Return-Path: X-Processed-By: Virex 7 on prxy.net X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.6) with PIPE id 20401459; Mon, 07 Mar 2005 03:00:27 -0800 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.6 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #318 Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 03:00:04 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on prxy.net X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4f2 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #318 1. Foy memorium blurb on "This Week" by "Immel,Patrick" 2. Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 3. Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 4. Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 5. Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship by Marty_Petlock [at] sarasotagov.com 6. Re: Part cues on ETC express. by Andrew Vance 7. Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 8. Re: annotated resumes by Sunil Rajan 9. SM calls the show by "David R. Krajec" 10. FA: Strand 300 network card by "Tony" 11. Re: SM calls the show by IAEG [at] aol.com 12. Re: Foy memorium blurb on "This Week" by "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" 13. Re: SM calls the show by Brian Munroe 14. Re: SM calls the show by John Bracewell 15. Re: SM calls the show by Bill Sapsis 16. Re: SM calls the show by Dale Farmer 17. Re: SM calls the show by John Bracewell 18. Re: SM calls the show by "Chris Warner" 19. Re: SM calls the show by Greg Bierly 20. Re: SM calls the show by "Mike Rock" 21. Re: SM calls the show by Adam Fitchett 22. VectorWorks 10 class problem by "Riter, Andrew (Head Ltg)" 23. Re: Painting S4 Lens by Dorian Kelly *** 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: <147CF8DFB9C5D41187300001FA7EE390244ACAA4 [at] mail.nwmissouri.edu> From: "Immel,Patrick" Subject: Foy memorium blurb on "This Week" Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 09:01:08 -0600 I was just channel surfing and came upon "This Week" hosted by George Stephenop....Stepenopo...the guy that used to work for Clinton. They had a little thing called "in memorium". They had bits on Tillie Fowler and Peter Foy. I think it is nice for the mainstream population to know that we lost someone special. They also listed the 16 new fatalities in Iraq. Here's to a good upcoming week! Patrick Immel Northwest Missouri State University ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <5b.64eda2ee.2f5ca4fb [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 13:24:59 EST Subject: Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship In a message dated 06/03/05 00:47:57 GMT Standard Time, marko [at] email.arizona.edu writes: > Would it be OK if I brought up Surtitles? Fine by me. I find them a great help in keeping track of the plots, which are often complicated. Even having read an unfamiliar opera up in Kobbe, it's often hard to know what's going on, if you don't speak the language, or if the diction is sub-standard. I can live with French, and get bt in German and Italian, but the Slav languages are totally impenetrable. If I ever sat in the stalls, I should find constantly having to shift my eyeline tiring. From the higher and cheaper seats they are less of a problem. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <156.4c3e44fe.2f5ca6ea [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 13:33:14 EST Subject: Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship In a message dated 06/03/05 02:30:24 GMT Standard Time, gbierly [at] dejazzd.com writes: > I don't think our way is best. It is the way theatre around here > operates. If I don't routinely wait for the "go" from the SM > (sometimes even if they are wrong) I am going likely to get fired for > not taking direction. Not always the way I would prefer it but it is > just how some theatres are structured. I know what you mean. I once worked with a very authoritarian SM, who insisted on calling everything. The problem was solved by one of the daftest pieces of theatre design I have ever met. The switchboard (an old Strand Sunset, if anyone remembers them, with resistance dimmers) was located BEHIND the cyclorama. Everything really had to be called. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1f6.5b11f2e.2f5caa45 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 13:47:33 EST Subject: Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship In a message dated 06/03/05 03:29:52 GMT Standard Time, MissWisc [at] aol.com writes: > IMHO the biggest problem with having someone who has done a lot of Rock and > Roll switch to thatre/ballet/etc. is he has probably damaged his hearing > from > the constant loudness of the rock shows. Unless you're wearing hearing > protection for every gig, your ears get beat up fast. > > Andy is right... knowing and adapting to the nuances of the performers makes > > for better sound. That means you have to hear what it is you are working > with. Kristi is right, too. Frequent exposure to high sound levels will damage your hearing. I remember one DJ who used to use a 50W amplifier to drive his headphones. By now he will be deaf. If you're doing a live mix, you need to be in the auditorium with the audience. Even if all you are doing is FX replay, you still need to be in the auditorium, to hear what you are doing, and to set the levels. I once tried to do this without an operator, and it was disastrous. However good the control room sound feed is, and I designed ours, it's not up to this. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship Message-ID: From: Marty_Petlock [at] sarasotagov.com Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:15:28 -0500 Al Fitch wrote: "This has been on my mind in the last few weeks. I personally hate running sound from a script. I really don't prefer running anything from a script as an operator. Apparently, it is regularly practiced at the small college I work at and is common elsewhere. I don't recall running shows from scripts as an operator in any of my previous locations of employment or as a student." Seems weird to me Al. I want anyone working a console for a performance to be looking at the stage, not have their eyes somewhere else. Especially now, when most sound & light cues are a matter of timing as when to push the 'GO' button. In the old days "Warning" meant re-read the cue from your sheet, "Stand By" meant get your hands ready and "Go" meant Go. You're timing your action to what is occurring on stage. My venue still does some productions of local groups that are not well supported technically. I've come to dread the insane howls of laughter when my Spot Ops ask (as if butter wouldn't melt in their mouths) whether they should be watching the performer or reading their scripts. Marty Petlock Technical Facilities Manager Van Wezel P.A.H. Sarasota, FL. ********** E-mail messages sent or received by City of Sarasota officials and employees in connection with official City business are public records subject to disclosure under the Florida Public Records Act. ********** ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: From: Andrew Vance Subject: Re: Part cues on ETC express. Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 15:21:23 -0600 On 05 Mar, 2005, at 10:27, Sarah Clausen wrote: > 1. Select the channels and set levels. > 2. Record Cue # Part # Enter > 3. Release those channels and select others (a channel cannot move to > different levels in different parts of the same cue) > 4. Record Part # Enter > 5. Repeat steps 3-4 until all needed parts (up to 8 total) are > recorded. The way I write Part cues on my Expression/Express is a variation on how I learned to write them on the Obsession: 1. I write what I want the final cue to look like and record it. 2. In Blind, I'll make a Part 1, assign the channels that I want in that Part, and re-record. 3. Repeat as necessary for however many parts the cue needs. 4. Edit timings/waits in Cue List in Blind. Not as easy as it is with the Obsession, but it makes sense to me. Also keeps me in the "Obsession mindset" when I have to program on one. I can also then make macros to assign groups of channels to a particular Part of a cue. I do this frequently when I'm dealing with CXIs to get live fades to time out right. -- Sincerely, Andrew Vance Lighting Designer www.andrewvance.com ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:53:54 EST Subject: Re: Small Detour from SM/Designer Relationship In a message dated 06/03/05 21:12:49 GMT Standard Time, Marty_Petlock [at] sarasotagov.com writes: > Seems weird to me Al. I want anyone working a console for a performance to > be looking at the stage, not have their eyes somewhere else. Especially > now, when most sound & light cues are a matter of timing as when to push > the 'GO' button. It was always so. Look at, or listen to what is really going on. This means having in your head what should be happening. My own cue sheets tell you this, and include information on when to go. Plus how to back up if it's all gone wrong, and what you expect to see or hear. I have high expectations of my operators. I agree that timing is very important, and I resent their being turned into automata on the end of the SM cue system. In the old days "Warning" meant re-read the cue from your > sheet, "Stand By" meant get your hands ready and "Go" meant Go. You're > timing your action to what is occurring on stage. My venue still does some > productions of local groups that are not well supported technically. I've > come to dread the insane howls of laughter when my Spot Ops ask (as if > butter wouldn't melt in their mouths) whether they should be watching the > performer or reading their scripts. The answer to that is 'both'. Reading their scripts to see what they should be doing next, and watching the stage to know when to do it. Frank Wood ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <546BED62-8E94-11D9-BACB-000A95BD64AC [at] earthlink.net> From: Sunil Rajan Subject: Re: annotated resumes Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 18:06:10 -0500 On Mar 6, 2005, at 6:01 AM, Stagecraft wrote: > The consensus of the entire group was that one should *always* send > references with a resume If they want to hire you, they want to > get the ball rolling right away. The references can (and probably > should) be on a second attached sheet.