Return-Path: X-Processed-By: Virex 7 on prxy.net X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.10) with PIPE id 21633586; Mon, 04 Apr 2005 03:00:34 -0700 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.10 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #352 Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 03:00:21 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on prxy.net X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4f2 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #352 1. Re Aisle Lights by "Bll Conner" 2. Positioning your hazer by "Christopher K. Nimm" 3. Re: Positioning your hazer by Mat Goebel 4. Re: Positioning your hazer by "Weston Wilkerson" 5. Re: Positioning your hazer by "Mike Rock" 6. Re: Positioning your hazer by "Rob Carovillano" 7. Re: Positioning your hazer by Boyd Ostroff 8. Re: Straight Jacket by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 9. Re: box office by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 10. Re: box office by IAEG [at] aol.com 11. Re: Projector Issues by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 12. Re: Projector Issues by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 13. Re: Projector Issues by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 14. Re: Projector Issues by Boyd Ostroff 15. Re: Projector Issues by "Chris Warner" 16. Re: Positioning your hazer by Stephen Litterst 17. Re: Positioning your hazer by Boyd Ostroff 18. Re: Projector Issues by Boyd Ostroff 19. Re: Positioning your hazer by "Immel,Patrick" 20. Re: Projector Issues by Stephen Litterst 21. Re: aisle lights by Mitch Hefter 22. Re: Positioning your hazer by "Derek Madonia" 23. Re: Projector Issues by Dale Farmer 24. Re: Positioning your hazer by "Randy Whitcomb" *** 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: <000b01c5385a$b9719d10$6a01a8c0 [at] BCA1> Reply-To: "Bll Conner" From: "Bll Conner" Subject: Re Aisle Lights Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 09:37:51 -0500 Chris posted "You COULD have one set of aisle lights that could be set for whatever you need, and another set of lights (say, some huge floods) that come on in the event of an emergency" and Steve posted "This is a common application for dimmed house lights that do double duty as emergency lighting fed from a generator." I just want to be clear that I believe national model codes require illumination both in emergency and non-emergency conditions and allowing house lights to dim to full out without other illumination of the means of egress is not permitted. Thus, the transfer switches are not a complete answer to code required illumination - but would usually meet the requirements for emergency illumination. Regarding "another set of lights" approach, it is one I have proposed and seen implemented on several occasions, especially where the normal house lighting uses, for instance, the ubiquitous ETC Source 4 Par, which is plug and cord connected. Plug and cord doesn't comply with emergency requirement and hard wiring a fixture that is listed as a stage lighting fixture is also not permitted. I usually call those big quartz floods on emergency transfer "rehearsal" lights. I like the fact they can be turned on and used occasionally as a kind of test. Something that sits there unused until an emergency is in my experience not as reliable as something that is used every day or at least regularily. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000a01c53878$f4d507c0$6c01a8c0 [at] tamiasuis> From: "Christopher K. Nimm" References: Subject: Positioning your hazer Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 13:14:19 -0500 I'm curious: where do you put your hazer on the stage to ensure (or attempt for) an even coverage of haze during performances, and why do you put it there? Do you use ductwork? Fans? Is there any ambient "wind" on the stage that you have to worry about? I know that it'll vary from theatre to theatre, but I'd still like to hear about it. Personally, I'm trying to find a good place for a hazer for an upcoming dance show. Thanks. Chris Nimm no credentials whatsoever ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 11:20:05 -0700 From: Mat Goebel Reply-To: Mat Goebel Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer In-Reply-To: References:

I've had success putting it in one of the wings (we use stage right) and having someone with a piece of cardboard create a small breeze to encourage it to spread across the rest of the stage. On Apr 3, 2005 11:14 AM, Christopher K. Nimm wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > I'm curious: where do you put your hazer on the stage to ensure (or attempt > for) an even coverage of haze during performances, and why do you put it > there? Do you use ductwork? Fans? Is there any ambient "wind" on the > stage that you have to worry about? I know that it'll vary from theatre to > theatre, but I'd still like to hear about it. Personally, I'm trying to > find a good place for a hazer for an upcoming dance show. Thanks. > > Chris Nimm > no credentials whatsoever > > -- Mat Goebel Cell: 510.693.1448 ------------------------------ Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: "Weston Wilkerson" Cc: mgoebel [at] gmail.com Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 14:28:27 -0400

