Return-Path: X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.10) with PIPE id 30372404; Fri, 19 May 2006 03:02:52 -0700 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,NO_RECEIVED, NO_RELAYS,TW_SN autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on localhost 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 #813 Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 03:00:52 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #813 1. Stopping a telemarketer by b Ricie 2. Re: Richard's Fotos by 3. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by Jim Hyslop 4. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" 5. Re: Weapons: best practice procedures? by "Paul Schreiner" 6. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by Jim Hyslop 7. Re: Hey, Paul Guncheon! by "Paul Guncheon" 8. Quiet Color Scrollers by Paul Marsland 9. Quiet Color Scrollers by Paul Marsland 10. Re: Quiet Color Scrollers by seanrmc [at] earthlink.net 11. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "Idaho Scenic & Rigging" 12. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "Dre Suchoski" 13. rock and roll hall of fame by 14. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by Jerry Dougherty 15. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "RD" 16. Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) by "RD" 17. Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) by "RD" 18. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures by CB 19. Re: Weapons: best practice procedures? by "RD" 20. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 21. Re: Good mixer type by CB 22. Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 23. Re: Stopping a telemarketer by 24. Re: stopping a telemarketer by CB 25. Re: Good mixer type by CB 26. Re: Good mixer type by CB 27. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by Stephen Litterst 28. Re: Good mixer type by "Storms, Randy" 29. Re: Good mixer type by "Nigel Worsley" 30. foils (was Re: Weapons: ) by CB 31. Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) by CB 32. Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions by "Todd Dupree" 33. Re: Good mixer type by "Storms, Randy" 34. Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) by "Nigel Worsley" 35. Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) by Charlie Richmond 36. Re: Good mixer type by "Nigel Worsley" 37. Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) by "Nigel Worsley" 38. Re: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions by "Salvatori, Jason" 39. Re: Good mixer type by "Paul Schreiner" 40. Re: Good mixer type by "Paul Schreiner" 41. Re: Good mixer type by "Bill Nelson" 42. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "Bill Nelson" 43. Re: Good mixer type by "Idaho Scenic & Rigging" 44. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by Stuart Wheaton 45. Melting telrads by Steve Shelley 46. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures... by June Abernathy 47. Re: stopping a telemarketer by Stuart Wheaton 48. Re: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions by "Peter Scheu" 49. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "Bill Nelson" 50. Re: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions by Stuart Wheaton 51. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "Bill Nelson" 52. Re: Melting telrads by "Dirk Van Pernis" 53. Re: Good mixer type by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 54. Re: Good mixer type by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 55. Re: Melting telrads by "Bill Nelson" 56. Re: Melting telrads by "Salvatori, Jason" 57. Re: Melting telrads by "Bill Nelson" 58. Re: Melting telrads by "Bill Nelson" 59. Re: Good mixer type by "Bill Nelson" 60. Re: Melting telrads by Steve Larson 61. Re: stopping a telemarketer by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 62. Re: Melting telrads by "Bill Nelson" 63. Re: Melting telrads by DonEarl01 [at] aol.com 64. Re: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions by Jerry Durand 65. Re: Melting telrads by "Occy" 66. Will Roger's Stairs by David Wilson 67. Re: Melting telrads by Stephen Litterst 68. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by Dale Farmer 69. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by StevevETTrn [at] aol.com 70. Re: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions by "Peter Scheu" 71. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "Bill Nelson" 72. Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... by "Bill Nelson" *** 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <20060518125753.86551.qmail [at] web50603.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 05:57:53 -0700 (PDT) From: b Ricie Subject: Stopping a telemarketer In-Reply-To: I do not have much trouble with the telemarketers anymore since the do no call list went into effect however the panhandlers LOVE me. I must put off an aura that says "this guy ain't from the city". I must look like a walking roll of coins holding an endless pack of smokes, cause they just about line up. I now keep my coins and smokes. In order to keep my coins, I ask them for some change before they have the chance to ask me, works every time. As for the smokes, I now carry a pack of rolling tobacco with me. When approached for a cigarette I simply say sure, pull out a pinch of rolling tobacco, and offer it up. Haven't had any takers yet. Brian Rice 508-685-0716 b_ricie [at] yahoo.com "Blessed are the cracked: For it is they who let in the light." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Richard's Fotos Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:05:18 -0400 Message-ID: From: Chris, I have C&Ped the text of a note from Barb Lucas at USITT who corrected me earlier this week when I posted about RF's fotos. I just trimmed the info a tad. Sorry if it sounded oddly turned. Was just trying to clarify an earlier post. ;) >"I think, in looking at Richard's photos, that you may have been=20 >confused. I think 570 is our Distinguished Achievement in Sound Design >winner Marjorie Bradley Kellogg (from Central New York no less), not=20 >Sylvia." =20 Steve -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of CB Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 12:21 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Richard's Fotos For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- >the Sound Design winner. What an odd turn of phrase! I don't think I've ever heard those words used in that order before... Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Message-ID: <446C714D.7050001 [at] dreampossible.ca> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:06:21 -0400 From: Jim Hyslop Organization: Dreampossible Inc. Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... References: In-Reply-To: June Abernathy wrote: [a LOT of excellent rules, guidelines, etc.] > Overkill? Maybe. Not in the least. Actors *have* been killed because they fooled around with blanks. Jon-Erik Huxom, for example: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0382149/bio The infuriating thing is that about two years after Huxom's death, I was working as a Production Assistan on a film which used guns. One of the other crew members pointed a gun at me. I didn't freak out, I just said in a deadly serious voice "Don't you EVER do that again." I think he got my message. Given the deadly nature of weapons, draconian measures like that are the minimum you can do. (by the way - nice choice of words: "overKILL" :=) -- Jim Hyslop ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" Subject: RE: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:14:51 -0400 Message-ID: <012101c67a7d$0be1dcd0$6501a8c0 [at] Dell> In-reply-to: =20 > Not in the least. Actors *have* been killed because they=20 > fooled around with blanks. This topic appears every couple of years ago. During an earlier = discussion, a lister (sorry, I don't remember who) posted a photo that dramatically illustrates the danger posed by blanks. I've got it online at: http://www.jeffsalzberg.com/temp/04-gunshot.jpg ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Weapons: best practice procedures? Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:17:16 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A042A9C6C [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" As a once-upon-a-time SAFD certified actor-combatant, stage combat TA in college, and occasional fight choreographer, let me toss in a few cents' worth. A lot of what June said (and others) is spot-on. Frank and I have never seen eye to eye on a lot of combat issues. If the archives were working, I'd say go back and check them out if you want details. Take that as you will. Chris, I gotta disagree with you on a few points (though I totally am with you on the "unsharpened real weapons" part)... > Provide boppers for=20 > individual practice. These can be anything from the big=20 > poofy commercially sold toys to a cardboard wrapping paper=20 > tube. This will instill in them that they can play and=20 > practice, just not with the weapons.