Return-Path: X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp X-Scanned-By: This message was scanned by MPP Lite Edition (www.messagepartners.com)! X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.10) with PIPE id 24668142; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 03:01:38 -0700 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.10 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #517 Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 03:01:19 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on prxy.net X-Spam-Level: X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4f2 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #517 1. Stop and take a moment by Herrick Goldman 2. 1987 Teatronics lighting system by BKHAIN [at] aol.com 3. Re: 1987 Teatronics lighting system by "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" 4. Re: counterweight rigging operation by "C. Dopher" 5. Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation by "sboone [at] bgnet.bgsu.edu" 6. Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 7. leaves by Adair Redish 8. Re: leaves by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 9. Re: leaves by Kevin Holly 10. intellectual property rights by "David R. Krajec" 11. Re: intellectual property rights by Jerry Durand 12. Re: Angel Wings Needed by Loren Schreiber 13. Re: intellectual property rights by Steve Larson 14. Re: intellectual property rights by Jerry Durand 15. Re: intellectual property rights by "Jon Ares" 16. Help with show selection by Joseph Champelli 17. Re: intellectual property rights by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 18. Re: Help with show selection by "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" 19. Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation by Greg Bierly 20. Re: 1987 Teatronics lighting system by "Bill Nelson" 21. Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation by Mike Brubaker 22. Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation by Jonathan Wills 23. Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation by Jonathan Wills 24. Lights for the deaf in Music Performances by nwwheatl [at] ius.edu 25. Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation by Greg Bierly *** 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: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 08:25:18 -0400 Subject: Stop and take a moment From: Herrick Goldman Message-ID: Stop and take a moment today to walk by your local Firehouse and Police Station and thank the people who work there. -- Herrick Goldman Lighting Designer, NYC www.HGLightingDesign.com 917-797-3624 "To the scores of silent alchemists who wreak their joy in darkness and in light bringing magic to life, we bow most humbly. "-CDS ------------------------------ From: BKHAIN [at] aol.com Message-ID: <36.7a150a76.305593c0 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:05:52 EDT Subject: 1987 Teatronics lighting system Hi all, The background story is a long and complicated tale about the former TD and the lack of money spent on the theater department but I'm working on that. And I'm told the theater is scheduled for major renovation next year.... However right now, I work at a community college that has a Teatronics 'Producer' lightboard, (2 scene 24 channel) with Teatronics Genesis dimmers that were put in about 1987. When we tried bringing in a new lightboard it was discovered that the system uses a signal protocol called 'TMUX' and that no converter is available. (My ignorance shows; I thought any 5 pin XLR was a DMX plug...guess not...) Is it possible to upgrade the dimmers to DMX? How many of you would even recommend trying? The lightboard is having a few issues so I hope we make it to next year... Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks- Ben Hain TD/LD Rochester Community and Technical College Rochester, MN bkhain [at] aol.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" Subject: RE: 1987 Teatronics lighting system Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:31:20 -0400 Message-ID: <000001c5b6dd$7db77590$6701a8c0 [at] Dell> In-Reply-To: > 'Producer' lightboard, (2 scene 24 channel) with Teatronics > Genesis dimmers that > were put in about 1987. I had Genesis dimmers in Sarasota, but mine were AMX and analog. If yours also have an analog input, Dove makes a decent, low-priced converter (and ETC makes a better, higher-priced one). ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 11:07:26 -0400 Subject: Re: counterweight rigging operation From: "C. Dopher" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000601c5b61f$dabda430$0500a8c0 [at] lpt> On 9/10/05 11:53 AM, "productionmanager [at] minnesotaballet.org" wrote: > The problem I see with that is that every fly balcony I've seen that is > elevated is a very narrow walkway. Seems to be true of most elevated fly galleries. I fondly recall one of the first theatres I worked it - in fact, my first-ever piece of backstage work for a show was as a fly operator (1 of 3) for a production of Robin Hood. The theater architects were clever and put the rail up 20 feet and used a double-purchase system. But the fly gallery was HUGE. Easily 15 feet deep, it was simply its own room, missing the onstage wall. It was used as storage for some items and for the department blueprint machine. The linesets were great and the visibility was unparalleled. Sure, we had to pull the lines twice as far....small price to pay! I miss that theatre. First time I ever saw a flyrail on the deck with an operator basically facing away from the action...well, I thought it was weird. Cris Dopher ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 11:07:45 -0400 From: "sboone [at] bgnet.bgsu.edu" Message-Id: <1126451265-15956.021.444-smmsdV2.1.2 [at] smtp.bgsu.edu> Subject: Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation yep, we do have such a critter. It's called a wire guide, double purchase, reverse rigged system. The one advantage is the newbie operators are facing the stage. The problems are many (arbors colliding, lots of weight in the arbors, the danger of dropped bricks heading straight for the wing, &tc.). Definitely not looking for that design in the new space! Steve Boone Asst. Prof/Lighting Designer today BGSU >From: seanrmc [at] earthlink.net >Subject: Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation > >It's usually a space issue, but one of the better setups (at least for oper= >ator view) is to have the handline on the OFFSTAGE side of the set--rail in= >stalled 180=B0 from the usual. So, one would stand behind the rail and run= > the set in and out WHILE facing the stage. If the rail is on deck level, = >it means the operator doesn't need to dodge scenery in the wing (in all of = >our "not quite big enough" spaces). Of course, then you get into the suppo= >rt of said system w/o being up against a nice solid wall for the T-track, e= >tc. > >Steve Boone? Chime in? The mainstage at Bowling Green State University in= > Ohio has an elevated rail oriented as I described above. > >--Sean > >Sean R. McCarthy >seanrmc [at] earthlink.net > ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <24.784d12ff.3055b362 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 12:20:50 EDT Subject: Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation In a message dated 10/09/05 03:16:33 GMT Daylight Time, seanrmc [at] earthlink.net writes: > I'm sure that would be _better_ (than floor level), but I'd think you could > be more selective than the whole rail. Perhaps a few vanity size mirrors ( > with DS masking) by the linesets in question. Often, only a few pipes are > moved during a particular show. Just place a few portables. > > Thoughts? How about fastening an old-fashioner car wing mirror to your hard hat? The ones on stalks. I have seen similar thingd on motor-bikes, too. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.0.20050911122414.01e53a58 [at] post.queensu.ca> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 12:32:16 -0400 From: Adair Redish Subject: leaves In-Reply-To: References: Hello to you all. I'm doing Chekov's Three Sisters this fall and I'm trying to source fall leaves in bulk. Probably several garbage bags full. Why not just rake them up you ask? Well then we're also going to make it rain on them as well. So we're looking for a cloth / plastic version so that we can re use them. Any thoughts / inspirations / suppliers would be very helpful. Thanks. This is, and continues to be, a great list Adair ------------------------------------------------- Adair Redish, Production Manager Queen's University Department of Drama Kingston, Ontario http://www.queensu.ca/drama/ ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1f9.11db9c90.3055bcd5 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 13:01:09 EDT Subject: Re: leaves In a message dated 11/09/05 17:34:08 GMT Daylight Time, redisha [at] post.queensu.ca writes: > I'm doing Chekov's Three Sisters this fall and I'm trying to source fall > leaves in bulk. > Probably several garbage bags full. > Why not just rake them up you ask? > Well then we're also going to make it rain on them as well. So we're > looking for a cloth / plastic version so that we can re use them. > > Any thoughts / inspirations / suppliers would be very helpful. We did this very same thing for "Uncle Vanya", in the round. True, most of the rain was caught in basins and buckets, the latter having cloth in their bases to reduce the sound. That said, the leaves caught a lot of the splash. It was directed by a Russian lady, one Oxana Melinshskaya, and we even took it to the Moscow Arts Theatre's small house. I lit it, and to my surprise got a design credit on the old-fashioned playbill. I'll scan in a picture, and post it to you privately, since the list doesn't like such things. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 12:45:53 -0500 From: Kevin Holly Subject: Re: leaves I'd have to recommend Autograph Foliages. http://www.autographfoliages.com A little pricey but excellent quality and customer service. Kevin Holly Technical Director-Libertyville High School 847-327-7059 >I'm doing Chekov's Three Sisters this fall and I'm trying to source >fall leaves in bulk. >Probably several garbage bags full. >Why not just rake them up you ask? >Well then we're also going to make it rain on them as well. So we're >looking for a cloth / plastic version so that we can re use them. > >Any thoughts / inspirations / suppliers would be very helpful. >------------------------------------------------- >Adair Redish, Production Manager >Queen's University Department of Drama >Kingston, Ontario >http://www.queensu.ca/drama/ ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "David R. Krajec" Subject: intellectual property rights Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 13:23:44 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: All of this talk about intellectual property rights brings up the issue of photographic copyright. How many times have we used photos from books or magazines in our productions when we are creating "virtual scenery". In other words, projections! I did the show "Good" a couple years ago (about a guy in Nazi Germany that finds himself becoming an SS officer without realizing it) and the director wanted projected pictures of the people caught up in the Holocaust in the background. I didn't think to ask about securing intellectual property rights at that time. Also, "The Laramie Project" calls for a lot of copyrighted photos to be used. If I go out and take a picture, that's mine. But if I use a photo from Time, Newsweek or National Geographic, I would think that I have to secure the rights to use those photos. Has anyone done due diligence on this issue? Opening another nasty kettle of worms, David K. ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20050911112853.029b4e10 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 11:29:49 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: intellectual property rights In-Reply-To: References:

