Return-Path: <stagecraft-report [at] theatrical.net>
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 42416623; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 03:03:06 -0800
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on localhost
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,AWL,NO_RECEIVED,
	NO_RELAYS,PRXY_USER_DROP_SINO,SUBJ_HAS_UNIQ_ID autolearn=no version=3.1.7
X-Spam-Level: 
X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.10
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stagecraft-off [at] theatrical.net>
List-ID: <stagecraft.theatrical.net>
List-Archive: <http://theatrical.net:8100/Lists/stagecraft/List.html>
Message-ID: <list-42416599 [at] prxy.net>
From: "Stagecraft" <stagecraft [at] theatrical.net>
Sender: "Stagecraft" <stagecraft [at] theatrical.net>
To: "Stagecraft" <stagecraft [at] theatrical.net>
Precedence: list
Subject: Stagecraft Digest #1141
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 03:01:53 -0800
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 <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
---------------------------------------------------

Stagecraft Digest, Issue #1141

 1. Re: new pyro product
    by Steve Shelley <mrtemplate [at] earthlink.net>
 2. Re: Craftsman question
    by Jason Haislet <jasonhaislet [at] yahoo.com>
 3. USITT Lodging
    by "Jonathan S. Deull" <jdeull [at] clarktransfer.com>
 4. Re: Welder Suggestions
    by Al Fitch <fitchal [at] yahoo.com>
 5. Re: CAD Standard
    by "C. Dopher" <brooklyn [at] dopher.com>
 6. Re: Vexing Vectorworks
    by "C. Dopher" <brooklyn [at] dopher.com>
 7. Re: ACad problem
    by Joe <joe [at] dunfee.com>
 8. Re: big class
    by MissWisc [at] aol.com
 9. Re: ACad problem
    by Chris Warner <cdw.lighting [at] gmail.com>
10. Re: Cirque's Delirium
    by "John Gibilisco" <johngib [at] cox.net>

*** 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: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:33:34 -0500
Subject: Re: new pyro product
From: Steve Shelley <mrtemplate [at] earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <C1F7DF2E.C779%mrtemplate [at] earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-42406037 [at] prxy.net>

Either that or you only need to sell **one**.


On 2/13/07 9:25 PM, "Jerry Durand" <jdurand [at] interstellar.com> wrote:

> For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 
> At 06:14 PM 2/13/2007, Charlie Richmond wrote:
> 
>> MSRP = Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price
> 
> I know what it stands for, just working on what a fair price would
> be.  How about $5,555,555.00 with BIG discounts to everyone?  :)
> 
> 

-- 
Steve Shelley
SoftSymbols Designer
MrTemplate [at] Earthlink.net
www.fieldtemplate.com



------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:40:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Jason Haislet <jasonhaislet [at] yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Craftsman question
In-Reply-To: <list-42401048 [at] prxy.net>
Message-ID: <611272.51250.qm [at] web50001.mail.yahoo.com>


    Craftsman hand tools are nice.  Unfortunaly thier
drills are laking.  I have had three different drills
purchased over three or four years.  Have to get them
replaced twice on the warranty.  


Jason Haislet, Carpenter
(937)830-1116
Kettering, Ohio


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't get soaked.  Take a quick peak at the forecast
with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather

------------------------------

From: "Jonathan S. Deull" <jdeull [at] clarktransfer.com>
Subject: USITT Lodging
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:18:15 -0500
Message-ID: <003901c74fe6$c5ebdd30$6400000a [at] M60>

My production schedule has changed and it looks like I will now be able to
make it to USITT after all.  All nearby hotels appears to be full. Does
anyone have any secrets or strategies that can help?

