have to get back to work. > Once again thanks much for all the traffic! ------------------------------ Subject: Re: designer/tech anniversaries From: "Jack E. Wilkinson" In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <1092425285.6665.27.camel [at] olympia.drbear.com> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:28:06 -0500 >In August we can celebrate (or mourn) the following anniversaries . . . probably no one knows, but this month hearlds the passing of my first fifty years on this great planet! for some reason fifty seems MUCH worse than forty did. we'll see. peace to all... jack -- Moving to San Antonio by 23Aug04. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <3306.129.252.241.105.1092431851.squirrel [at] webmail.columbia.sc> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:17:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND From: usctd [at] columbia.sc You know,.....I don't have a very good answer for you. I have been using Vectorworks for a limited amount of time, so I may be completely wrong here. But it seems that ACAD is a more engineering-type program. IMO, Vectorworks lends itself more to designer type stuff, while ACAD is more for the engineering type stuff. Yep, that's not a very good answer. Besides, you can tranfer drawings easily enough as DXF. The only issue I have had are a few class to layer things and lineweight problems. -- Eric Rouse TD-University of SC, Columbia Freelance Foyboy > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > >> I have used AutoCAD for 10 years now. I will be teaching >> Vectorworks. >> This seems to be the general standard for lighting and scene >> designers. I >> encourage TD's to stick with ACAD. > > Why would you encourage TDs to stick with AutoCAD if it's been your > experience that more scenic designers use VectorWorks? > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <3312.129.252.241.105.1092432171.squirrel [at] webmail.columbia.sc> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:22:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: evacuation From: usctd [at] columbia.sc I was at my parents house in Puerto Rico during Hugo. My dad and I held our sliding glass window for four hours. We were afraid it was going to blow in. The noise outside was horendous and you could not see more than 10 feet. We had a quasi detatched second floor on the house (In that you have to go outside to go upstairs). After the storm we went outside to look around and found that the entire structure had colapsed. We had not heard a thing. The full size pool table slate was gone. We found it several days later about 100 yds from the house. Scary. My thoughts are with you, and my mom who is now in St. Petersburg in the heart of it. -- Eric Rouse TD-University of SC, Columbia Freelance Foyboy ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:22:57 -0800 From: Jeff Kanyuck Subject: Garde Arts Center Message-id: <001b01c48173$52295880$ed4ced18 [at] Jeff> References: Has anyone here worked in the Garde Arts Center? Can you give me any information on or off list about the place, people, goings on? Jeff Kanyuck ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <6EAA32DC-ED68-11D8-82AD-003065D2C502 [at] klad.com> From: Kevin Lee Allen Subject: Re: evacuation Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:36:19 -0400 "held" the glass door during the hurricane On Aug 13, 2004, at 5:22 PM, usctd [at] columbia.sc wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see=20 > > --------------------------------------------------- > > I was at my parents house in Puerto Rico during Hugo. My dad and I=20 > held > our sliding glass window for four hours. We were afraid it was going=20= > to > blow in. The noise outside was horendous and you could not see more=20= > than > 10 feet. We had a quasi detatched second floor on the house (In that=20= > you > have to go outside to go upstairs). After the storm we went outside = to > look around and found that the entire structure had colapsed. We had=20= > not > heard a thing. The full size pool table slate was gone. We found it > several days later about 100 yds from the house. Scary. > > My thoughts are with you, and my mom who is now in St. Petersburg in=20= > the > heart of it. > > --=20 > Eric Rouse > TD-University of SC, Columbia > Freelance Foyboy > > ----- Kevin Lee Allen Production Designer http://www.klad.com 973.744.6352.voice 201.280.3841.cell klad [at] klad.com =F0 ------------------------------ From: BKHAIN [at] aol.com Message-ID: <59.130f0cf0.2e4e832a [at] aol.com> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:48:42 EDT Subject: How do I make it daylight? Hi everybody, I've just designed lights for 'The Drawer Boy' by Michael Healy. Inventory was 24 - 6" fresnels and 20 Source Four Jr's. And some PAR 38's. And, of course, a $50 lighting