At 11:23 AM 9/11/2005, you wrote: >If I go out and take a picture, that's mine. Unless you take a recognizable picture of a person, statue, other work of art, etc. Then you still have to get clearance from the person or owner of the statue (etc.). -- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.1.1.1.2.20050911113121.03c740d8 [at] mail.sdsu.edu> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 11:33:42 -0700 From: Loren Schreiber Subject: Re: Angel Wings Needed In-Reply-To: References: Hey Tom, I can clip them. They actually come apart at about 6' wide already. Had to fit them in a box suitable for shipping. >Delbert and Steve: Thanks for the suggestion of Loren's wings. I saw them= >at the Expo and they are nice but they 12' wide. That is too big for what= >we need. (My whole stage is only 25' wide.) Professor Loren Schreiber, Technical Director School of Theatre, Television and Film, San Diego State University http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/schreibr/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 14:38:24 -0400 Subject: Re: intellectual property rights From: Steve Larson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: I believe that it also depends on the nature of the photo. News photos about some event don't require releases from the individuals involved. Steve > From: Jerry Durand > Reply-To: "Stagecraft" > Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 11:29:49 -0700 > To: "Stagecraft" > Subject: Re: intellectual property rights > > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > At 11:23 AM 9/11/2005, you wrote: >> If I go out and take a picture, that's mine. > > Unless you take a recognizable picture of a person, statue, other > work of art, etc. Then you still have to get clearance from the > person or owner of the statue (etc.). > > > -- > Jerry Durand > Durand Interstellar, Inc. > 219 Oak Wood Way > Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA > tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 > web: www.interstellar.com > > > > ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20050911115218.029b50a0 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 11:54:51 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: intellectual property rights In-Reply-To: References:

At 11:38 AM 9/11/2005, you wrote: >I believe that it also depends on the nature of >the photo. News photos about some event don't >require releases from the individuals involved. How about using news photos for non-news use...such as an old news photo of a famous statue as a backdrop in a play? Seems you would then fall into getting permission from the stature owner AND the new agency. Then there are "public figures" like politicians which fall under different categories. And "security" pictures as long as they don't record sound. ... and so on. -- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000501c5b703$858073a0$0600000a [at] BRUTUS> From: "Jon Ares" Cc: drkrajec [at] stritch.edu References: Subject: Re: intellectual property rights Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 12:03:40 -0700 > I did the show "Good" a couple years ago (about a guy in Nazi Germany that > finds himself becoming an SS officer without realizing it) and the > director > wanted projected pictures of the people caught up in the Holocaust in the > background. Only once in the many times I've designed projections for a show did I have to utilize material I would have to source - I needed news footage, presidential footage, etc for a production of HAIR. I hired an assistant, who culled the various archives and we either purchased royalty-free material (buy-out), or got permission from the libraries of CBS and/or whoever else she used. Most of the time, I am in a position to 'make my own' artwork. - Jon Ares www.hevanet.com/acreative ------------------------------ Message-ID: <621d2eb00509111301a1ef68e [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 16:01:03 -0400 From: Joseph Champelli Reply-To: joechamp [at] gmail.com Subject: Help with show selection Hello all. Posting this for a HS in Southern Louisana in need: > I am seeking a show for a=20 >group of 10 or so students ... something funny, uplifting ... but with=20 >a message or a dramatic pitch to it as well. I know .. tough bill to=20 >fill. I have several students now who have been displaced by Katrina=20 >(they are from New Orleans and the coast). Several are seniors and=20 >thespians in their old schools, and I really want to get them involved=20 >ASAP. I am thinking about The Boys Next Door, but I have never seen it=20 >and am afraid I may not strike the right balance with the characters=20 >... meaning I don't want the play to be taken as though we are making=20 >light of mentally challenged individuals. Can you provide insight=20 >here? Suggestions? Is there a copy of the play or a movie version I=20 >might purchase? Or can you suggest other titles? > The next show would open in December before the holidays ... and=20 >could have a cast of 7- 10 males (max) and 3-5 females (max). These=20 >numbers are flexible. Thanks, Joe ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <76.5b48990b.30560283 