Thanks.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
Jonathan S. Deull
Executive Vice President
Clark Transfer, Inc.
jdeull [at] clarktransfer.com



------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:47:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Al Fitch <fitchal [at] yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Welder Suggestions
In-Reply-To: <list-42395658 [at] prxy.net>
Message-ID: <713130.25528.qm [at] web84011.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


> And if I can hijack the thread a touch, too, is
> there a 'welding for
> dummies' book out there?  I want to learn to weld,
> but I don't see any
> courses available in my area, beyond the 'become a
> professional
> welder' ilk, which isn't what I want.   IS this
> something one can
> learn from a book?  I haven't welded since Junior
> High, where I got
> two days with an arc welder to do some stuff.
> 
> Thanks!
> -cdr


Have you tried a local community college or CTE(career
and technical education) school ?


> 
> 


Be Kind, Smile and Have Fun.

------------------------------

In-Reply-To: <list-42407296 [at] prxy.net>
References: <list-42407296 [at] prxy.net>
Message-Id: <AB867250-61F4-448F-A72F-A6AA6679648F [at] dopher.com>
From:	"C. Dopher" <brooklyn [at] dopher.com>
Subject: Re: CAD Standard
Date:	Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:42:52 -0800

John wrote:


>
>> Is there a CAD standard approved by USITT?  I know
>> there is the drafting standard for hand drafting but am curious on
>> what conventions I should be following when using AutoCAD.
>
> The drafting standards are platform agnostic: Pencil, Pen, AutoCAD,
> VectorWorks, crayola. Drafting should be clear and useful no matter  
> what
> method is used to put lines on the page.

Nicely put John.

Cris Dopher


------------------------------

In-Reply-To: <list-42407296 [at] prxy.net>
References: <list-42407296 [at] prxy.net>
Message-Id: <73DA09F4-374B-4F3D-B1B8-5D328B1A9330 [at] dopher.com>
From:	"C. Dopher" <brooklyn [at] dopher.com>
Subject: Re: Vexing Vectorworks
Date:	Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:08:39 -0800

Mark-O wrote:

>
>
> Even when I am not making tap files from a drawing, I often "ask" the
> drawing for a measurement. Amazing how often a platform measures at 8'
> 0-1/16" wide, when I know it should be 8' even, (Unless it is Keith's
> Luan)

Philosophy:
I have been making this point a lot lately to various associates and  
clients:  unless you are drawing accurately AND precisely, you are  
merely illustrating, not drafting.  Hand drafting demanded as much  
precision and accuracy from a designer as he or she could muster and  
those drawings were used directly by humans to create scenery.   
Pencil lines could be an inch thick on their own, in scale, hence the  
tradition of careful, plentiful dimensioning - it was the reality  
check against the scale rule.

CAD ups the standard; adds a dimension (pardon the pun).  Since  
objects may be sent directly from a designer's CAD drawing to a  
machine to cut the shape (never a possibility before CAD and so not  
an invalid use OF CAD), the designer bears responsibility for  
accurate, precise drawings - this includes using closed vectors when  
such is required (i.e. your scenery is headed for CNC).  True, the TD  
shares responsibility for correct execution, but I believe that if a  
designer is going to bring CAD to the table at all, he or she should  
be prepared to back it up with the ability to use the program in the  
way CAD demands AND the way humans have always demanded.  It's the  
nature of the beast.  If you can't or won't draw accurately,  
precisely, and with the right tools (more right than others, I'm  
saying), then just draft by hand and send a blueprint.  It will be  
faster for you and probably faster for the shop!

Phact:
Too often I see drawings built without regard to snapping  
constraints, with the sizes and lengths of objects put in by  
eyeballing.  I'm not even sure how people do that.  The dimensions  
come out even (or are cheated), but the actual objects are not  
precisely what the dimensions say.  Two culprits:  one is the ability  
to command the CAD program to round.  You may round to a fine degree,  
but only the dimensions shown are rounded, though the object is off -  
usually by a degree less than the rounding margin set in the  
preferences.  This easily leads to 4x8 platforms that are 1/16" too  
big.  Duplicate Array that erroneous platform and your deck is now an  
inch too wide and you can't get your dimensions to agree with each  
other.  Second culprit:  not drafting with snaps turned on &/or not  
entering precise values directly, trusting instead to lining up the  
cursor with rulers on the screen.  Aw, man.  See comments in the  
first paragraph.