budget. And my question is how do you all make it really look like a sunny day outside? The set design is house interior on 16" platforms upstage and front yard downstage. What's the best way to make it really look like sunshine? How do you get that bright, even, dispersed sunlight look? I've been doing lighting for 20 years and still haven't really found a good sunlight design. Any suggestions? Thanks Benjamin Hain Technical Director / Lighting Designer Jon Hassler Theatre Plainview, Minnesota ------------------------------ Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20040813140242.009eae30 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:04:02 -0700 From: Chris Warner Subject: Re: How do I make it daylight? In-Reply-To: At 04:48 PM 8/13/04 -0400, you wrote: >For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see >--------------------------------------------------- > >Hi everybody, > >I've just designed lights for 'The Drawer Boy' by Michael Healy. Inventory >was 24 - 6" fresnels and 20 Source Four Jr's. And some PAR 38's. And, of >course, a $50 lighting budget. > >And my question is how do you all make it really look like a sunny day >outside? The set design is house interior on 16" platforms upstage and >front yard >downstage. What's the best way to make it really look like sunshine? How >do you >get that bright, even, dispersed sunlight look? > >I've been doing lighting for 20 years and still haven't really found a good >sunlight design. > >Any suggestions? Use R60, and a safe yellow. What I do is make the R60 REALLY bright, then I balance with the warm Yellow color. I did this for the last scene of I Hate Hamlet, only it was all indoors. My .02. Chris ------------------------------ Subject: RE: How do I make it daylight? Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:21:33 -0500 Message-ID: <721DC9EE550F834A92EC08BDC332B0EE016080C3 [at] trader.river.idm.com> From: "Steven Haworth" I usually take a McCandleless cross-light approach, using R60 and R08 = (though I've tried R04, R304 and R05 also - but I like R08 best for = bright sunlight, I think). For some shows (musicals, usually) where I need more variety, I've also = used a cross-light of R55 and R08, with a straight-on wash of R60. (For = example, the R55 can be crossed w/something like R64 for night, letting = me hang 2 colors on one side but only one on the other). I haven't tried it, but a head-on wash of R60 with R08 from the sides = might work, or even R08 from the front and R60 from both sides, or = perhaps slightly front/sides. - Steven (sjh [at] idm.com) --------------------------- http://www.stagelights.info ------------------------------ Message-Id: <200408132123.CEI79774 [at] ms7.netsolmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:23:18 -0700 From: "John D. Palmer" Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND (longish response) Hi all, Let's just start with there have been some really good points brought up. I know that I try to make my CAD drawings emulate the best features of my hand drafting including better more legible lettering. It is good that I know the basics of hand drafting for sketching a quick drawing. It was easy for me to transition from hand to CAD because I knew how it was supposed to look, and I had an understanding of scale. This brings me to my point, some people will learn best with a pencil in their hand others will be able to go directly to the computer. So my very humble advise is to start with a few quick hand drafting lessons and then move on to cover the reason that students are taking the class, CAD. If you find that students are having trouble grasping some of the concepts, then take the time to show how to do it/ how it should turn out by hand. In point of fact, I still use a pencil to sketch ideas and dimensions before and during the process of entering my design ideas into the CAD program. Remember, CAD= computer assisted design. Stepping down and backing away from the soap box! Good luck to all in the SE. May clear skies come shortly! John D. Palmer Palmer & Company Design & Production Los Angeles, Ca. (213) 453-1547 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:23:20 -0500 Subject: Thanks for Help with Spandex Shapes From: Greg Persinger Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Hello All, Thanks for the help with the spandex shapes. I have found a solution. Sincerely, Greg Persinger Vivid Illumination Greg [at] Vividillumination.