=20 One of the biggest issues surrounding safety in stage combat involves understanding where the force should be directed. Mandating that individual practices should not be using the real weapons is a bad idea here, because substituting foam rubber or cardboard tubes throws off the weight so much that--with the exception of walking through the targeting sequences--it's liable to be useless at best. The actors *must* be given the opportunity to become comfortable with whatever they're gonna be using when they're partnered. Trying, for example, to do a moulinet into a downward swipe towards the partner's head is tough enough with the real thing. Trying to bounce back and forth rehearsal-wise between the real weapon and a cardboard facsimile, with such differing weights and weight distributions, adds a level of complexity that futzes with the muscle memory to the point of danger. Also, the suggestion was made that plastic blades, while no-no for swords, are okay for knives. That gives the impression that knives are inherently safer, and nothing could be further from the truth. Real steel for all, and avoid cheap spring-loaded fake plastic knives for stabbing like the plague. > bang from off-stage with a big piece of lumber is a good=20 > substitute, and you don't really need the audience to think=20 > that another actor was realy shot. If one guy points a gun,=20 > and there is a bang, and the other actor spills a squib or=20 > pulls a red hanky out of his shirt, they get what you're=20 > trying to tell them. It depends, here. I'll agree that there should be extensive training by a knowledgeable person, but sometimes this approach of dummy weapon and offstage noise (depending on the venue, audience proximity, and a number of other variables) just doesn't work. There are issues both of distraction (why'd that bang come from way over there?) and timing (Bang! Recoil! Ouch!) that can unnecessarily pull the audience out of that zone that we've tried so hard to work them into. When you're doing realism, there are safe and reliable ways of performing this illusion that aren't so artificial as to stick out like the proverbial sore thumb...but this (in many cases) isn't one of them. Chris, as a sound guy, I'm surprised you'd suggest that *where* the sound of the shot comes from is immaterial to the audience's "getting it"... ------------------------------ Message-ID: <446C75AC.3070201 [at] dreampossible.ca> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:25:00 -0400 From: Jim Hyslop Organization: Dreampossible Inc. Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... References: In-Reply-To: Jeffrey E. Salzberg wrote: > This topic appears every couple of years ago. During an earlier discussion, > a lister (sorry, I don't remember who) posted a photo that dramatically > illustrates the danger posed by blanks. I've got it online at: > > http://www.jeffsalzberg.com/temp/04-gunshot.jpg Excellent shot (pun intended). -- Jim Hyslop ------------------------------ Message-ID: <003501c67a84$172c2a80$0202a8c0 [at] HUNKACRAP> From: "Paul Guncheon" References: Subject: Re: Hey, Paul Guncheon! Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 04:05:14 -1000 <> Gosh... Thanks. Paul "Those ants will never get in here," Tom said defiantly. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20060518141521.50203.qmail [at] web52207.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 07:15:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Paul Marsland Subject: Quiet Color Scrollers In-Reply-To: I bought the Wybron Forerunners because they fit my budget and then added a $3.00 switch for Fan On/Off. It took about 30 minutes per unit to install. Use them in a noisy space with fans on, and the studio space with fans off and heat shield behind the mounting plate. Worked like a champ for the years that I owned them. Paul > I'm interested in purchasing color scrollers for our > theatre, but noise=20 > level is a major concern. I'd heard that Wybron > scrollers were the=20 > quietest scrollers on the market. Can anyone > confirm this claim? > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20060518142622.91505.qmail [at] web52201.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 07:26:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Paul Marsland Subject: Quiet Color Scrollers In-Reply-To: This product looks really nice -- but bless their hearts, they have their S4 lens in upside down. Like when Jennifer Tipton was on the cover of Smithsonean Magazine with an Altman 360Q hung upside down! > The Seachanger color engine is the quietest color > changer on the > market. It's not a scroller, but a dichroic CMYK > color mixer that > fits a Source 4. The only time you can hear it is > if you are > standing 6-8 inches away. Other then that, nothing. > Here is the web > page. http://www.seachangeronline.com/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <21867363.1147963336789.JavaMail.root [at] elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 10:42:16 -0400 (EDT) From: seanrmc [at] earthlink.net Reply-To: seanrmc [at] earthlink.net Subject: Re: Quiet Color Scrollers The ColoRams are a bit "crankier" in terms of keeping them running. They have a tendency to blow fuses if you look at them funny. The ForeRunners are slower, make more noise when moving, and "step" when moving them at slow speeds. So, from your scrollers you hear: "srape" beat "scrape" beat "scrape" etc.... I do have to disagree with Steve just a bit about the power supplies. The current Ram II line is: Option-full: Change fan speed, etc either from the PSU or from the console Propriatary: Only Wybron products use it. Non-RDM: They're changing that according to the guys in the booth at LDI. When they do it will involve a polarity swap so as to match the ForeRunner's polarity The ForeRunner line: Very easy to work with, albeit with essentially no options (no fan options, etc) Compatible with other products: Apollo stuff, Rosco I-Cues, etc Almost 1/2 the price of the Ram gear. More bang for your buck (with scrollers): Forerunners More colors, speed, options: Rams My $.02 --Sean Sean R. McCarthy seanrmc [at] earthlink.net -----Original Message----- >From: Stephen Litterst >Sent: May 17, 2006 5:23 PM >To: Stagecraft >Subject: Re: Quiet Color Scrollers > >It depends on your venue. We've had great success with the ColoRam II line >in both our proscenium and arena theatres. However, the Forerunners were >distractingly loud in the arena theatre. The fans are d*mn near silent, >but the sound of the gel moving was ugly. We reloaded/rewound the gel >strings to see if we could align them better, but no luck. > >Also, looking towards the future, see which scroller line (and power >supply) is most likely to help you grow. Forerunners are only compatible >with themselves, but the ColoRam power supplies can also power the >GoboRam, CXI, and dowser line from Wybron. Makes mixing and matching a >little easier. > >Steve L. > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <001501c67a8e$f70dcfa0$6401a8c0 [at] amd2200> From: "Idaho Scenic & Rigging" Cc: stagecraft [at] jeffsalzberg.com References: Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:23:06 -0600 a picture tells a thousand words. Rob't ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" In-Reply-To: From: "Dre Suchoski" Any idea what kind of blanks and gun that was? Dre=20 -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Idaho Scenic & Rigging Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 11:23 AM To: Stagecraft Cc: stagecraft [at] jeffsalzberg.com Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- a picture tells a thousand words. Rob't ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 08:59:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Subject: rock and roll hall of fame With the recent thread on sound boards I remembered seeing this on the local news last week and thought some people on this list might be interested. http://ksdk.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=96642 Ken Zinkl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:36:33 -0700 From: Jerry Dougherty Subject: RE: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... Message-id: >> Especially in the US, people know what >>they expect to see when a gun is fired. See, not hear. >What do they expect to see? In my 55 years, I've never watched a gun = being=20 >fired, so I wouldn't know (except on television, of course, where all I = see=20 >is the "blood".) If you have a licensed Pyrotech on staff, it is easy to create a muzzle = flash with a tiny bit of airburst powder (pyropak A/B mix) and a pizeo = igniter. ------------------------------ If looks are a concern... I've had lots of success using the 8mm blank replicas. The "muzzle flash" is directed out a vent hole in the top of the weapon, so you get a flash, just not in the right direction. It is fast enough that you see the flash, hear the bang, and believe that a gun was fired. A word of caution, these replicas require more preventive maintenance than a real gun. The components of the blank round and quality of the powder used in them can really gunk up the moving parts. The thought of the pyro muzzle flash effect scares me because the is the potential for some component to fail, break loose, and become a projectile. Jerry ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "RD" Subject: RE: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:07:24 -0600 Message-ID: <011501c67a9d$89004bf0$c083c447 [at] doom1> In-Reply-To: Having done the investigation and all that jazz with a number of shootings in the movie industry and four plays, i.e. two Kung Fu actors who got shot, villains in the musical Oliver, a couple of actors at Fox Studios in the past who used weapons and one who shot himself, all of whom I am sure each of you know of, and then worked with the movie industry to develop guidelines for weapons, I understand the concern and believe it is warranted. Dr. Doom -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Idaho Scenic & Rigging Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 9:23 AM To: Stagecraft Cc: stagecraft [at] jeffsalzberg.com Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- a picture tells a thousand words. Rob't ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey E. Salzberg" From: "RD" Subject: RE: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:11:53 -0600 Message-ID: <011d01c67a9e$297f0710$c083c447 [at] doom1> In-Reply-To: Absolutely true and to the point. Oops, not that point. Doom -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Gerry G. Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 12:02 AM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Tell me who it was so I can smack them on the side of the head! You were absolutely right. Never give someone just enough knowledge so they can get hurt. Moreso never give an actor an actual weapon without a weapons master in attendance and a legitimate need for a real weapon. Gerry G. -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Kate Daly > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > As a side note, I want to tell y'all how much you're validating something I > did ages ago ... in the olden days when dinosaurs roamed (ok, in the early > '80s) I fenced competitively and taught foil fencing in South Philly. I had > to give up fencing because (insert long and completely off topic story > here) but I kept my best foils on display in my living room because, well, > because they just looked so cool. > > Fast forward to about five years ago, someone needed foils for a play and > wanted to borrow mine. No weapons master, no fight instructor -- they just > wanted the foils, and me to come in and give a quickie lesson on how to use > them. I refused, not negotiable. I told them these are weapons not toys, > I'm not a qualified fight choreographer, I can't teach anyone enough > fencing in half an hour to make them look authentic, and I wouldn't loan > these particular foils in any case because they're older than god and would > probably break the first time they were flexed. > > They argued, I refused; they demanded, I refused; they went away and told > all their friends that I don't play well with others. I felt really bad > about it for a long time and secretly wondered if I was being too much of a > hard-arse. Based on what I've read in this thread, I wasn't. > > Thanks! > > ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "RD" Subject: RE: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:26:18 -0600 Message-ID: <012701c67aa0$2c81fbf0$c083c447 [at] doom1> In-Reply-To: Kate, thank God you are on our side, or on the right side, or just thanks you have such wisdom and prudence. Kudos. Dr. doom -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Kate Daly Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:44 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- As a side note, I want to tell y'all how much you're validating something I did ages ago ... in the olden days when dinosaurs roamed (ok, in the early '80s) I fenced competitively and taught foil fencing in South Philly. I had to give up fencing because (insert long and completely off topic story here) but I kept my best foils on display in my living room because, well, because they just looked so cool. Fast forward to about five years ago, someone needed foils for a play and wanted to borrow mine. No weapons master, no fight instructor -- they just wanted the foils, and me to come in and give a quickie lesson on how to use them. I refused, not negotiable. I told them these are weapons not toys, I'm not a qualified fight choreographer, I can't teach anyone enough fencing in half an hour to make them look authentic, and I wouldn't loan these particular foils in any case because they're older than god and would probably break the first time they were flexed. They argued, I refused; they demanded, I refused; they went away and told all their friends that I don't play well with others. I felt really bad about it for a long time and secretly wondered if I was being too much of a hard-arse. Based on what I've read in this thread, I wasn't. Thanks! ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20060518104226.00d3f600 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 10:42:26 From: CB Subject: RE: Weapons: "best practice" procedures >If you have a licensed Pyrotech on staff, it is easy to create a muzzle = >flash with a tiny bit of airburst powder (pyropak A/B mix) and a pizeo = >igniter. Yep, but timing the sound effect tends to start to get tricky. If you have a sound guy (or a props guy with a good-sized piece of lumber) that's on the ball and an actor who's thinking, it can work, but if you have multiple actors that are shooting, it can get out of sync really fast. This tends to take them out of the imaginary far faster than the lack of flash and smoke. YMMV. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "RD" Subject: RE: Weapons: best practice procedures? Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:36:26 -0600 Message-ID: <013701c67aa1$99cf49a0$c083c447 [at] doom1> In-Reply-To: One of the last productions I directed was The Royal Hunt of the Sun, with a cast of 200. Thirty of the Conquistadors were on stage, and the stage was a raked sixty foot monster, from back to front, and fifty feet wide. I called in a Weapons Master from the Hollywood Studios who worked only with swords, as we had rented long swords (real ones) to be used in the production. One week of training for the cast and crew, incredibly choreographed. Whew. Incredible. Seven nights of the production, very fortunately, and not a scratch. My last shot at fame. Dr. doom -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of CB Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 5:04 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Weapons: best practice procedures? For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- >Edged weapons are >blunted, and preferably made from soft plastic. I'd suggest you avoid soft plastic for swordplay. Knives, I'd agree, are easily replaced by plastic replicas, but swordplay needs to be steel, and weapon grade steel. Cheap imitations made in the shop are far more dangerous than real live steel swords. Most 'real' swordmakers will provide their weapons before an edge is put on them. They are, minus the edge, the very same thing as thier dealy cousins. Oh, and I've three features with the credit, "Weapons Master" under my belt, with no injuries. Most of what Frank has posted on the subject goes against my training and best information. As Frank said, your choice. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1be.4a24e29.319e0dda [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:50:18 EDT Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... In a message dated 18/05/06 05:28:11 GMT Daylight Time, jea00321 [at] yahoo.com writes: > Edged weapons should be dulled for onstage use. I'll say! Many years ago, my fencing club decided to stage a duel at a festival. We worked it all out very carefully. Our president, who was a very eminent fencer, and also president of the British and Commonwealth fencing associations, said that he would provide the period weapons. He duly did, on the day. They were real and SHARP! I tell you, we went through our fight with very great care, especially me, as I had to make the kill. As a fight director myself, the only occasion when I have permitted a sharp weapon on stage was for the scene in "Hamlet", when Polonius is stabbed through the arras, and the weapon has to be capable of penetrating that. I withdrew it from the general props storage, and it now hangs above my fireplace, in France. Don't underestimate the harm that can be done by the bluntest of swords. I did the fights for a production of the Scottish play some years ago. The swords were made of 2" x 3/16" mild steel bar, about 3' long. Every night, there were splinters flying from the shields. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20060518110457.00d3f600 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:04:57 From: CB Subject: RE: Good mixer type >Man, sound guys are snobs! What'reya, new!?! So, if the espresso machines in teh roadboxes didn't clue you in, the t-shirts shoul have. >Mackie's SR series consoles are inexpensive, >feature-rich and relatively solid. "Relatively solid". Look. Most of them are toys purchased by pragmatic and utilitarian bean-counters or some lighting guy that got stuck with the sound gig. Mackie is what you get, as a sound guy, instead of what you should have. >Are they as good as a Yamaha, Midas, >etc.? No. Asked and answered. > Are they "serious" mixers? Maybe not. 'Maybe"?!? Let em help you out. 'No'. >But some gigs need a >Cadillac, and others do fine with a Chevy; So, you buy a Chevy and tell the Caddy clients to take a leap at a rolling donut, or you buy the Caddy and tell the Chevy clients that they get to play with teh power windows? >and *for the money*, nobody >competes with Mackie. I think Mackie gear is aimed at the low-end >professional, or in some cases high-end consumer, market. Nobody >expects you to mix Aerosmith on one. Lie. If you have a mixer, they'll expect you to use the damn thing to mix whatever they get. Look, there are far too few people that know a damn thing about sound, and far too many of those are working as sound engineers. Lighting Cats and Carp Dudes, and especially managerial-types, think that because they have a really cool stereo at home, with surround-sound, and they know what all the buttons do (sort of), that they know what they're doing with sound. I've had clients argue physics with me. I've had employers pull all the EQ's out of the gear list because the client wanted to cut the budget. It really is starting to get annoying when just wanting a quality product to do the job we're asked to do, do it well, and not make apologies for, is considered snobbish. Hey, there ain't no reason to get anything like an Expression or a Grand MA or a Hog, either. I've got a perfectly good American DJ two-scene preset console. It even does DMX! ITs fairly solid, and while it isn't exactly professional, it *is* high end broke DJ, Low end community theatre, and no one espects you to mix Aerosmith's lights on it anyways... Sheesh. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <401.2857ae4.319e11e7 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:07:35 EDT Subject: Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) In a message dated 18/05/06 05:44:32 GMT Daylight Time, kdaly973 [at] comcast.net writes: > I'm not a qualified fight choreographer, I can't teach anyone enough > fencing in half an hour to make them look authentic, and I wouldn't loan > these particular foils in any case because they're older than god and would > probably break the first time they were flexed. > > They argued, I refused; they demanded, I refused; they went away and told > all their friends that I don't play well with others. I felt really bad > about it for a long time and secretly wondered if I was being too much of a > hard-arse. Based on what I've read in this thread, I wasn't. No, you weren't. Fights need to be properly choreographed, and above all, rehearsed. Few directors understand this, and allow adequate time in their rehearsal schedules. I remember playing in Sheridan's "The Rivals" forty years ago, which contains a duel. It was not until the final dress rehearsal that it occurred to anyone that the duel had not been arranged. As a competent fencer, I took charge, and the other participant and I retired to the Green Room and worked something out. Apart from bruising his fingers, when he made a wrong parry, we got away with it. But it is not a satisfactory way. You also raise another important point. Every year, there are a few fatal accidents on the fencing piste, almost always caused by a broken blade. The fight director needs to make the actors aware of this, and to plan for some procedure to deal with it, in conjunction with the show director. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-ID: <001001c67aa6$2ccb5240$0300a8c0 [at] lpt> From: References: Subject: Re: Stopping a telemarketer Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:09:15 -0500 Organization: Minnesota Ballet I have been called "evil" by many of my friends who witness me answer a telemarketer call. It depends on what they are selling. Home mortgage calls I tell them: "I have a 15 year at 2%, if you can beat that I'll buy." Now I love to tell them that I just got my 1 year old so sleep, and really start chewing them out for the time I will now have to spend getting her back down. (never mind that I actually unplug the phone during her naps) My favorite is actually very sexist. (DISCLAIMER!!!!! we've already had this discussion, and I've admitted that it's bad) I won't tell it on the list for fear, e-mail me off list if you want to hear it. The best thing is to start right in with a sales pitch of your own. Start asking them questions like: "are you happy with your job......wanna work for me?" or ask them if they are happy with their current boyfriend and how much better you'd be at the job. Things like that never fail, and every time I get a telemarketer to hang up on me is a victory. Ken ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20060518111109.00d3f600 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:11:09 From: CB Subject: RE: stopping a telemarketer >I always try to keep in mind the fact that the poor shlump's just trying to >make a living, So are thieves and crack dealers. I don't cut them any slack, either. Anyone that comes into my house uninvited (and now with the DNC easily available, actually DIS-invited) they take their medicine and shuddup about it. I tend to be very polite on the phone, but with telemarketing calls, you get what you get. I am in the position (and so many of us are) that work comes through the phone lines. I tend not to turn the phone off, and work strange hours. If they wish to complain, have them complain to the supervisor who doesn't look up the names on the DNC list. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20060518112316.00d41878 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:23:16 From: CB Subject: Re: Good mixer type >Ok here is a question, how much does a yamaha pm 3k/4k or crest what ever >number they are this week or a soundcraft, consol with all the needed out >board equipment cost? verses a digital cost? Most of this is just the opinion of and olde pharte sound guy that might be all about being raised in an analogue environment. If you were to add up all the channels of EQ, dynamics control, and all the other bells and whistles that come on every channel of the digi-console, it would be worth far more than the equivalent number of channels on an analogue console with the equivalent number of outboard processors. Once you factor in that you don't need most of that outboard gear on most of the channels, and the fact that you can swap outboard processing and that you can take some processing to another gig, the analogue contender is not only cheaper, but actually more usefull. Digital consoles are like digital audio. They're fast and easy (once you know the giant blinky mouse really good) but they just arent the same as actually manipulating electricity. They'll do automation really nicely, and repeat and memorize til the cows come home, but it's a bit sterile and removed from the organic, live human feel of mixing. Horses for courses, but I just don't like mixing on digital consoles. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20060518112742.00d3f600 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:27:42 From: CB Subject: Re: Good mixer type >>> manufacturer) that were built in 1991? >I drink scotch older than that.... If anyone needs me I'll be at Steve-o's... Hmmm.... that might work! I don't mix on anything older than my whisky! Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:26:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Litterst Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... In-reply-to: Message-id: <1979.172.151.91.85.1147976793.squirrel [at] webmail.ithaca.edu> References: > --------------------------------------------------- > Don't underestimate the harm that can be done by the bluntest of swords. A friend of mine used to say it long before Alan Rickman made the line famous -- "It's dull. It'll hurt more, you twit." Steve L. ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Good mixer type Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:26:30 -0700 Message-ID: <555928311F8B2943B65FC7197942C3B70538C26D [at] es1.bsdnet.wednet.edu> From: "Storms, Randy" Take a pill, Chris. ;) I stand by my statement that there is a place in the market for = inexpensive mixers. If your budget can accommodate better gear, Mazel = Tov! Some of us have to work with what we can afford, and I resent the = implication that buying gear that is simply adequate, rather than gear = that costs twice as much to do the same job, is an act of ignorance or = stupidity. Anyone from Mackie on the list? Hey, Rube! A little help over here? Randy Storms rstorms [at] bham.wednet.edu ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2afa01c67aaa$1587d410$0c00a8c0 [at] Nigellaptop> From: "Nigel Worsley" References: Subject: Re: Good mixer type Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 19:37:13 +0100 FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: > rstorms [at] bham.wednet.edu writes: > >> Nice board. Fifteen years is a bit of a stretch, though. I wonder how > many >> people on the list are currently using consoles (made by *any* > manufacturer) >> that were built in 1991? >> Not many, I'd guess - and of those, how many wish they weren't... > > We did. It was designed and built by us. Two good electronic engineers with > relevant experience. It did what was needed No it didn't, it did what its designers decided was the best way of working and lacked any flexibility whatsover to accommodate alternative approaches. It only had 6 mono faders! It was hated by almost everybody that had ever used a conventional console. > rather better than our current console The only thing it could do that the current one can't is pan around in two dimensions with a joystick. A nice gimmik to have, but how often was it really justifiably used? > and lasted well. Rubbish. It took years before it was finished, by which time it was already showing its age. For at least ten years before it was finally scrapped, selecting a channel to a speaker produced a distinctly audible click, requiring the speaker mute switch to be engaged before doing so. > Sound design requirements expanded, and it just wasn't big enough. It never was big enough, by a long way. And totally unexpandable. > But its successor is nowhere near as versatile. It has far more inputs, a few more outputs, ( plus 6 auxes, versus NONE previously ), the channels are all gain matched, none of them have phase reversals due to internal miswiring, and it is instantly understandable by anyone familiar with similar consoles. It also recognises that microphones might actually have uses in a theatre. For anyone that is interested, the current console is a Soundcraft Venue 2 with 8 stereo inputs and 8 mono 'theatre' inputs - not enough for a pukka musical, but in that case we would have to hire in the radio mics anyway, so hiring a console as well isn't considred to be a problem. It also means that we don't have to move the existing console down into the auditorium. And to get back to the original thread, it is about ten years old and has never given any trouble that I am aware of - and I am the person most likely to be called upon to fix it if it had. Nigel Worsley Who has been biting his tongue while reading this shit for far too long. ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20060518115655.00d3f600 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 11:56:55 From: CB Subject: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) >I kept my best foils on display in my living room <> > I told them these are weapons not toys, *sigh* Kate, it's, "These are sporting goods, officer, not weapons". I used to belong to a fencing club whose rival club was at another bar. We would get off of work at 2AM or so, and gather at one or the other of the bars and we would train and fence. One of the bouncers was an olympic hpoeful, one of our other trainers was a Venezuelan Olympic Bronze Medalist. We had to make that explanation to the cops on more than one occasion. And you were right to refuse. Broken foils are an efective killing tool. Almost as dangerous as untrained stage combatants. ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20060518120548.00d3f600 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:05:48 From: CB Subject: Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) >Moreso never give an actor an actual weapon without a weapons master >in attendance and a legitimate need for a real weapon. I'm just a tiny but uncomfortable with this, as 'real weapon' and 'legitimate need' are terms that could be molded to fit any directors dreams. I agreee with the concepts, but the verbiage gives me pause. 'Legitimate need' could be replaced with, 'use the least dangerous method that allows the show to move forward', i.e., don't use a blank firing gun when a plastic toy and a board slap backstage is sufficient. As far as 'real weapon' goes, as I said, foils are sporting goods. Bseball bats are sporting goods, too, and both can be dangerous. Brooms are real weapons. Don't believe it? If I attack you with a broom, and all you have to defend yourself with is a fencing foil, you *will* get hurt, and I will most likely not. I could definitely kill with a broom. I'm not so sure about the foil. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1122.199.184.89.110.1147979962.squirrel [at] webmail.northstate.