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 17:58:27 EDT Subject: Re: intellectual property rights In a message dated 11/09/05 19:26:17 GMT Daylight Time, drkrajec [at] stritch.edu writes: > All of this talk about intellectual property rights brings up the issue of > photographic copyright. > How many times have we used photos from books or magazines in our > productions when we are creating "virtual scenery". In other words, > projections! It is, as you rightly say, a can of worms, and this is double true in a litigious environment. It depends an awful lot on the country and on the people involved, and on the timescale. Before the G&S copyrights ran out, when you staged one of the operettas in the UK, your licence included Gilbert's production notes. These included what business there was, what encores were permitted, where it was permissible to change the lines for topicality, and so on. I believe that they even sent inspectors round to ensure conformity. Certainly doing a Brecht/Weil show can get you into a lot of bother. Even recording one can, or could. The years pass, and the copyrights die out. The Internet is an extra complication. Once a piece of your work is out there, you have no control. There are sites which archive stories, and for an author I think this is good. You want your work as widely read as may be, otherewise, why have you written it? Yet one such site was so attacked by 'copyrighters' that it just shut down. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" Cc: joechamp [at] gmail.com Subject: RE: Help with show selection Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 17:58:52 -0400 Message-ID: <001a01c5b71c$026e0860$6701a8c0 [at] Dell> In-Reply-To: > >ASAP. I am thinking about The Boys Next Door, but I have > never seen it > >and am afraid I may not strike the right balance with the characters > >... meaning I don't want the play to be taken as though we > are making > >light of mentally challenged individuals. Can you provide insight > >here? Suggestions? Is there a copy of the play or a movie > version I > >might purchase? I know there's a video of The Boys Next Door, because I've seen the box. Did the play at Saint Michael's Playhouse a couple of years ago. You'll need lots of prop doughnuts. My suggestion: involve representatives of local agencies who serve the developmentally disabled. My experience is that they're happy to help, if only for the opportunity to dispel some of the myths about the disability. If you can, make one performance a benefit for one or more agencies. Arrange a field trip for your actors (ours, alas, came back). ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: From: Greg Bierly Subject: Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:16:42 -0400 > It's called a wire guide, double purchase, reverse rigged > system. The one advantage is the newbie operators are facing the > stage. The problems are > many (arbors colliding, lots of weight in the arbors, the danger of > dropped bricks heading > straight for the wing, &tc.). Ok I was described a similar system being installed in a local theater but then wasn't installed as described. What I understood seemed brilliant but have never seen it or heard of it before. Double purchase, t-bar counterweight system with a raised operating locking rail but an extra set of pulleys for the operating line. The T-bar mounted to the SR wall with the locking rail on the onstage side (SL side) of the operating catwalk. This would take two additional pulleys located away from the wall above and below the onstage side of the catwalk. Does this make sense to anyone and has it been done. It puts the T-bar on the wall behind the operator, puts the locking rail on stage of the operator thus watching the deck and batten behind the operating line. I don't care for the double purchase but like the raised operation off the deck with more visibility of hazards. It just makes a lot of sense without a huge increase in cost (2 rope blocks and 20' of rope per line set if you have a 10' wide catwalk and maybe two additional beams running up and down stage for the blocks) At least not huge $ for the increased safety. I know we have excellent flymen that can handle running the line and watching the stage at the same time but change isn't always bad (on the wall "change is good, dollars are better") Like to hear your $.02 Greg Bierly Technical Director Hempfield HS ------------------------------ Message-ID: <22918.69.59.200.119.1126492114.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 19:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: 1987 Teatronics lighting system From: "Bill Nelson" > However right now, I work at a community college that has a Teatronics > 'Producer' lightboard, (2 scene 24 channel) with Teatronics Genesis > dimmers that > were put in about 1987. When we tried bringing in a new lightboard it was > discovered that the system uses a signal protocol called 'TMUX' and that > no converter > is available. (My ignorance shows; I thought any 5 pin XLR was a DMX > plug...guess not...) > > Is it possible to upgrade the dimmers to DMX? How many of you would even > recommend trying? You are correct, there is no converter available. Nor is there likely to be, as there were not that many dimmers made for the protocol. The dimmers should also have analog input. The only option I can see is converting your board's DMX signal to analog and using that to drive the dimmers. Bill ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20050911212746.03a2f8d8 [at] mail.insightbb.com> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:41:47 -0500 From: Mike Brubaker Subject: Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation In-Reply-To: References:

Something like this? | <-----to headblocks and top of arbor | ___ | _O___O <-----two-sheave block O | | 'in' handline---> | | <-------|----------'out' handline | | | | | | O <---arbor bottom sheave | | | | | | | | | | | | | |<|----dead end of handline tension ---> O OO <---lower sheaves sheave? <-----STAGE | OP PLATFORM | WALL-----> Mike At 09:16 PM 9/11/2005, Greg Bierly wrote: >Double purchase, t-bar counterweight system with a raised operating >locking rail but an extra set of pulleys for the operating >line. The T-bar mounted to the SR wall with the locking rail on >the onstage side (SL side) of the operating catwalk. This would >take two additional pulleys located away from the wall above and >below the onstage side of the catwalk. ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 23:14:23 -0400 From: Jonathan Wills Reply-To: jbwills [at] gmail.com Subject: Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation In-Reply-To: References:

> Something like this? >=20 >=20 > | <-----to headblocks and top of a= rbor > | > ___ | > O___O <-----two-sheave block > | | > | <-------|----------'out' handline >| | > | | | O <---arbor bottom sheave > | | | | | > | | | | | > | | | |<|----dead end of handline > tension ---> O OO <---lower sheaves > sheave? >=20 > <-----STAGE | OP PLATFORM | WALL-----> On 9/11/05, Mike Brubaker wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Something like this? >=20 >=20 > | <-----to headblocks and top of a= rbor > | > ___ | > _O___O <-----two-sheave block > O | | > 'in' handline---> | | <-------|----------'out' handline > | | | > | | | O <---arbor bottom sheave > | | | | | > | | | | | > | | | |<|----dead end of handline > tension ---> O OO <---lower sheaves > sheave? >=20 > <-----STAGE | OP PLATFORM | WALL-----> >=20 >=20 > Mike >=20 > At 09:16 PM 9/11/2005, Greg Bierly wrote: >=20 >=20 > >Double purchase, t-bar counterweight system with a raised operating > >locking rail but an extra set of pulleys for the operating > >line. The T-bar mounted to the SR wall with the locking rail on > >the onstage side (SL side) of the operating catwalk. This would > >take two additional pulleys located away from the wall above and > >below the onstage side of the catwalk. >=20 > ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 23:19:28 -0400 From: Jonathan Wills Reply-To: jbwills [at] gmail.com Subject: Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation In-Reply-To: References:

Sorry about that last one was trying to make some changes and hit the wrong button. Thisis what my mind was thinking when I read the description. Essentially a rerouting of the handline through the raised platform. | <-----to headblocks and top of ar= bor | | O___O <-----single sheave | =20 | <------- ----------'in/out' handline | =20 | ---- <---arbor bottom | | | | | | tension ---> O-------O | | | O <---lower sheave sheave? <-----STAGE | OP PLATFORM | WALL-----> ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1126499858.432506128baf7 [at] webmail.iu.edu> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 23:37:38 -0500 From: nwwheatl [at] ius.edu Subject: Lights for the deaf in Music Performances I am a college student wishing to find more information on the use of stage lights to enhance music performances for the deaf. An example of this is in Mr. Holland's Opus, stage lighting is used to signify moods of the music, intenseness, and rhythm. I would like to implement this into my current studies, but am unable to find any research starting point. Any help anyone has would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Nate ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References:

Message-Id: <21aef21afd3ccd69e6862fef7a0328d0 [at] dejazzd.com> From: Greg Bierly Subject: Re: Counterweight Rigging Operation Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 01:30:54 -0400 Ascii art never comes out right in OSX mail so I am not quite sure if either is right. I think they may both be "right". this is purely a guess that Mike is trying to show the double purchase system and Jonathan is showing it as a single purchase system. Single purchase is going to be easier to describe since I can't do ASCII art with my MAC. It is too smart for me and won't let me dumb it down to do something that simple. Here we go: The handline is fixed to the top of the arbor (located in the normal t-bar, wall mount location) runs up through the headblock and instead of turning 180 degrees and running down to the locking rail it turns 90 degrees towards the stage and runs the width of the catwalk (lets say 10' in this example) then it hits a single rope block and turns 90 degrees downward to where it runs to the locking rail located on the onstage side of the operations catwalk. Continuing downward it passes through another single rope block mounted under the onstage side of the operations catwalk and the handline turns 90 degrees offstage where it runs 10' to the bottom block that would normally be the tensioning block in a normal t-bar system. From here the handline turns 90 degrees again and attaches to the bottom of the arbor as normal. Now I had a few other nifty extras that would make the system even "cooler" but Clancy, Secoa, etc will have to contact me directly for those. Is this any clearer? Anyone seen such a beast? Would it work? Again I think all it adds in this case is the two off-the-shelf loft blocks, 20' of handline and 1 or 2 additional beams for the blocks (the one under the catwalk would just need beefed up since the catwalk most likely had one in place for support already. The addition in safety.... priceless! :-) Greg Bierly Hempfield HS ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #517 *****************************