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <411D72CE.3030008 [at] peak.org> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:02:54 -0700 From: Pat Kight Subject: Re: How do I make it daylight? References: In-Reply-To: BKHAIN [at] aol.com wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Hi everybody, > > I've just designed lights for 'The Drawer Boy' by Michael Healy. Inventory > was 24 - 6" fresnels and 20 Source Four Jr's. And some PAR 38's. And, of > course, a $50 lighting budget. > > And my question is how do you all make it really look like a sunny day > outside? The set design is house interior on 16" platforms upstage and front yard > downstage. What's the best way to make it really look like sunshine? How do you > get that bright, even, dispersed sunlight look? IANA lighting designer, but one error I've seen many of them make is neglecting to include some shady spots in their daylight designs. Real-world sunny days include lots of shadows, unless it's high noon on the equator, and a completely even wash of bright "sunlight" that erases all the shadows looks phony as hell to me. -- Pat Kight kightp [at] peak.org ------------------------------ From: "Matthew Breton" Subject: RE: CAD VS HAND Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 22:14:45 -0400 Message-ID: > When I last taught set design, the students got pretty vocal in their >insistance that I just give them full-scale printouts of the (simple) >theatre floorplan .... I thought it a shame how the students didn't want to >do >one second more drafting than they had to. I can understand their frustration. If you were to have a visiting designer work in the space, you'd provide them with a ground plan and sectional of the theater, no? So why not afford your students the same luxury? And if they do all need to come up with a groundplan, it's the same "laziness" -- some call it efficiency -- that would suggest that only one person takes actual dimensions from the stage floor, and the others draft off those measurements. There's a bit of social skill involved in that -- it always seems to be the least socially-adept kid who gets nominated to do so -- but no drafting skills, per se. Of course, from an instructor's point of view, you might not want to fact-check draftings for areas you've never seen, or wouldn't care to. That's all right; the first few attempts are usually about grasping the skills involved; accuracy and legibility will follow. Or, how's this for a suggestion: Have them to draft the theater in a different scale than you would normally use. Or, better yet, draft some detail that doesn't already exist -- say, a 3" scale drawing of the baseboard and cornicework on the proscenium; or a floorplan of the lighting booth or shop. If accuracy is important, you could develop ten or fifteen of these drafting exercises, then rotate which ones you use each time you teach the class. Matthew Breton Technical Director The River Rep =========== _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000501c481a4$81b8ad40$81ecbed0 [at] hppav> From: "Joe Meils" References: Subject: Re: How do I make it daylight? Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:15:01 -0500 Pat, There are several approaches to creating the effect of sunlight onstage. Since your set design seems to be primarily interior, I'd say your best approach would be to first, overlight any background windows you have. This way you have very BRIGHT light spilling into the set as it would be naturally. Second, change your filtering to a very pale yellow. Third, rather than light the set evenly, you should instead bring most of your illumination from one direction, high up, then fill as needed from the opposing side. Basically, you have to do the opposite of lighting for a night effect: elliminate shadows, yellowish kelvin color instead of blue, and keep the light coming from a high angle, as if from a mid day sun. Joe Meils UCA Theatre Conway, Arkansas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat Kight" To: "Stagecraft" Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 9:02 PM Subject: Re: How do I make it daylight? > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > BKHAIN [at] aol.com wrote: > > > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > Hi everybody, > > > > I've just designed lights for 'The Drawer Boy' by Michael Healy. Inventory > > was 24 - 6" fresnels and 20 Source Four Jr's. And some PAR 38's. And, of > > course, a $50 lighting budget. > > > > And my question is how do you all make it really look like a sunny day > > outside? The set design is house interior on 16" platforms upstage and front yard > > downstage. What's the best way to make it really look like sunshine? How do you > > get that bright, even, dispersed sunlight look? > > IANA lighting designer, but one error I've seen many of them make is > neglecting to include some shady spots in their daylight designs. > > Real-world sunny days include lots of shadows, unless it's high noon on the > equator, and a completely even wash of bright "sunlight" that erases all > the shadows looks phony as hell to me. > > -- > Pat Kight > kightp [at] peak.org > ------------------------------ From: "Elliott Family" Subject: RE: How do I make it daylight? Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:17:39 -0700 Message-ID: <001e01c481a4$e4759fb0$6400a8c0 [at] chicago1927> In-Reply-To: Kudos, Pat. Thanks! Saved me from saying it. Warmest regards, John Elliott "I've always wanted to be normal,=20 =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 but lately I've had a=A0strong suspicion = that=20 =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 this is it." --J. Skinner. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Eliminate annoying spam! My mailbox is protected by iHateSpam, the #1-rated spam buster. http://www.ihatespam.net -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Pat = Kight Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 7:03 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: How do I make it daylight? For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- BKHAIN [at] aol.com wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see = > --------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Hi everybody,=20 >=20 > I've just designed lights for 'The Drawer Boy' by Michael Healy. = Inventory > was 24 - 6" fresnels and 20 Source Four Jr's. And some PAR 38's. And, = of=20 > course, a $50 lighting budget. >=20 > And my question is how do you all make it really look like a sunny day = > outside? The set design is house interior on 16" platforms upstage and front yard=20 > downstage. What's the best way to make it really look like sunshine? = How do you=20 > get that bright, even, dispersed sunlight look? =20 IANA lighting designer, but one error I've seen many of them make is=20 neglecting to include some shady spots in their daylight designs. Real-world sunny days include lots of shadows, unless it's high noon on = the=20 equator, and a completely even wash of bright "sunlight" that erases all = the shadows looks phony as hell to me. --=20 Pat Kight kightp [at] peak.org ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.1.1.1.2.20040813195600.02f73cd0 [at] mail.sdsu.edu> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:07:02 -0700 From: Loren Schreiber Subject: Re: CAD and the old way In-Reply-To: References: I have decided not to teach hand drafting as part of my Tech Production curriculum. Scene designers may still need it, but I don't know any TDs that do. I haven't touched a pencil since Generic Cadd 6. (Except, of course, for napkin drawings--but that's sketching, not drafting.) None of the students I have sent out into the world are hand drafting--no one can afford to pay them for all the time involved, especially when it come to editing existing drawings. Not to mention, of course, the convenience of merging drawings created by several people into an integrated whole. Hand drafting is going the way of bow pens, slide rules and inner tubes. I'm not sorry to see it go. Y'all that long for the simpler days, get over you bad selves! Loren Schreiber School of Theatre, Television and Film San Diego State University ------------------------------ Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20040813202323.009f0ec0 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:26:35 -0700 From: Chris Warner Subject: Re: CAD and the old way In-Reply-To: References: >Loren Schreiber >School of Theatre, Television and Film >San Diego State University Hey Loren, We are Neighbors actually in about a year I will probably be a student of yours! I am transferring out of Grossmont College Next year. I am studying tech theatre so at some point in time I will probably take a class form you... ACtually because I am a poor student I don't can't afford a CAD tool for Light Plots, so I draw them by hand, however, That is usually just a template thing. Can't wait to take classes at SDSU! Chris Warner Amateur Lighting Designer/Aspiring professional Light/Sound Designer. ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20040813231545.041b5c58 [at] mail.hstech.org> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 23:17:23 -0400 From: "Scott C. Parker" Subject: Re: CAD and the old way In-Reply-To: References: At 11:07 PM 8/13/2004, you wrote: >Generic Cadd 6. I loved that program. Still have the discs. I ran across this site that has creating a "new" version: http://generalcadd.com. Complete with the two letter commands... Scott C. Parker Production Designer/Technical Director High School Tech Production Web Site hstech~AT~hstech.org High Schoolers: come visit the HS Tech Web Site... http://www.hstech.org Our Mission: To assist High School Technical Theater students in their desire to learn about, create, and execute theatrical productions. ------------------------------ From: StevevETTrn [at] aol.com Message-ID: <145.30d56fa6.2e4eef0f [at] aol.com> Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 00:29:03 EDT Subject: hurricane survival The eye of Hurricane Charlie passed over us here in Orlando tonight (Friday 13th!) No reports of major damage or any loss of life, thank God. Ironically, Orlando was host to many of the evacuees from Tampa-St Pete. The storm virtually missed them and hit us instead. Most of the reported damage was further south around Ft Myers/Sanabel where the storm made first land fall. Fortunately it was a relatively small storm (in diameter) and was moving across the State very rapidly so inland damage was less than it could have been. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 01:41:52 -0400 From: David Boevers Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND Message-ID: <53349508.1092447712 [at] [192.168.1.101]> In-Reply-To: References: This thread is interesting to me. Sometime over a year ago I posed the question about whether there was significance to the sequence of teaching CAD or hand drafting (which to teach first if teaching both). To my recollection I was advised (first I typed "lambasted") fairly strongly by the group that you of course had to teach manual drafting first. Now we're wondering if we need it at all. The times they are a changin. A few thoughts: First, I don't think this is either "do we have to teach two scene preset now that we have computer boards" or "do we have to teach screwdrivers now that we have screwguns" or even "should we keep teaching people how to cartoon when we can now print full scale." All of those would be nice arguments to have over drinks someday. The reason I believe this is different is because there is a very real overlap in the teaching of drawing process and drawing content. During the time that most people are teaching drafting or CAD they often wind up teaching about set design or about scenery construction or both. One can't really discuss drafting a groundplan without discussing sightlines and the placement of masking. Teaching the offset command without talking about where to place framing and how corners go together is problematic. So either in the case of "which first" or "which at all" it is important that whatever you are trying to get across as far as content remains even if you've selected one tool. I continue to be a proponent of teaching both drafting methods. I believe that the more tools you have in your bag the better off you are as a professional, and hand drafting is not so antiquated as to be useless quite yet. Also, manual drafting and geometric construction methods are useful to people working in the shop (I am speaking as someone who once had to lay out a 30' major axis ellipse for a showdeck). Also, while we can all work from letter size NTS prints (which by the way most often ARE to scale, it's just "no easily discernable scale") and while computers and enough boot copies of AutoCAD and Vectorworks are around to make us all ashamed, there are times when output is unavailable and duplicating is (I have to tell you though blueprinting and large format copying is often just as difficult to find as plotting), and A-Sheets are ok for the shop, but may not be alright for other applications. I am going on a bit aren't I? I've been teaching CAD to theatre students for four years now, and the last three summers I have taught manual drafting to theatre precollege students. For the last two summers, in an 18 session summer (which is comparable to our 16 session semesters), I have taught both methods concurrently. I find that the kids don't so much need to be taught CAD as introduced to the program and to typical conventions for the type of drawings we do. So piggybacking CAD onto a manual drafting class has been a decent way to fast-track the CAD instruction. I've also found that teaching CAD in the context of the manual drafting course has given better results than teaching it as a stand alone, they're just more focused on what they are trying to do. I also think that learning how to do something in CAD right on top of learning how to do it manually builds an appreciation for the strengths and weaknesses of either method, things that you miss when they are taught consecutively. So, after two years of trying it out I'm pretty sold. My answer to "which first" and "which one" are the same: "yes". db David Boevers - Assistant Professor of Drama - Technical Director Production Technology & Management Option Coordinator Carnegie Mellon University - Purnell Center for the Arts dboevers [at] cmu.edu 412-268-2146 ------------------------------ Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.20040814054429.0132036c [at] pop.paonline.com> Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 01:44:29 -0400 From: Joe Subject: Re: CAD vs HAND This 15yr AutoCAD guy votes for including some hand drafting in the class. Joe Dunfee joe [at] dunfee.com Gordonville, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #101 *****************************