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:19:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions From: "Todd Dupree" Reply-To: dupreet [at] northstate.net Hi All, I have a need for some additional opinions regarding our Fire Curtain Policy. This group is about as opinionated as they come, so I am expecting some good responses!! As it stands, the policy basically states that the fire curtain must not be impeded by anything should it need to come in. We abide by this rule 99% of the time, but have occasionally bent it a bit if a lightweight prop, barstool, dining chair, etc. needs to be set in its way for a short period of time. The basis behind this is that either the item will be crushed, or a nearby actor will move it if the curtain is headed in. I have two questions for the group: First, is any bending of the rule too much? Do we in the industry hold this line, or is it judgment call at times? Secondly, if the curtain is to be impeded or blocked, is there an alternative means of audience protection you have used - a fire watch, big red truck idling at the back door, etc. At this point, I am gather information for my boss and other parties involved. I'd appreciate any comments, suggestions, horror stories you care to pass along, either on or off the list. Thanks! Todd Dupree Facility Manager/Technical Director High Point Theatre High Point, North Carolina ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Good mixer type Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:19:10 -0700 Message-ID: <555928311F8B2943B65FC7197942C3B70538C26E [at] es1.bsdnet.wednet.edu> From: "Storms, Randy" >> We did. It was designed and built by us. Two good electronic = engineers with=20 >> relevant experience. It did what was needed >No it didn't, it did what its designers decided was the best way of = working and lacked >any flexibility whatsover to accommodate alternative approaches. >Who has been biting his tongue while reading this shit for far too = long. _______________ Wha!!?! Nigel, are you saying you work in the same venue as Frank? =20 Randy Storms rstorms [at] bham.wednet.edu ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2c9b01c67ab0$8f71f200$0c00a8c0 [at] Nigellaptop> From: "Nigel Worsley" References: Subject: Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:23:35 +0100 "CB" wrote: >>I kept my best foils on display in my living room > <> >> I told them these are weapons not toys, > > *sigh* Kate, it's, "These are sporting goods, officer, not weapons". Reminds me of when I hired a blank firing replica AK47 machine gun to an open air production in the middle of London. Apparently the performance space was overlooked by several buildings, and the producer needed to assure the police that it wasn't a live weapon - they where asking for a deactivation certificate. I sent the following in reply, careful to refer to it as a prop and never use the word gun: The prop that I have provided is a blank firing replica of a Kalashnikov AK-47. It was designed and manufactured to make it impossible to be loaded with live ammunition, the main features being: The magazine will only accept a short 20mm long cartridge, less than half the length of live ammunition. The chamber is also limited to the same length, so live ammunition will not fit. The caliber is 8mm, live ammunition does not exist in this caliber. The barrel has a solid end, and is made from thin-walled tubing that is totally incapable of surviving the pressures generated by live ammunition. There is no deactivation certificate, because the prop was never a firearm in the first place. The prop was not supplied with any blanks, and was checked before dispatch to ensure that it did not contain any. No license of any sort is required for the possesion or use of the prop. For legal purposes, the prop is classed as an 'imitation firearm', as is a cap gun and even a water pistol. The law prohibits the possesion of it in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. Transporting it from one place to another would be reasonable. A stage is not generally considered to be a public place, although other parts of the venue will be. I know of no instance where responsible stage use has caused any legal problems. In summary, the legal restrictions are the same as a cap gun, and the only way to cause injury with it would be to use it as a club. It obviously did the trick, as I didn't hear anything more until they arranged to ship it back to me at the end of the run. Nigel Worsley ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:32:39 +0100 (BST) From: Charlie Richmond Subject: Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: On Thu, 18 May 2006, Nigel Worsley wrote: > It obviously did the trick, as I didn't hear anything more until they > arranged to ship it back to me at > the end of the run. And then what happened? Are you saying they confiscated it for the duration? ;-) Charlie ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2ca101c67ab1$df546d10$0c00a8c0 [at] Nigellaptop> From: "Nigel Worsley" References: Subject: Re: Good mixer type Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:32:59 +0100 "Storms, Randy" wrote: > > Wha!!?! Nigel, are you saying you work in the same venue as Frank? Yes, I don't generally mention it as some people here won't take me seriously if I do, there are a number of other people that post here who do the same. Frank's views are by no means universal at the Questors, and the impression of the place that he gives is a long way from the reality. For instance, moving lights are used on many shows and one of our LDs brought along a Hog3 as part of the beta testing for it for several productions. I could cite plenty more examples, but can't be bothered right now! Nigel Worsley ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2ca901c67ab2$6abfa630$0c00a8c0 [at] Nigellaptop> From: "Nigel Worsley" References: Subject: Re: foils (was Re: Weapons: ) Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:36:53 +0100 "Charlie Richmond" > On Thu, 18 May 2006, Nigel Worsley wrote: > >> It obviously did the trick, as I didn't hear anything more until they >> arranged to ship it back to me at >> the end of the run. > > And then what happened? Are you saying they confiscated it for the duration? No, that no further assurance was required! This would have gone to the City of London Police, who have been on permanent terrorist alert for years, if they wheren't happy then I would probably have been raided. At the very least, further questions ( ie. interrogation ) would have been involved. Nigel Worsley ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:39:04 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Salvatori, Jason" Cc: dupreet [at] northstate.net I personally bend the rules in the same manner as you: if it is something that can be pushed or kicked out of the way I'll allow it - mobile props/set pieces only. We have a strict rule of no live flame on stage without written permission (from myself or my ATD), so fire=20 is slightly less of a concern for us. If I DO give permission for flame in a show, we go back to the policy of nothing blocking the curtain. Jason _________________________________________________________________________= _ This e-mail, including any attachment(s), may be confidential and is = intended solely for the attention and information of the named = addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient or have received = this message in error, please notify me immediately by return e-mail and = permanently delete the original transmission from your computer, = including any attachment(s). Any unauthorized distribution, disclosure = or copying of this message and attachment(s) by anyone other than the = recipient is strictly prohibited. ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:00:17 -0400 From: "Paul Schreiner" Subject: Re: Good mixer type In-Reply-To: References: > > > Take a pill, Chris. ;) FWIW, I'm solidly in Chris's corner on this. > I stand by my statement that there is a place in the market for inexpensi= ve mixers. If your budget can accommodate better gear, Mazel Tov! Some of= us have to work with what we can afford, and I resent the implication that= buying gear that is simply adequate, rather than gear that costs twice as = much to do the same job, is an act of ignorance or stupidity. I don't see where that implication has been made...okay, maybe I was a bit colorful in my "boat anchor" description, but if you read farther along you'll see the following: "If one *needs* a mixer with XYZ and can't get more for the budget than what'd buy a Mackie, then get the Mackie--with the understanding you'll be replacing it in five years." "But I'll shoot myself in the foot before I ever spec a Mackie as a first (or even second) choice. And here, I'm not recommending them." That's my attempt at making the point you seem to think had been missed...that some people need a mixer (or other equipment) capable of [insert shopping list here], and the only thing that fits their budget is a Mackie (or other similar-quality piece of...recording/reinforcement equipment). But *until that budget has been set in stone* I'm not going to recommend Mackie. Ever. The moment some bean counter sees that list of possible equipment choices and notices that the Mackie is a fraction of the price of a similarly-configured (but higher quality) other brand, they'll ignore practically every argument you throw at them for trying to come up with the difference. ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:05:29 -0400 From: "Paul Schreiner" Subject: Re: Good mixer type In-Reply-To: References: Okay, I'm a little off in my last post. I said I was solidly in Chris's corner, but forgot about this... > Lighting Cats and Carp Dudes, and especially managerial-types, > think that because they have a really cool stereo at home, with > surround-sound, and they know what all the buttons do (sort of), that the= y > know what they're doing with sound. I started off as a lighting cat (actually, started off as a spear chucker), and am more of a carp dude than anything else these days. 90% of my sound experience has been either self-taught or gleaned from this list (and the Theatre-Sound list), but I make no apologies for that. Some of those people who do have a clue sound-wise happen to be generalists= ! :) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4003.64.28.54.105.1147984067.