~Paul > > On Mar 5, 2005, at 6:00 AM: > >> If you give the references out front there's no impetus to actually >> communicate is there? I personally don't remember the last time I included references on a resume. Of course, any resume I've given out has been only for "paperwork" purposes, not the actual job! Bear in mind, that the great majority of people in this business get work through contacts, not from references. YMMV, but I've got a friend who may be better off NOT including her references, since that would mean people would actually have to talk to her. My 2 cents... after working on a project for little money, and have already gotten work through the contacts. Sunil Rajan Freelance Audio Mercenary Sound Design, Engineering, Consulting for Stage, Screen, Studio I.A.T.S.E. #395 (based out of NYC) ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "David R. Krajec" Subject: SM calls the show Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:15:07 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Chiming in on the subject I was taught (and continue to teach) that light board op, sound board op, fly op, et. al. do nothing until the SM says "go". Otherwise, you may have chaos. For a heavily cued show, that makes it hard on the SM, and perhaps another method of calling a show is in order, but most of the time it works. (I had a show once, where everybody simply had cue numbers and the SM simply called "Cue # - Go" If you didn't have that number, you didn't do anything. It worked.) That being said, it pays to have ops with brains as well. Case in point, most recently I had an SM that miscalled a moment on opening night. The SM called "Lights Go" but the light board op. knew that the actors had not cleared the set and that was when the cue should have been called. After the show, I admonished the SM and told her to get it right in her book and thanked the light board op. for saving the moment. I then admonished her for not obeying the SM. Sometimes you have to get it wrong to learn how to get it right. On another note, how many people have directors going into the booth to give notes to the SM and ops during a performance? (This ought to light things up!) Making trouble in MKE. David Krajec Assoc. Professor-Theatre Cardinal Stritch University ------------------------------ Message-ID: <00be01c522a2$314be170$0800000a [at] Tony> From: "Tony" References:

Subject: FA: Strand 300 network card Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 23:14:00 -0000 Another little item up on Ebay. The desk already has a network card installed, and don't really need a spare, so if anyone wants one, happy bidding! http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7306213256&ssPageName=ADME:B:LC:UK:1 Ynot ------------------------------ From: IAEG [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 18:17:15 EST Subject: Re: SM calls the show In a message dated 3/6/05 6:16:02 PM, drkrajec [at] stritch.edu writes: << On another note, how many people have directors going into the booth to give notes to the SM and ops during a performance? (This ought to light things up!) >> throw the bastard out of the theatre, , : - ) keith ------------------------------ From: "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" Subject: RE: Foy memorium blurb on "This Week" Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:33:41 -0800 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The Foy Family notified me that there would also be a program at three this afternoon about Foy, ABC. I am not sure whether it is Eastern Standard time or not. Doom And it is good that the entire world knows of Peter's death and his work ...millions and millions have been touched by his expertise and his great humanity. More than three hundred productions a year are using Foy .. many more than that. He will be missed and he was a very good friend. I hope he receives more accolades. His contribution has been enormous. Doom -- Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson, Risk International & Associates, Inc. - www.riskit.com Latest workshops for Educational and Entertainment Industry Performing Arts Personnel (Riggers, and Public Assembly and Educational Technicians) www.riskit.com/workshops International Secondary Education Theater Safety Association (ISETSA) - www.isetsa.org -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Immel,Patrick Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 7:01 AM To: Stagecraft Subject: Foy memorium blurb on "This Week" For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- I was just channel surfing and came upon "This Week" hosted by George Stephenop....Stepenopo...the guy that used to work for Clinton. They had a little thing called "in memorium". They had bits on Tillie Fowler and Peter Foy. I think it is nice for the mainstream population to know that we lost someone special. They also listed the 16 new fatalities in Iraq. Here's to a good upcoming week! Patrick Immel Northwest Missouri State University ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 19:49:48 -0500 From: Brian Munroe Reply-To: Brian Munroe Subject: Re: SM calls the show In-Reply-To: References:

One of the strangest shows I ever worked on had no stage manager, per say. The Frankfurt Opera's production of John Cages's ''Europeras 1 & 2" back in the late 80's Everything was cued from a time clock. Singers, musicians, props, sound, electrics, flyrail, you name it. There were large monitors everywhere in the theatre. In the wings, hanging from the rail, in the booths, on the balcony rail for the singers. The monitors played a VCR tape of a digital clock. At 1:36 this piece flew in. At 3:47 this prop was moved. Really weird. Brian Munroe On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:15:07 -0600, David R. Krajec wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Chiming in on the subject > I was taught (and continue to teach) that light board op, sound board op, > fly op, et. al. do nothing until the SM says "go". > Otherwise, you may have chaos. For a heavily cued show, that makes it hard > on the SM, and perhaps another method of calling a show is in order, but > most of the time it works. (I had a show once, where everybody simply had > cue numbers and the SM simply called "Cue # - Go" If you didn't have that > number, you didn't do anything. It worked.) > That being said, it pays to have ops with brains as well. Case in point, > most recently I had an SM that miscalled a moment on opening night. The SM > called "Lights Go" but the light board op. knew that the actors had not > cleared the set and that was when the cue should have been called. After > the show, I admonished the SM and told her to get it right in her book and > thanked the light board op. for saving the moment. I then admonished her > for not obeying the SM. > Sometimes you have to get it wrong to learn how to get it right. > > On another note, how many people have directors going into the booth to give > notes to the SM and ops during a performance? > (This ought to light things up!) > > Making trouble in MKE. > > David Krajec > Assoc. Professor-Theatre > Cardinal Stritch University > > ------------------------------ Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20050306200721.02d10598 [at] pop.lightlink.com> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 20:14:14 -0500 From: John Bracewell Subject: Re: SM calls the show In-Reply-To: References: >I was taught (and continue to teach) that light board op, sound board op, >fly op, et. al. do nothing until the SM says "go". >Otherwise, you may have chaos. Well, not necessarily. I think this is part of the argument that Frank Wood has been carrying on for quite some time. Actually, I was trained on a system where each op learned his/her cues and took them according to either a cue line or an action on stage. If we all did our jobs, it worked quite well. In fact, some of the tightest and most energetic shows I've ever seen came from that system. The first time someone told me that a stage manager was going to call my cues, my response was, "Over my dead body!" Well, I was the designer and also the op. I won't say that I've seen the light, because I still believe that there are merits to the system of each op running cues at the appropriate moment on response, not on command from the SM. (Yeah, I know. Rank heresy! But what the heck?) That said, I've come to believe that having the SM call the show is the most appropriate and logical system for a variety of reasons. Most of them I don't need to go into, because we've hashed them over so many times on this forum. My primary point here was that autonomous operators don't necessarily guarantee chaos, but having autonomous ops does require a level of commitment to the show that we don't always see in contemporary practice. The SM, on the other hand, lives with the show from the very beginning. -- JLB ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 20:18:46 -0500 Subject: Re: SM calls the show From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: on 3/6/05 7:49 PM, Brian Munroe at bpmunroe [at] gmail.com wrote: > One of the strangest shows I ever worked on had no stage manager, per > say. The Frankfurt Opera's production of John Cages's ''Europeras 1 & > 2" back in the late 80's > > Everything was cued from a time clock. Singers, musicians, props, > sound, electrics, flyrail, you name it. There were large monitors > everywhere in the theatre. In the wings, hanging from the rail, in > the booths, on the balcony rail for the singers. The monitors played > a VCR tape of a digital clock. At 1:36 this piece flew in. At 3:47 > this prop was moved. > > Really weird. well, you did say it was John Cage piece, right? I mean, I like his stuff and all, but it sure is weird. Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Please support the Long Reach Long Riders on their 2nd annual benefit ride http://sapsis-rigging.com/LRLR.html ------------------------------ Message-ID: <422BBF6E.1085321D [at] cybercom.net> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 21:41:50 -0500 From: Dale Farmer Subject: Re: SM calls the show References:

John Bracewell wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > >I was taught (and continue to teach) that light board op, sound board op, > >fly op, et. al. do nothing until the SM says "go". > >Otherwise, you may have chaos. > > Well, not necessarily. I think this is part of the argument that Frank > Wood has been carrying on for quite some time. Actually, I was trained on > a system where each op learned his/her cues and took them according to > either a cue line or an action on stage. If we all did our jobs, it worked > quite well. In fact, some of the tightest and most energetic shows I've > ever seen came from that system. The first time someone told me that a > stage manager was going to call my cues, my response was, "Over my dead > body!" Well, I was the designer and also the op. > > I won't say that I've seen the light, because I still believe that there > are merits to the system of each op running cues at the appropriate moment > on response, not on command from the SM. (Yeah, I know. Rank heresy! But > what the heck?) That said, I've come to believe that having the SM call > the show is the most appropriate and logical system for a variety of > reasons. Most of them I don't need to go into, because we've hashed them > over so many times on this forum. My primary point here was that > autonomous operators don't necessarily guarantee chaos, but having > autonomous ops does require a level of commitment to the show that we don't > always see in contemporary practice. The SM, on the other hand, lives with > the show from the very beginning. > > -- JLB That works great, as long as you have the same operators who are with the show. But what happens when your operator is run over by a pie truck and is going to be in the hospital for the next few days getting his leg put back together? (( Really happened, I was the guy they called in to cover that week. )) --Dale ------------------------------ Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20050306221949.00b46608 [at] pop.lightlink.com> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 22:24:22 -0500 From: John Bracewell Subject: Re: SM calls the show In-Reply-To: References:

> [Automonous operation] works great, as long as you have the same > operators who are with >the show. But what happens when your operator is run over by a pie truck >and is going to be in the hospital for the next few days getting his leg put >back together? (( Really happened, I was the guy they called in to cover >that week. )) Which is exactly why a self-prompting operator system will usually only work in a college or community theatre environment where the run of the show is short enough so that its not too likely that the operator is going to go away. Granted, accidents can always happen, but on a long-run show, it's just about guaranteed that at least one op will drop out before the end of the run, probably more than one. Believe me, I'm not about to agree with Frank that SM's shouldn't call the show. Far from it. (Frankly, I"m not sure that even college and community theatres should be on an autonomous operator system, though there certainly are a few out there that still use this way of running.) -- JLB ------------------------------ Message-ID: <05b701c522c8$3e8081e0$6401a8c0 [at] chris> From: "Chris Warner" References:

Subject: Re: SM calls the show Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 19:46:28 -0800 I believe in the SM calling the show, but have done it both ways. It mostly depends on how competent the light board op, and whether or not you can count on the same op for every show. Currently board oping a production of Laramie, the SM is going insane due to the large VOLUME of light cues. Must be close to 200+ cues that have follows, we get out of sequence ANYWHERE, the show is F****d, might as well go back and start again (direct quote from the Light Designer). But, for a sitting room drama, where characters sit around and hash out the events in dialogue, well, for that I believe the boardop should be able to call her own cues. my .02. Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Bracewell" To: "Stagecraft" Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 5:14 PM Subject: Re: SM calls the show > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > > >I was taught (and continue to teach) that light board op, sound board op, > >fly op, et. al. do nothing until the SM says "go". > >Otherwise, you may have chaos. > > Well, not necessarily. I think this is part of the argument that Frank > Wood has been carrying on for quite some time. Actually, I was trained on > a system where each op learned his/her cues and took them according to > either a cue line or an action on stage. If we all did our jobs, it worked > quite well. In fact, some of the tightest and most energetic shows I've > ever seen came from that system. The first time someone told me that a > stage manager was going to call my cues, my response was, "Over my dead > body!" Well, I was the designer and also the op. > > I won't say that I've seen the light, because I still believe that there > are merits to the system of each op running cues at the appropriate moment > on response, not on command from the SM. (Yeah, I know. Rank heresy! But > what the heck?) That said, I've come to believe that having the SM call > the show is the most appropriate and logical system for a variety of > reasons. Most of them I don't need to go into, because we've hashed them > over so many times on this forum. My primary point here was that > autonomous operators don't necessarily guarantee chaos, but having > autonomous ops does require a level of commitment to the show that we don't > always see in contemporary practice. The SM, on the other hand, lives with > the show from the very beginning. > > -- JLB > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.6.2 - Release Date: 3/4/2005 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.6.2 - Release Date: 3/4/2005 ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: From: Greg Bierly Subject: Re: SM calls the show Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 23:02:28 -0500 > << On another note, how many people have directors going into the > booth to > give notes to the SM and ops during a performance? > (This ought to light things up!) >> > > throw the bastard out of the theatre, , > : - ) > keith > > Don't I wish. My director will add an entire number from Friday nights performance to Saturday nights performance. No matter how well we document the cues they are ALWAYS wrong because the piece feels different from night to night so the light and sound cues should go when it feels right to her. I insist she calls her own show now because I refuse to have her stand over my shoulder and tell me when to relay the GO to the crew over headset. Greg Bierly Technical Director Hempfield HS ------------------------------ Message-ID: <003b01c522d1$465a27f0$80fea8c0 [at] Fred> From: "Mike Rock" References:

Subject: Re: SM calls the show Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 22:51:06 -0600 When doing a show I like to be a the point where I know what needs to be done before I get the stand-by. I still like to know the SM is there in case I get side tracked by something like a bootleger. ALso if for some reason some one has to step up and cover for me they should be able to figure it out between the SM and my cheat sheet. Mike ------------------------------ Message-ID: <422BDE34.2030008 [at] fitchtech.net> Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 23:53:08 -0500 From: Adam Fitchett Subject: Re: SM calls the show References: In-Reply-To: David R. Krajec wrote: >On another note, how many people have directors going into the booth to give >notes to the SM and ops during a performance? >(This ought to light things up!) > > I was always taught that once a show opened the SM took over control and the director no longer had any real say. Aside from that, any changes a director wants to make show go through the SM who can choose to implement it or not and pass along the change to the people involved/responsible. The first, and only, show I mixed for San Jose State the director came up to me during a performance (mix position is in the house) and was instructing me to turn it up beyond what I felt was a safe level. When I mentioned this to my TD after the show he responded: "she apparently has a hearing problem." ------------------------------ Message-ID: <297C9E3B63B2D3119C8100508B5ED28F16020068 [at] exchange2.ubc.ca> From: "Riter, Andrew (Head Ltg)" Subject: VectorWorks 10 class problem Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:03:48 -0800 Hello all I'm using VectorWorks 10, and am having issues with classes, and portions of things not working as I'd expect them to: I have a Lighting Position (a 2D object as recognized by VW) drawn, on layer "Royal Box", class "Lighting Position". It turns invisible when I set class LX positions to Invisible (GOOD), but with LX Positions visible, it also turns invisible when the Class "Label - Purpose" is turned invisible (BAD). "Label Purpose" was created (I believe) as part of an instrument legend (don't get me going on those, sigh, they never centre correctly, and the text is often in the wrong direction, and sometimes I can grab the text and move it, and sometimes I grab the entire unit, no matter how close I zoom in and click on the lable). "Label - Purpose" will also turn some lines on layer "Canopy" and Class "Building" invisible, even when those lines for part of a group. I think there is a similar fault involving other classes in my drawing as well. It seems to affect VW-recognized Lighting Object (ie 2D instruments) or Lighting Positions. Any thoughts as to why, and how I'd correct this? I'm used to Generic Cadd 6, spent some time on other programs, etc. I've never come across Classes before. Can you give me some examples of how this second set of definitions/control tools/nomenclature would be best used, and why, and how. I have an idea, I just can't really wrap my head around it. If you can supply real examples of how you use it with your house plot (or a show plot), that would be extremely helpful. See you all in Toronto, mucklucks and all. Andrew M. Riter Head Lighting Technician Chan Centre for the Performing Arts University of British Columbia 6265 Crescent Road Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z1 604-822-2372 604-822-1606 fax chanlights [at] exchange.ubc.ca ------------------------------ Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 10:40:30 +0000 From: Dorian Kelly Subject: Re: Painting S4 Lens The tour manager almost blew a blood vessel till we >showed him the rolls had come from our supply closet. The looks of awe >and general murmer from the road techs/actors was amazing that we had >the budget to "throw away" on good gaffers tape. Just out of interest how much do you pay for a role of best grade gaffer tape in the US? It occurs to me that if a dancer trips on non-stuck reused gaffer it could get dammed expensive. The insurance companies would not pay out. Dorian Illuminati Creative Technology 3 Gladstone Road Colchester CO1 2EB +44 1206 798075 +44 7770 950964 ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #318 *****************************