>I'm curious: where do you put your hazer on the stage to ensure (or attempt
> for) an even coverage of haze during performances, and why do you put it
> there? Do you use ductwork? Fans? Is there any ambient "wind" on the
> stage that you have to worry about? I know that it'll vary from theatre to
> theatre, but I'd still like to hear about it. Personally, I'm trying to
> find a good place for a hazer for an upcoming dance show. Thanks.

I like to position them totally opposite the air HVAC returns. If the return in Down Right in the ceiling, i would put the unit up left on the floor. That way the natural circulation of the room will spread the haze.

In my experience, despite however safe a specific unit maybe, backstage crew and actors always prefer the unit at least head high. Unless you have particulary strong air currents, the heigth shouldn't matter.

Also, don't put it upstage of softgoods, even scrims. I have worked multiple shows where people claim that haze will easily travel through scims. IMHO, it won't. You end up with a hazy pocket between the cyc and scrim.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Weston Wilkerson
e: Weston_Wilkerson [at] hotmail.com
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

------------------------------ Message-ID: <000901c5387c$02567d90$80fea8c0 [at] Fred> From: "Mike Rock" Cc: mgoebel [at] gmail.com (Mat Goebel) References:

Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 13:36:10 -0500 We have had some success using a magnum pro fogger in the wings pointed offstage with a box fan blowing at an angle towards the opposite wall. The thinking behind having the fog shoot offstage then bowen back on is so that it will not come out as a big cloud but rather a less noticeable puff. It is a little thicker than haze but gets the job done. Mike Rock ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 15:43:45 -0400 From: "Rob Carovillano" Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer Message-id: <000301c53885$7393f790$5aa44481 [at] LAPTOP> References:

I have found that upstage left works best for us. It took a lot of trial and error to find it. There is quite a bit of natural airflow in the space and it doesnt really follow with the positioning of the air returns. It also changes depending whether the building is on heat or AC. We have tried elevating the hazer to the fly galley, using fans etc, pointing it off stage, upstage etc. It seems that the haze spreads just as quickly without a fan. I think the trick is to have enough time to let it spread out. It seems if there is a light haze base it is easier to make it thicker faster. (Using a Neutron) Rob Carovillano Technical Director - Bluett Theatre Saint Joseph's University (610) 660-1044 rcarovillano [at] verizon.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Christopher K. Nimm To: Stagecraft Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 2:14 PM Subject: Positioning your hazer For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- I'm curious: where do you put your hazer on the stage to ensure (or attempt for) an even coverage of haze during performances, and why do you put it there? Do you use ductwork? Fans? Is there any ambient "wind" on the stage that you have to worry about? I know that it'll vary from theatre to theatre, but I'd still like to hear about it. Personally, I'm trying to find a good place for a hazer for an upcoming dance show. Thanks. Chris Nimm no credentials whatsoever ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 16:08:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Boyd Ostroff Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References:

It really depends on the set, how much space we have, etc. Generally we do one of two things (using either one or two G-300 hazers) 1. For a heavy haze they go in the last wing upstage. We have a few of the small Vornado fans that are used to help get the haze out onto the set before it rises too high 2. For a more general even look we put it upstage of the drop (or cyc, or RP, whatever) and just let it disperse gradually. This can give a nice effect, but the downside is that it makes a very heavy haze in the upstage/offstage areas. This can lead to complaints from the cast... We almost never put it downstage. For one thing, it's too crowded there. The G300 also makes a hissing sound that the music staff really dislikes, so the farther away the better. | Boyd Ostroff | Director of Design and Technology | Opera Company of Philadelphia | http://tech.operaphilly.com | ostroff [at] operaphilly.com ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 16:35:00 EDT Subject: Re: Straight Jacket In a message dated 29/03/05 03:08:38 GMT Daylight Time, breed [at] whittier.edu writes: > Do a search for "straight jacket" and you should find one listed if you > scroll down the page. At a cost of only $22.75, it might not be a very > convincing version, but you could check some of the many other links > provided on the Costume Page site. Possibly a search for "strait jacket" might me more rewarding, since that is its correct name. With or without the space. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <53.24d08034.2f81af5a [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 16:43:06 EDT Subject: Re: box office In a message dated 29/03/05 04:23:25 GMT Daylight Time, IAEG [at] aol.com writes: > in the UK isn't it called a "Booking Office" ? Not usually. it's a 'Box Office', as in most other English-speaking countries, and listed in the telephone directory as such. I have no idea where the term came from. My theory is that the only areas of the old theatre which could be reserved were the boxes. The peasants in the Pit (now the stalls) and gallery queued for and bought their tickets on the night. Hence, 'box office' i.e. office for the reservation of boxes. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: IAEG [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1d5.3987f9dc.2f81b138 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 16:51:04 EDT Subject: Re: box office In a message dated 4/3/05 4:44:12 PM, FrankWood95 [at] aol.com writes: << In a message dated 29/03/05 04:23:25 GMT Daylight Time, IAEG [at] aol.com writes: > in the UK isn't it called a "Booking Office" ? Not usually. it's a 'Box Office', as in most other English-speaking countries, and listed in the telephone directory as such. I have no idea where the term came from. My theory is that the only areas of the old theatre which could be reserved were the boxes. The peasants in the Pit (now the stalls) and gallery queued for and bought their tickets on the night. Hence, 'box office' i.e. office for the reservation of boxes. Frank Wood >> I know in my "morgue" of old brochures and fliers I have materials from THE ROYAL BALLET and ROYAL OPERA (Covent Garden) and the part of the flier you fill out with your ticket order is labeled "BOOKING FORM". so perhaps that's where I got that notion from very best, Keith Arsenault IAEG - International Arts & Entertainment Group Tampa, Florida ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <83.24d3618d.2f81b302 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 16:58:42 EDT Subject: Re: Projector Issues In a message dated 29/03/05 21:55:05 GMT Daylight Time, psyd [at] cox.net writes: > I see. Although I don't understand why interrupting the frame would make > it seem less like a flicker. It would take the same interval to change > from one frame to the next whether each frame was interrupted or not, so if > they eye percieves on interruption of that length as flicker, wouldn't two > be worse? Two interruptions would contribute nothing to the overall > percieved light level either. > Anyone close to a contemporary projector at the moment? Anyone know where > the original tests and research came from? Go back to the original silent movie speed of 16fps. By fitting the shutter with three blades, this brought the flicker rate up to 48fps. As sound speed, a two-blade shutter works. OK, it's the same image two or three times. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:10:44 EDT Subject: Re: Projector Issues In a message dated 29/03/05 22:20:39 GMT Daylight Time, jdurand [at] interstellar.com writes: > They started with a split screen with DLP on > one half and a 35mm answer print (Frank, American movie term, very good > quality print) on the other. Having been around film (in the TV business) on and off since 1964, the jargon is not unfamiliar. Perhaps it's one area where the two countries are quite close together. > > The DLP looked BETTER than the film. They said they were originally > thinking DLP wouldn't be that good due to having fewer pixels than even a > good consumer monitor. But, the pixels don't jitter and are very accurate > as far as color and contrast. What was the original source for the DLP? Presumably