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Good mixer type From: "Bill Nelson" >>>> manufacturer) that were built in 1991? >>I drink scotch older than that.... > > If anyone needs me I'll be at Steve-o's... > Hmmm.... that might work! > > I don't mix on anything older than my whisky! > Heck. I have wine in my cellar that is far older than that. Going by that rule, I could use any console that was built clear back to the mid 1960. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4032.64.28.54.105.1147985008.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... From: "Bill Nelson" >> http://www.jeffsalzberg.com/temp/04-gunshot.jpg > > Excellent shot (pun intended). That also is not a small calibre blank. It looks like the muzzle blast from a .44. I wonder why so much flame, unless that was desired. A loud bang can be generated with far less flash. Also, the house must have been huge to require that high a blank charge. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <003d01c67abd$76474e30$6401a8c0 [at] amd2200> From: "Idaho Scenic & Rigging" References: Subject: Re: Good mixer type Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:55:57 -0600 Settle down fella 'fore you get a spike in your amp. ----- Original Message ----- From: "CB" To: "Stagecraft" Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 11:04 AM Subject: Re: Good mixer type > >Man, sound guys are snobs! > > What'reya, new!?! So, if the espresso machines in teh roadboxes didn't > clue you in, the t-shirts shoul have. > > > > Are they "serious" mixers? Maybe not. > > 'Maybe"?!? Let em help you out. 'No'. >... > ... ------------------------------ Message-ID: <446CE2A0.3000308 [at] fuse.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:09:52 -0400 From: Stuart Wheaton Reply-To: sdwheaton [at] fuse.net Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... References: In-Reply-To: Dale Farmer wrote: > Kate; if you would like to try firing some guns, I'm in the Boston > area and would be pleased to show you how to turn money into loud noises > and holes in paper targets. > I'd like to extend this offer to anyone in the Cincinnati area who would like to perforate a bit of paper just to see how it all really works. I actually won our club handicap trophy for Bullseye Pistol this winter season! Accurate bullseye shooting is a great way to force yourself to relax. Tense and jittery doesn't cut it for a 3" circle at 50 feet. Stuart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:10:17 -0400 Subject: Melting telrads From: Steve Shelley Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Hi folks; We're teching a new opera down here at the spoleto festival. Currently we've got source 4-10 degree ERS with a city theatrical handle on the tail. Telrads magnetically attached to the side of the body (exactly how I'm not certain). Bottom line is: the report that "the telrads are melting". ???? Any thoughts how to prevent further damage to the borrowed telrads? TIA Shelley -- Steve Shelley Ltg & Scenic Coordinator Spoleto Festival USA (843) 720-1140 prod office (843) 724-1195 fax MrTemplate [at] Earthlink.net www.spoletousa.org Www.fieldtemplate.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20060518211911.67978.qmail [at] web35307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:19:11 -0700 (PDT) From: June Abernathy Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures... >They argued, I refused; they demanded, I refused; >they went away and told all their friends that I >don't play well with others. I felt really bad >about it for a long time and secretly wondered if I >was being too much of a hard-arse. Based on what I've >read in this thread, I wasn't. >Thanks! Kate, You were right for a dozen reasons, some of which have nothing to do with weapons safety. IMO, at least, you never want to loan a theater props for a show if you would be deeply upset if said objects were damaged or lost. The more expensive, fragile, or sentimental an object is, the more important this is. Even in well run theaters with responsible prop people and stage management, stuff happens. It just does. At the very least, if a theater is trying to talk you out of a nice item, they should offer to be responsible for any repair or replacement cost, even if that means taking out an insurance policy. I am frankly amazed at people who DO loan theaters antique furniture, musical instruments, fur coats, and all sorts of other items of financial and/or sentimental value, without any kind of assurances from the theater - not even a reciept of what has been borrowed from who. Prop people and others who go about borrowing things from people and businesses for shows need to learn that having a good relationship with the person being borrowed from is as important - really, more important - than getting the thing you need. If you are well mannered and understanding when they don't feel that they can lend you somehting one time, they are all the more likely to be forthcoming when you need them again, and chances are, you will need them again. And taking care of their stuff and returning it in good shape in a timely manner with much thanks when you do, means it is that much more likely that you will get cooperation in the future. Conversely, being rude to you and bad mouthing you around town goes a long way toward insuring that you will never lend them anything again, ever, and that is hardly a good idea from their point of view. In your particular situation, you were worried that the swords, which had sentimental (and possibly monetary) value, would not withstand the rigors of the production. Also, you were worried, particularly given the lack of supervision and training, that someone might hurt themselves or others with your weapons, putting you in a liability situation, as well as a huge potential for guilt. And, the request for the loan of the swords also came with a request for you to instruct them in safe care and handling, and even a request for you to come up with safe fight choreography, something that you felt was outside of your abilities, particularly given the short time frame allotted. Again, huge possibilites for liability and/or guilt if things didn't go well. All in all, it was a lot to ask, you had every right to refuse, and they were way out of line being rude and cheeky when you didn't give them what they wanted. June Abernathy IATSE #321 (Tampa, FL) FOH Electrician The Lion King National Tour (Gazelle) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <446CE55C.9030107 [at] fuse.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:21:32 -0400 From: Stuart Wheaton Reply-To: sdwheaton [at] fuse.net Subject: Re: stopping a telemarketer References: In-Reply-To: Scott Parker wrote: > Survey takers hate it when I say I work for the TV News. Political > callers might get this: "If you tell me who you are calling on behalf > of, I'll vote for the other guy." OR "The first opponent you bad mouth > will get my vote..." I got a call from somebody at the Republican party a while ago...She wanted my help because 'the liberals were plotting to take over our government,' I asked her if that would be a bad thing? Had she seen a newspaper lately? Did she actually think things were in good shape right now? Perhaps she recalled the last time we had a budget surplus? Etc... I actually had her agreeing with me by the end. Sadly, most of the political calls I get are automated messages or push polls. Stuart ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Peter Scheu" Cc: dupreet [at] northstate.net Subject: RE: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:22:26 -0400 Organization: Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. Message-ID: In-reply-to: Todd Dupree wrote: >First, is any bending of the rule too much? We're talking about a life safety system here (like sprinklers, smoke detectors, etc.). Bending a rule that may be written into your local code (and may have the force of law) is as good as breaking it. If a tragedy occurred, how do you explain your justification for "bending" the rule to investigators? Or the family's lawyers? Or the judge? >Secondly, if the curtain is to be impeded or blocked, is there >an alternative means of audience protection you have used - a >fire watch, big red truck idling at the back door, etc. Any temporary circumvention of a life safety system must be approved by the local AHJ (like temporarily disabling your smoke detectors during a fog effect). You would need to discuss your alternative plans with them and get their WRITTEN approval. IMHO there are no gray issues here. You either obey the rules, or get the rule makers to change them (or help you develop alternatives they will sign off on). The liability issues are far too grave to do otherwise. Peter Scheu Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. Syracuse, NY www.scheuconsulting.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4076.64.28.54.105.1147987503.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:25:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... From: "Bill Nelson" > The thought of the pyro muzzle flash effect scares me because the is > the potential for some component to fail, break loose, and become a > projectile. Or overloaded - which could turn the blank gun into a grenade. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <446CE889.2040308 [at] fuse.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:35:05 -0400 From: Stuart Wheaton Reply-To: sdwheaton [at] fuse.net Subject: Re: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions References: In-Reply-To: Todd Dupree wrote: > We abide by this rule 99% of the time, but have occasionally bent it a bit > if a lightweight prop, barstool, dining chair, etc. needs to be set in > its way for a short period of time. The basis behind this is that either > the item will be crushed, or a nearby actor will move it if the curtain is > headed in. I'd say that nothing can be built or blocked to go in the path of the fire curtain, it's a simple 4" wide swath across the stage where you just can't put a chair. If something does break the line, it must either be built to automatically fall out of the path or built as a full width fire wall. That being said, if an actor puts a chair down on the curtain line during a scene, I wouldn't stop the show to have it moved. Stuart ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4085.64.28.54.105.1147988035.