Cris Dopher

------------------------------

Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.0.20070214001550.01281298 [at] dunfee.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 00:24:30 -0500
From: Joe <joe [at] dunfee.com>
Subject: Re: ACad problem
In-Reply-To: <list-42407296 [at] prxy.net>
References: <list-42407296 [at] prxy.net>

Loren Schreiber said;
 >What advantage is there to forcing the TD to redraw a
 >complex designer's drawing to produce a working drawing?

One advantage is that the design gets worked-over by someone who is 
looking at the placement of every nut and bolt.

I've been able to use some of the designers work (especially for 
irregularly shaped objects) by doing things like tracing over his 
AutoCAD polylines to make sure they are clean and don't have any 
surprises in them.


Joe Dunfee  joe [at] dunfee.com
Gordonville, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. 


------------------------------

From: MissWisc [at] aol.com
Message-ID: <bdd.c152073.330403b2 [at] aol.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:18:26 EST
Subject: Re: big class

psyd [at] cox.net writes:
<<   Hopefully, included in the lesson was that some of the information is 
provided  by those that are as reliable as Charlie Richmond, while other info is 
provided  by those with something to sell, an axe to grind, or just too much 
spare time  (and not enought grey matter) to do anything useful.  >>

Oh  yeah! I've been showing him the differences in the news reporting too. 
Love to  compare the same topic as reported by the BBC versus the US press.  

Just like the bullies at school... consider the source before you decide to  
trust the data.
 
Kristi

------------------------------

Message-ID: <45D2AB9A.8060304 [at] gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:26:34 -0800
From: Chris Warner <cdw.lighting [at] gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ACad problem
References: <list-42407296 [at] prxy.net> <list-42409829 [at] prxy.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-42409829 [at] prxy.net>

Joe wrote:
> For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Loren Schreiber said;
> >What advantage is there to forcing the TD to redraw a
> >complex designer's drawing to produce a working drawing?
>
> One advantage is that the design gets worked-over by someone who is 
> looking at the placement of every nut and bolt.
>
> I've been able to use some of the designers work (especially for 
> irregularly shaped objects) by doing things like tracing over his 
> AutoCAD polylines to make sure they are clean and don't have any 
> surprises in them.
>
>
> Joe Dunfee  joe [at] dunfee.com
> Gordonville, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
>

I don't think that is what Loren was alluding too.  His point is that 
time is wasted corrected a drawing for machining.  This problem gets 
worse when machining a 3D part in CNC, and a line that is down 2 layrs 
deep sends a cutter across a $300 hunk of inconel or other exotic 
alloy.  The lesson is simple, use a selection window in autocad and make 
sure there is no objects below.

Chris


------------------------------

Message-ID: <006001c75009$41aaf880$6500a8c0 [at] om.cox.net>
From: "John Gibilisco" <johngib [at] cox.net>
References: <list-42365172 [at] prxy.net> <list-42365356 [at] prxy.net>
Subject: Re: Cirque's Delirium
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:23:00 -0600



 atvanceld [at] gmail.com wrote:
> It came through Omaha in November, but I wasn't in town.  I'll e-mail
> some folks back there and see if you'd like.

Andy \ Kristi,

 I was on the local sound crew. It must have been a very large local call as
I am "last pick in gym class" on the extra list. The out was a pain because
it felt as if someone was trying to set a record for getting out of the
venue. Couple that with the difficult to understand French accents and it
quickly became a frustrating evening. I was translating about every other
word of instruction as my crew chief ran from one end of the arena to the
other all night. As for the trucks I don't remember how many but 20 trucks
seems correct. The footprint of the raised stage was enormous. Also a good
number of chain motors to rig. Loved the crew shirts. Thankfully sound crew
shirts were a handsome dark blue.

JG



------------------------------

End of Stagecraft Digest #1141
******************************