the cut camera negative, or the same answer print. Digital processing can enhance images, yes: I do it myself all the time with still images. With fast processing power, and a trained and experienced user, minor corrections can be achieved which would be hugely difficult to impossible in the labs. As for jitter, that is partly a question of the projector design, and partly of its mechanical maintenance and adjustment. It is possible to deal with it at the digital stage, too. My own digital camera (still) has an 'anti camera shake' system fitted. I presume that while an exposure is being recorded, changes to the digital image are blocked. But, when you have mechanics around who can set up a 10:1 zoom lens to a back focal distance of 52mm, plus 0, minus 5 microns, throughout the zoom and focal ranges, taking the jitter out of a projector comes as a fairly trivial problem. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1de.389d4707.2f81c8c6 [at] aol.com> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 18:31:34 EDT Subject: Re: Projector Issues In a message dated 29/03/05 22:53:30 GMT Daylight Time, slitterst [at] ithaca.edu writes: > It's back to the persistence of vision built into the brain. The > brain sees the repeated image as a 'new' image and the persistence > resets. It's all about tricking the brain. Also, increasing the > "refresh rate" by showing each frame twice means the brain can filter > the higher frequency flicker more easily. Even though the motion is > changing at 24Hz, the brain is "seeing" 48 Hz because of that extra > flicker. So it's not so much about making the motion smoother, but > about alleviating the flicker. It's also why interlace in TV systems. The basic frame rate is 30 or 25fps, according to which side of the pond you're on. Interlace doubles this., to 60 or 50fps, as far as the visual perception goes. These rates are above the flicker threshold. They also happen to be the nominal mains frequencies. In the early days of TV equipment, it was important that they matched. In those days, the BBC went to the length of running the whole recording booth on 60Hz mains, off a generator. It worked, as well as the whole system worked. I occasionally see archive material from then, and I cringe! Expectations are higher; picture quality is higher: technology is better. Then, we were breaking ground. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 19:10:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Boyd Ostroff Subject: Re: Projector Issues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: > It's also why interlace in TV systems. No doubt this is a factor, but based on several articles I've read it had more to do with the capabilities of original video equipment which had to sweep the electron beam across the screen and also the available bandwidth for tranmission. With LCD's and plasma screens there is no interlace (nothing is actually "scanning"), so the 60i signals must be deinterlaced and converted to 30 (or 25) frame progressive (30p). This is all a hot topic around "filmakers" working with digital video. Evidently some tests were done by the movie studios perhaps 30 years ago when they were considering different formats. Supposedly the results showed that even though the quality was better as you increased frame rate beyond 30 fps it was perceived as too immediate, like a TV show. The studios felt this interfered with the theatrical nature of film and gave it too much of a documentary feel. As I said, this is quite a hotly debated topic in the online forums. The 24 frame progressive (24p) video format was developed to emulate this film "motion signature," and originally appeared in an inexpensive video camera (the Panasonic DVX-100) about 3 years ago. More recently the Canon XL-2 also added support for 24p, and both of these cameras also shoot in 30 frame progressive (30p). These slower frame rates have a different amount of motion blur than normal 60i interlaced video. They especially show a difference when there is fast movement. With 60i video the edges of moving objects have a jagged comb-like appearance because the alternate fields were captured 1/60 second apart. With 30p or 24p these edges would just be blurry. There is another issue related to interlaced standard definition video; if you have very thin horizontal lines they can appear in one field but not the other, causing flicker. So vertical blending is added between scan lines, but this results in about a 25% loss of vertical resolution. However shooting in progressive mode, where the entire image is written simultaneously 30 times a second, doesn't have this problem and can offer a higher resolution. In a couple weeks at NAB both Panasonic and JVC will introduce new low cost HD cameras that will also support 24p and 30p. Sony has chosen to go a different route with their HDR-FX1 and HVR-Z1 low cost HD cameras; they only support 1080x1920 interlaced (1080i). | Boyd Ostroff | Director of Design and Technology | Opera Company of Philadelphia | http://tech.operaphilly.com | ostroff [at] operaphilly.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <0dd101c538ae$aab74690$6401a8c0 [at] chris> From: "Chris Warner" References:

Subject: Re: Projector Issues Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 17:38:48 -0700 Funny, Sony steps off the bandwagon and doesn't get supported.... BETA Max anyone? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Boyd Ostroff" To: "Stagecraft" Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 4:10 PM Subject: Re: Projector Issues > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: > > > It's also why interlace in TV systems. > > No doubt this is a factor, but based on several articles I've read it had > more to do with the capabilities of original video equipment which had to > sweep the electron beam across the screen and also the available bandwidth > for tranmission. With LCD's and plasma screens there is no interlace > (nothing is actually "scanning"), so the 60i signals must be deinterlaced > and converted to 30 (or 25) frame progressive (30p). > > This is all a hot topic around "filmakers" working with digital video. > Evidently some tests were done by the movie studios perhaps 30 years ago > when they were considering different formats. Supposedly the results > showed that even though the quality was better as you increased frame rate > beyond 30 fps it was perceived as too immediate, like a TV show. The > studios felt this interfered with the theatrical nature of film and gave > it too much of a documentary feel. > > As I said, this is quite a hotly debated topic in the online forums. The > 24 frame progressive (24p) video format was developed to emulate this film > "motion signature," and originally appeared in an inexpensive video camera > (the Panasonic DVX-100) about 3 years ago. More recently the Canon XL-2 > also added support for 24p, and both of these cameras also shoot in 30 > frame progressive (30p). These slower frame rates have a different amount > of motion blur than normal 60i interlaced video. They especially show a > difference when there is fast movement. With 60i video the edges of moving > objects have a jagged comb-like appearance because the alternate fields > were captured 1/60 second apart. With 30p or 24p these edges would just be > blurry. > > There is another issue related to interlaced standard definition video; if > you have very thin horizontal lines they can appear in one field but not > the other, causing flicker. So vertical blending is added between scan > lines, but this results in about a 25% loss of vertical resolution. > However shooting in progressive mode, where the entire image is written > simultaneously 30 times a second, doesn't have this problem and can offer > a higher resolution. > > In a couple weeks at NAB both Panasonic and JVC will introduce new low > cost HD cameras that will also support 24p and 30p. Sony has chosen to go > a different route with their HDR-FX1 and HVR-Z1 low cost HD cameras; they > only support 1080x1920 interlaced (1080i). > > | Boyd Ostroff > | Director of Design and Technology > | Opera Company of Philadelphia > | http://tech.operaphilly.com > | ostroff [at] operaphilly.com > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 4/1/2005 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 4/1/2005 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 20:40:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Litterst Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer In-reply-to: Message-id: <2000.172.135.193.63.1112575258.squirrel [at] 172.135.193.63> References:

> --------------------------------------------------- > I'm curious: where do you put your hazer on the stage to ensure (or > attempt > for) an even coverage of haze during performances, and why do you put it > there? Do you use ductwork? Fans? Is there any ambient "wind" on the > stage that you have to worry about? I know that it'll vary from theatre > to > theatre, but I'd still like to hear about it. Personally, I'm trying to > find a good place for a hazer for an upcoming dance show. Thanks. In our proscenium house, the hazer goes US of the cyc until the first audience. ONce the audience is in, the airflow is completely unpredictable and the hazers keep moving night by night. When it works, the US position is great because the haze really disperses is quite even by the time the audience sees it. Steve Litterst ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:43:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Boyd Ostroff Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References:

On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Stephen Litterst wrote: > ONce the audience is in, the airflow is completely unpredictable and the > hazers keep moving night by night. How true. On opening night all bets are off. With a 2800 seat theatre and lots of doors the circulation patterns really do change in unpredictable ways. It also seems to be influenced by temperature and humidity. I think the oil base hazes may be a little less susceptible to the G-300's water/glycerol mix, but our singers have only approved the G300. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:51:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Boyd Ostroff Subject: Re: Projector Issues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References:

On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Chris Warner wrote: > Funny, Sony steps off the bandwagon and doesn't get supported.... BETA > Max anyone? Yeah, that's one way to look at it, and some have criticized them. But these cameras are also developing a very loyal following and are quite reasonably priced. I hear that the BBC is going to replace their fleet of PD-150's and VX-2000's with them. The JVC looks nice but will probably cost a lot more. The Panasonic is bit of a breakthrough in that it doesn't use tape but solid state memory cards. These will initially be quite expensive however. I think Sony will continue to do very well with their HDV cameras. All though the don't shoot true progressive, they have pseudo 24p and 30p modes, and the pro model shoots PAL and NTSC standard definition as well as HD, with the option of recording in DVCAM format. Plus Sony has the advantage of being the first to market with a 3ccd HDV camera (yeah, I know that also sounds a little like Betamax ;-) Shameless plug: read all about this kind of stuff at: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/ | Boyd Ostroff | Director of Design and Technology | Opera Company of Philadelphia | http://tech.operaphilly.com | ostroff [at] operaphilly.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <147CF8DFB9C5D41187300001FA7EE390244ACB08 [at] mail.nwmissouri.edu> From: "Immel,Patrick" Subject: RE: Positioning your hazer Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 19:54:38 -0500 -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Litterst To: Stagecraft Sent: 4/3/2005 7:40 PM Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer When it works, the US position is great because the haze really disperses is quite even by the time the audience sees it. Steve Litterst ***************************************** How long before house open do you turn on your hazer? Patrick Immel Northwest Missouri State University ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 20:54:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Litterst Subject: Re: Projector Issues In-reply-to: Message-id: <2149.172.135.193.63.1112576084.squirrel [at] 172.135.193.63> References: > --------------------------------------------------- >> The DLP looked BETTER than the film. They said they were originally >> thinking DLP wouldn't be that good due to having fewer pixels than even >> a >> good consumer monitor. But, the pixels don't jitter and are very >> accurate >> as far as color and contrast. > > What was the original source for the DLP? Presumably the cut camera > negative, > or the same answer print. Based on the context of JErry's screening, the original source for the DLP was the original computer rendering of the movie. Monster's Inc was a PIXAR film, and they've been known to do screenings from the original digital source. This is why PIXAR DVDs have incredible clarity, since they've never seen a film print. Steve Litterst ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.1.0.6.2.20050403172747.02cc6f50 [at] mail.DesignRelief.com> Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 20:14:16 -0500 From: Mitch Hefter Subject: Re: aisle lights In-Reply-To: References: Greg Persinger wrote: >Chris Warner wrote: > > In my experience Generators are not as fast as an Inverter/UPS system (I > > maintain these things for a living), genny's I am told can take as much as > > 15 mins to take a load, an inverter is instant. > >Chris, > >You have been told wrong. > >Yes battery powered emergency systems are almost instant on, but most >generator systems are online in 30seconds or less. > Article 700 NEC (Emergency Systems): From the scope of article 700: "... systems are intended to automatically supply illumination, power, or both, to designated areas and equipment in the event of failure of the normal supply or in the event of accident to elements of a system intended to supply, distribute, and control power and illumination essential for safety to human life." This includes egress. 700.12 General Requirements. "Current supply shall be such that, in the event of failure of the normal supply to, or within, the building or group of buildings concerned, emergency lighting, emergency power, or both shall be available within the time required for the application but not to exceed 10 seconds. ..." Yes - 10 seconds from Power Failure/Interruption to emergency light. Use of dimmers for aisle lights is not prohibited, but the system must be capable of delivering "restored" light essentially instantaneously, since it may take the full 10 seconds to provide power. If the electronics in the dimmer and/or dimmer rack require a few seconds to boot up, you're past the 10 second time frame. That's why a bypass scheme, transfer contactor, or alternate source such as battery packs (referred to as unit equipment in the Code) are generally used. Not all "standby" power systems are true emergency systems. 701: Legally Required Standby Power. "... These systems are intended to automatically supply power to selected loads (other than those classed as emergency systems) in the event of failure of the normal source." The Fine Print Note to 701.2 states: "Legally required standby systems are typically installed to serve loads, such as heating and refrigeration systems, communications systems, ventilation and smoke removal systems, sewage disposal, lighting systems, and industrial processes, that, when stopped during any interruption of the normal electrical supply, could create hazards or hamper rescue or fire-fighting operations." 701.11 Legally Required Standby Systems. Current supply shall be such that, in the event of failure of the normal supply to, or within, the building or group of buildings concerned, legally required standby power will be available within the time required for the application but not to exceed 60 seconds. ..." 702: Optional Standby Systems The Fine Print Note to 702.2 states: "Optional standby systems are typically installed to provide an alternate source of electric power for such facilities as industrial and commercial buildings, farms, and residences and to serve loads such as heating and refrigeration systems, data processing and communications systems, and industrial processes that, when stopped during any power outage, could cause discomfort, serious interruption of the process, damage to the product or process, or the like." Another important fact: In contrast to Article 700, Articles 701 and 702 both permit the standby circuits to occupy the same raceways, cables, boxes, and cabinets with other general wiring. Some jurisdictions do not make a disticntion between 701 and 702. It is the occupancy that defines the type of system. The NEC states the requirements for the system once the occupancy has been defined. . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------ Mitch Hefter stagecraft [at] DesignRelief.com [at] DesignRelief.com Office: Entertainment Technology / a Division of the Genlyte Group mhefter [at] genlyte.com ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Positioning your hazer Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 21:21:25 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Derek Madonia" We place our two hazers (Neutron XS) in our catwalks just upstage of the plaster line. We place a Vornado fan behind each and blast the haze across the cats. The heat/cooling vents force the haze though out the space. -D =20 =20 ________________________________ Derek Madonia Master Electrician Geva Theatre Center Geva Electric's Website (585) 232-1366 x3054 -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Christopher K. Nimm Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 2:14 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Positioning your hazer For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- I'm curious: where do you put your hazer on the stage to ensure (or attempt=20 for) an even coverage of haze during performances, and why do you put it there? Do you use ductwork? Fans? Is there any ambient "wind" on the=20 stage that you have to worry about? I know that it'll vary from theatre to=20 theatre, but I'd still like to hear about it. Personally, I'm trying to find a good place for a hazer for an upcoming dance show. Thanks. Chris Nimm no credentials whatsoever=20 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <425099AB.53D4285C [at] cybercom.net> Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 21:34:35 -0400 From: Dale Farmer Organization: The fuzz in the back of the fridge. Subject: Re: Projector Issues References:

Boyd Ostroff wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: > > > It's also why interlace in TV systems. > > No doubt this is a factor, but based on several articles I've read it had > more to do with the capabilities of original video equipment which had to > sweep the electron beam across the screen and also the available bandwidth > for tranmission. With LCD's and plasma screens there is no interlace > (nothing is actually "scanning"), so the 60i signals must be deinterlaced > and converted to 30 (or 25) frame progressive (30p). > > This is all a hot topic around "filmakers" working with digital video. > Evidently some tests were done by the movie studios perhaps 30 years ago > when they were considering different formats. Supposedly the results > showed that even though the quality was better as you increased frame rate > beyond 30 fps it was perceived as too immediate, like a TV show. The > studios felt this interfered with the theatrical nature of film and gave > it too much of a documentary feel. > > As I said, this is quite a hotly debated topic in the online forums. The > 24 frame progressive (24p) video format was developed to emulate this film > "motion signature," and originally appeared in an inexpensive video camera > (the Panasonic DVX-100) about 3 years ago. More recently the Canon XL-2 > also added support for 24p, and both of these cameras also shoot in 30 > frame progressive (30p). These slower frame rates have a different amount > of motion blur than normal 60i interlaced video. They especially show a > difference when there is fast movement. With 60i video the edges of moving > objects have a jagged comb-like appearance because the alternate fields > were captured 1/60 second apart. With 30p or 24p these edges would just be > blurry. Back in the 60s, Kubrick was pushing a new, higher frame rate film standard. I think it was 60 or 72 fps on regular 35mm stock. He made a promo film, and IIRC, only one movie house ever actually used it, and only for the demos. obviously, it didn't catch on. I heard some stories about it that it was basically, too real, for the audience of film people. --Dale ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000601c538d3$97f3f650$6501a8c0 [at] D4D3R151> From: "Randy Whitcomb" References:

Subject: Re: Positioning your hazer Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 23:03:07 -0600 I made some ground rows to mask our floor strip lights. I run a length of metal dryer hose, which we've perforated and with one end plugged, behind the ground row. We have a G 300. The supply end of the hose has an inline fan. This gives us a nice even coverage. When the ground row is not used we generally run fog from upstage. My stage air supply vents are at the top of the upstage wall with the returns in the pit and at a point mid way up to the FOH cat. Randy Whitcomb, TD Price Civic Aud. Loveland, CO. ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #352 *****************************