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 14:33:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... From: "Bill Nelson" > Don't underestimate the harm that can be done by the bluntest of swords. I > did the fights for a production of the Scottish play some years ago. The > swords > were made of 2" x 3/16" mild steel bar, about 3' long. Every night, there > were splinters flying from the shields. Then the shields were poorly designed and built - unless the splinters were desired. Bill ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Melting telrads Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:08:30 -0400 Message-ID: <071168C3EF37C34580207EB53478A0F732C55C [at] stage.OTC.local> In-Reply-To: From: "Dirk Van Pernis" I'm assuming it's magnetic tape holding the telrad to the body. First, are the telrads mounted to the 10 degree tube or the body of the source4? The lens tube will be cooler. I have a 10 degree and a telrad lying around let me see if I can come up with something useful. Dirk Van Pernis - OTC ME =20 -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Steve Shelley Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 5:10 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Melting telrads For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Hi folks; We're teching a new opera down here at the spoleto festival. Currently we've got source 4-10 degree ERS with a city theatrical handle on the tail. Telrads magnetically attached to the side of the body (exactly how I'm not certain). Bottom line is: the report that "the telrads are melting". ???? Any thoughts how to prevent further damage to the borrowed telrads? TIA Shelley -- Steve Shelley Ltg & Scenic Coordinator Spoleto Festival USA (843) 720-1140 prod office (843) 724-1195 fax MrTemplate [at] Earthlink.net www.spoletousa.org Www.fieldtemplate.com ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <426.16dec0c.319e4ed7 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:27:35 EDT Subject: Re: Good mixer type In a message dated 18/05/06 19:40:06 GMT Daylight Time, nigle [at] dsl.pipex.com writes: > > We did. It was designed and built by us. Two good electronic engineers with > > > relevant experience. It did what was needed > > No it didn't, it did what its designers decided was the best way of working > and lacked > any flexibility whatsover to accommodate alternative approaches. It did what was needed when it was designed. That was to execute sound effects for straight plays. It was never contemplated to do liove mixes for musicals. > > It only had 6 mono faders! And six stereo faders, and a good routing system from sources to destinations. > > It was hated by almost everybody that had ever used a conventional console. I have not heard that. > > > rather better than our current console > > > and lasted well. > > Rubbish. It took years before it was finished, by which time it was already > showing its age. > For at least ten years before it was finally scrapped, selecting a channel > to a speaker > produced a distinctly audible click, requiring the speaker mute switch to be > engaged > before doing so. I do not remember this fault. Had it been reported, we should have fixed it. > > > Sound design requirements expanded, and it just wasn't big enough. > > It never was big enough, by a long way. And totally unexpandable. True in practice, but not in pronciple. Expasnding hardware is difficfult, but not impossible. There were no electronic problems at all, given the engineering principles on which it was desidned. Adding extra faders would have been difficult. > > > But its successor is nowhere near as versatile. > > It has far more inputs, a few more outputs, ( plus 6 auxes, versus NONE > previously ), the channels > are all gain matched, none of them have phase reversals due to internal > miswiring, and it is instantly > understandable by anyone familiar with similar consoles. > > It also recognises that microphones might actually have uses in a theatre. This depends on the job for which it is installed. When Pete and I designed, built, and installed the system to which you refer so contemtuously, we considered its prime purpose, of replaying sound effects. As you know, this can be tricky. > > For anyone that is interested, the current console is a Soundcraft Venue 2 > with 8 stereo inputs and > 8 mono 'theatre' inputs - not enough for a pukka musical, but in that case > we would have to hire in the > radio mics anyway, so hiring a console as well isn't considred to be a > problem. It also means that > we don't have to move the existing console down into the auditorium. And, in my personal opinion, it is a waste of space. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <303.5584392.319e509d [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:35:09 EDT Subject: Re: Good mixer type In a message dated 18/05/06 20:21:01 GMT Daylight Time, rstorms [at] bham.wednet.edu writes: > > > Wha!!?! Nigel, are you saying you work in the same venue as Frank? Yes, he does.And he knows far more about computer engineering than I do,. I think I know more about sound engineering than he does. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4163.205.215.255.19.1147992090.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Melting telrads From: "Bill Nelson" > Any thoughts how to prevent further damage to the borrowed telrads? Mount them on the 10 degree barrel near the lens. They have a projected image, so you do not have to be close to the "eyepiece". You can put a curved piece of steel inside the lens barrel, or just tape a piece of steel to the outside of the barrel. Bill ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Melting telrads Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:44:31 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Salvatori, Jason" I'm a little out of the loop on this one: What's a telrad? (A google search gave me a bunch of tele-com hits, and I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean...) Jason -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net]On Behalf Of Bill Nelson Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 6:42 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Melting telrads For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- > Any thoughts how to prevent further damage to the borrowed telrads? Mount them on the 10 degree barrel near the lens. They have a projected image, so you do not have to be close to the "eyepiece". You can put a curved piece of steel inside the lens barrel, or just tape a piece of steel to the outside of the barrel. Bill _________________________________________________________________________= _ This e-mail, including any attachment(s), may be confidential and is = intended solely for the attention and information of the named = addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient or have received = this message in error, please notify me immediately by return e-mail and = permanently delete the original transmission from your computer, = including any attachment(s). Any unauthorized distribution, disclosure = or copying of this message and attachment(s) by anyone other than the = recipient is strictly prohibited. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4174.205.215.255.19.1147993173.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:59:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Melting telrads From: "Bill Nelson" > I'm a little out of the loop on this one: What's a telrad? > (A google search gave me a bunch of tele-com hits, and > I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean...) A Telrad is a projected image sight designed for mounting on a telescope. It has a variable intensity reticule. The nice thing about it is that eye position does not cause parallax errors. The reticule consists of concentric circles. If I recall correctly, the inner one has an angular diameter of 0.5 degrees. It has colimation screws so the view matches the main instrument's field. Mount one on a follow spot or long focus ER and you have a handy sight for precision aiming while the spot is damped. They are relatively inexpensive - I think I paid about $40 for mine about 10 years ago. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4196.205.215.255.19.1147993590.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:06:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Melting telrads From: "Bill Nelson" For a review, see: http://www.backyard-astro.com/equipment/accessories/telrad/telrad.html During a quick scan of the article, I notice an error. The author stated that it was a "zero power" finder. That is incorrect, as zero power would mean that the image was infinitely small. It is a one power finder - the image is neither magnified or reduced. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4200.205.215.255.19.1147993848.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 16:10:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Good mixer type From: "Bill Nelson" >> For anyone that is interested, the current console is a Soundcraft >> Venue 2 with 8 stereo inputs and >> 8 mono 'theatre' inputs - not enough for a pukka musical, but in that case >> we would have to hire in the >> radio mics anyway, so hiring a console as well isn't considred to be a >> problem. It also means that >> we don't have to move the existing console down into the auditorium. > > And, in my personal opinion, it is a waste of space. I suppose you feel the same way about your theatre's light board, since it has a moving light panel. Bill ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 19:26:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Melting telrads From: Steve Larson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: And you get them from whom? Steve > From: "Bill Nelson" > Reply-To: "Stagecraft" > Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:59:33 -0700 (PDT) > To: "Stagecraft" > Subject: Re: Melting telrads > They are relatively inexpensive - I think I paid about $40 for mine about > 10 years ago. > > Bill > ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 23:48:53 GMT Subject: Re: stopping a telemarketer Message-Id: <20060518.164922.10965.331730 [at] webmail36.lax.untd.com> For long distance stopping power against telemarketers, a .357 Magnum wo= rks fine, but the newer .475 Magnum is even better at that distance. /s/ Richard _____________________________ Scott Parker wrote: > Survey takers hate it when I say I work for the TV News. Political > callers might get this: "If you tell me who you are calling on behalf = of, I'll vote for the other guy." OR "The first opponent you bad mouth w= ill get my vote..." ______________ I got a call from somebody at the Republican party a while ago...She = wanted my help because 'the liberals were plotting to take over our = government,' I asked her if that would be a bad thing? Had she seen a = newspaper lately? Did she actually think things were in good shape = right now? Perhaps she recalled the last time we had a budget surplus?= Etc... I actually had her agreeing with me by the end. Sadly, most of the political calls I get are automated messages or push = polls. Stuart ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4493.205.215.255.19.1147997246.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:07:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Melting telrads From: "Bill Nelson" > And you get them from whom? Do a Google search on telrad finder. You will get over 90,000 hits. Most will be for the finder, although there will be some telephone equipment hits as well. Just check the merchant listings to find the best price with shipping. Ask them if it is in stock - some sellers drop ship, and that can take weeks. Bill ------------------------------ From: DonEarl01 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <488.9377d.319e6ca1 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 20:34:41 EDT Subject: Re: Melting telrads Earl Girls sells them but I think they're about $60 Don Earl - etcp certified rigger - arena & theatre Earl Girls Inc. Theatrical Equipment 1648 White Horse Pike P.O. Box 297 Egg Harbor City, NJ 08215-0297 609 965-6900 fax 609 965-3330 www.earlgirls.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:38:38 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions In-reply-to: Message-id: <7.0.1.0.0.20060518173556.01f7b5b8 [at] interstellar.com> References: At 02:22 PM 5/18/2006, Peter Scheu wrote: >IMHO there are no gray issues here. You either obey the rules, or get the >rule makers to change them (or help you develop alternatives they will sign >off on). The liability issues are far too grave to do otherwise. Actually, it seems a grey area would be someone carrying or pushing something through the area the fire curtain would come down. For some period of time the curtain is blocked while the item is passing under it. How long a period can this be? I have no idea what would be considered too long. Also, people standing in doorways are considered to be obstructing the door. Wouldn't it follow that an actor standing under the fire curtain would also be obstructing it? -- Jerry Durand, Durand Interstellar, Inc. www.interstellar.com 219 Oak Wood Way, Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 Skype: jerrydurand ------------------------------ Message-ID: From: "Occy" References: Subject: Re: Melting telrads Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 18:20:34 -0700 From bill's link to this link, they are 39.95USD http://www.scopetronix.com/finders.htm ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Larson" > --------------------------------------------------- > > And you get them from whom? > > Steve > > ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <91B46AD9-971C-49C1-BD4F-2846B891CE82 [at] brandeis.edu> From: David Wilson Subject: Will Roger's Stairs Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 21:23:32 -0400 What's the secret to searching the archives? I keep getting a server not responding error- We're renting the set from the national tour of Will Roger's follies that's closing this month. It was refitted with Versatubes in the stairs for this last tour, fed by video. Unfortunately the versatubes were sold to someone else when the tour comes down, and I'm looking for other options. The last time I did it I had to use rope light, as the only thing I could afford in the budget. Has anyone had success with side emiting fiber optics for this - are they bright enough? This is a 45-50' staircase, I'm assuming at least 1 illuminator per side, probably 3 zones of 3 or 4 stairs each. From the pics I've seen of the set, the stair riser is not translucent, so lighting needs to be surface mounted on the face of the riser. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 22:04:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Litterst Subject: Re: Melting telrads In-reply-to: Message-id: <2758.24.58.7.223.1148004264.squirrel [at] webmail.ithaca.edu> References: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > And you get them from whom? I got mine from Production Advantage a few years ago. Steve L. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <446D3A10.6090801 [at] cybercom.net> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 23:22:56 -0400 From: Dale Farmer Organization: I'm working on that.... Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... References: In-Reply-To: Dre Suchoski wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Any idea what kind of blanks and gun that was? > > Dre > Based on the size of the fireball, and the side blasts, I'd speculate that it was some sort of large bore revolver, firing full power blanks. I suspect that the actors on stage had their ears ringing after the shot. It may have been some sort of custom blank, that had been mixed up to produce enhanced flame and smoke. ( basically, one adds black powder to the blank's propellant mix, while reducing the double base powder by the appropriate amount. Deceptively simple to describe, but full of unobvious ways to do really serious injury to people. ) --Dale ------------------------------ From: StevevETTrn [at] aol.com Message-ID: <46a.c4fdc3.319e9358 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 23:19:52 EDT Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... jeff salzberg writes: >a photo that dramatically >illustrates the danger posed by blanks. While some have noted the large muzzle blast, this picture also effectively highlights the side venting that occurs at the gap between the chamber and the barrel. This also must be taken into account when planning the effect. Are all those actors flinching so much because they anticipated the blast? ;) Steve Vanciel Orlando, FL ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Peter Scheu" Subject: RE: Help: Fire Curtain Rules & Exceptions Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 23:29:58 -0400 Organization: Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. Message-ID: In-reply-to: Jerry Durand wrote: >Actually, it seems a grey area would be someone carrying or pushing=20 >something through the area the fire curtain would come down. For=20 >some period of time the curtain is blocked while the item is passing=20 >under it. How long a period can this be? I have no idea what would=20 >be considered too long. > >Also, people standing in doorways are considered to be obstructing=20 >the door. Wouldn't it follow that an actor standing under the fire=20 >curtain would also be obstructing it? True in the literal sense, but both your examples are extremely short duration, transitory conditions, and an actor can react whereas a chair can't. The original poster talked about deliberately placing an = inanimate, "dumb" object in the path of the curtain (Please, no "dumb actor" = comments). And I am sure that people knowingly standing in or obstructing an = emergency egress is a violation of code or law in some jurisdictions By most codes, the curtain should close within 30 seconds. If an object = or person can't be removed from its path in less than that time, I would consider it a "violation". The concept of "due diligence" comes to mind. Maybe some other list = members who have legal experience/expertise will comment. But knowing that one = is deliberately creating a hazardous condition, or is being downright negligent, would seem to me to be indefensible. Peter Scheu =20 Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. Syracuse, NY www.scheuconsulting.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1514.205.215.255.19.1148024051.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 00:34:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... From: "Bill Nelson" > While some have noted the large muzzle blast, this picture also > effectively > highlights the side venting that occurs at the gap between the chamber > and the barrel. This also must be taken into account when planning the > effect. On many small revolvers, such as the 22 cal crimped blank ones sold cheaply for theatre use, that is the only vent area. > Are all those actors flinching so much because they anticipated the blast? > ;) Probably. Those shots must have been quite loud. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1518.205.215.255.19.1148024393.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 00:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Weapons: "best practice" procedures ... From: "Bill Nelson" > Based on the size of the fireball, and the side blasts, I'd speculate > that it was some sort of large bore revolver, firing full power blanks. > I suspect that the actors on stage had their ears ringing after the > shot. It may have been some sort of custom blank, that had been mixed > up to produce enhanced flame and smoke. ( basically, one adds black > powder to the blank's propellant mix, while reducing the double base > powder by the appropriate amount. Deceptively simple to describe, but > full of unobvious ways to do really serious injury to people. ) I don't think it was a completely black powder blank - there is not enough smoke and flame. Going from smokeless to BP is relatively easy. It is going the other direction where the real hazard occurs. One of the reasons for this is that smokeless powders are not designed to function well under the low pressures you find in a blank. So very energetic powders must be used and load levels can be rather critical. Bill ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #813 *****************************