Return-Path: X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp X-Scanned-By: This message was scanned by MPP Lite Edition (www.messagepartners.com)! X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.10) with PIPE id 22987440; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 03:01:48 -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 #423 Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 03:01:26 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on prxy.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00, US_DOLLARS_3 autolearn=ham version=3.0.3 X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4f2 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #423 1. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Bill Sapsis 2. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Delbert Hall 3. Copyright of silence by "RICHARD FINKELSTEIN" 4. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Scheu Consulting Services" 5. Re: Copyright of silence by "Michael S. Eddy" 6. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Stephen Litterst 7. Re: Copyright of silence by "Paul H. Sullivan" 8. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 9. When is it safe? by b Ricie 10. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Delbert Hall 11. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Bruce Purdy 12. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Paul Schreiner" 13. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Scheu Consulting Services" 14. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 15. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Jerry Durand 16. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Delbert Hall 17. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 18. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Paul Schreiner" 19. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 20. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Bill Sapsis 21. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Paul Schreiner" 22. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Scheu Consulting Services" 23. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Scheu Consulting Services" 24. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Wood Chip-P26398 25. Re: Hey, by CB 26. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Jerry Durand 27. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Bruce Purdy 28. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Bill Sapsis 29. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Delbert Hall 30. Re: Can you hear me now? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 31. Re: DXF file and old VW... by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 32. Re: Stubborn carriage bolts by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 33. Re: Can you hear me now? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 34. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by Delbert Hall 35. Re: Hey, by Greg Bierly 36. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Joe Golden" 37. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 38. Re: MSDS Resources by "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" 39. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" 40. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" 41. Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? by "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" 42. Used Dimmers by "Sam Fisher" 43. Re: Stubborn carriage bolts by "Christopher K. Nimm" *** 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: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 06:49:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: There's another issue to look at here, I think. And that's one of equipment. If you want to fly a piece of scenery, all of the pieces to do that are readily available from theatrical dealers and the big box hardware stores. But, if you want to fly a person safely, the harness is the big question mark. Where to get one and how to use it? Too many people run off to the big box store and pick up a fall arrest harness, or a sit harness (shudder) and use them in a flying rig. That's simply a very dangerous thing to do. Then there's the rigs themselves. Pendulum. 2 point rigs. Track on track. Whatever effect is hoped for, the gear is not readily available. So they go back to the big box store and grab some more gear that looks OK. And finally, it's a question of understanding forces. When a 60 pound kid swings out over the audience in a 20 ft arc, what do they really weigh and can the dad holding the other end of the line really control that kid? I wrote an article not all that long ago that asks parents this question. Would you be willing to take your son or daughter up to the top of a 6' step ladder and toss them off? Of course not. But should there be a failure in a flying rig, that could be the end result. Or worse. Yes, it is about the liability to a certain degree and yes it is about protecting ones paycheck to a certain degree (please note: We here at SRI do NOT fly people.) but it's also about the gear. And the expertise to use the gear properly. I forget who said something about pushing the edge a bit but they're right. You can push the edge on a lot of things in this business and get away with it. Amateurs flying people around the stage......I don't think it's worth the risk. 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 on 6/8/05 11:41 PM, usctd [at] columbia.sc at usctd [at] columbia.sc wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > So I have a bit of a philosophical question. I admit I don't know the > answer. And yes, I realize it's a can of feisty worms! > > When is it OK for someone who is not an expert to try this type of effect, > or any type of flying effect for that matter? (I understand the > ramifications of the word "try" but humor me here.) Folks on this list > say "You need an expert!" Hey, I don't mind, it gets me an extra > paycheck. But philosophicaly speaking, when do we say, hey, do this and > it will work? > > Is it just about the liability? > > Considering how so many of us started doing this very type of work, it > seems odd to me that we sometimes shut everyone else out of the circle. > It's not magic. Is it about the money? Do we want the paycheck so badly, > that we scare people into thinking that there is no way in hell they can > possibly pull off that effect? Dont tell me these companies started > because they just couldn't bear the thought of actors lives being in > danger. > > What makes this so different than any of the other wacky things we do in > theatre every day? > > This is just something up for discussion. I am not endorsing the notion, > I am just interested in peoples thoughts on this. > > Eric Rouse > TD-University of SC, Columbia > Freelance Foyboy > ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 08:15:15 -0400 From: Delbert Hall Reply-To: Delbert Hall Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In-Reply-To: References:

Eric has raised some very good points. When I rigged my first production of PETER PAN in 1981, I did it with very little knowledge of the forces involved or what equipment was needed. There was almost nothing published on this subject at that time, and sources of good information (like this list) were not available. Fortunately, I did have some rigging experience and I devised very simple systems to create the effects that I wanted. I also tested these systems with sandbags before we flew performers on them. These were probably the main reasons that the effects were safe at all. Did I make mistakes? Hell yes, but they were not mistakes that resulted in any injuries. I still have some of the harnesses that I built for that production, but they are so inferior to what I use today that I would never use them again. Although building your own harnesses is possible, it is an area that that requires some very special knowledge, skills, and equipment. The failure of homemake harnesses is one of the greatest causes of flying accidents. For this reason, I always recommend that people who what to create their on flying effects purchase professionally made harnesses that are designed specificly for flying effects (fall arrests and rock climbing hearnesses are not recommended for most performer flying effects). We all learn by trial and error, but no one should attempt to rig something that they do not have confidence in rigging. Part of having confidence is knowing the proper techniques and equipment. That first production of PETER PAN gave me the confidence to try other flying effects, and that gave me the responsibility of having to learn more about the equipment and rigging techniques. Although I have been flying performers for a very long time, I am still learning new techniques and devising new systems and components. There are articles, books, seminars, and many other resources on flying performers available today that were not available in 1981. If someone want to learn how to safely fly performers, there is no reason that he or she can't learn to do it. The problem exist that some people will attempt to rig a flying effect without spending very much effort learning to do it properly. You do not have to be a professional to fly a performer safely. You do have to know what you are doing, and not exceed your abilities. There are lots of simple flying effects that almost any competent rigger can create with only a little training, and there are effects that require very sophicated equipment and lots of experience. Knowing what you can do safely and when to call in a professional is one of the greatest skills you can have. Related to this discussion, I will be teaching a one-day performer flying seminar at the USITT-SE Masterclasses at the NC School of the Arts in September. This seminar will teach how to rig many simple flying effects like the one that Dana is wanting to create. -Delbert Delbert Hall ZFX Technical Flying Director Phone: 423-773-4255 ------------------------------ Message-ID: From: "RICHARD FINKELSTEIN" Subject: Copyright of silence Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 08:46:30 -0400 Greetings all. I keep extensive files of clippings dealing with copyright issues, almost like Dr. Doom collects articles on accidents! First I have to congradulate Jerry and the other listers for pretty good instincts. Indeed John Cage's silent piece IS protected by copyright, but all hell breaks loose after that fact in enforcement. Somewhere (alas not filed yet) I have a really funny article on the Cage's folks suing someone for stealing his silence. While silence per se is not protected by copyright, the performer in question, in his own title referenced John Cage and his piece....hense the suit. As usual the newspapers never followed the case long enough to reveal the outcome but the judge did ask a question that I think is telling to whatever the outcome was. The question went something like this: "Mr. Cage. How do you know that it was YOUR silence that was being stolen?" I think the case was about 2 years ago if any of you want to take a stab at finding reference to it in e-databases or online, but indeed there is a record of attempted enforcement of Cage's copyright on the silence. Richard Finkelstein http://www.rfdesigns.org/ http://www.artslynx.org/ ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Scheu Consulting Services" Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 09:23:23 -0400 Organization: Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. Message-ID: In-reply-to: Eric Rouse wrote: >Is it just about the liability? If you consider someone getting hurt (or worse) a "liability", then yes, it's the "liability". Bill, Delbert, Tony, et. al., have it right. Liability is not just about money. It's ultimately about acknowledging that you are responsible for someone else's welfare. It's about knowing your limitations, and doing = the "right thing" in the face of enormous pressure to do the opposite. It's about being able to sleep at night. All the money in the world cannot compensate for the loss of a loved = one, or a limb, or the ability to walk. If it did, there'd be a lot more of = "them" out there with REALLY big insurance policies... because they wouldn't = care if anyone got hurt. The problem is, we DO care. And we want others to care as well.=20 For us folk like us, it's not about the money. Peter Scheu Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. www.scheuconsulting.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: Reply-To: From: "Michael S. Eddy" Cc: rfinkels [at] msn.com ('RICHARD FINKELSTEIN') Subject: RE: Copyright of silence Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 09:46:22 -0400 In-reply-to: Somewhere (alas not filed yet) I have a really funny article on the Cage's folks suing someone for stealing his silence. While silence per se is not protected by copyright, the performer in question, in his own title referenced John Cage and his piece....hense the suit. I think the case was about 2 years ago if any of you want to take a stab at finding reference to it in e-databases or online, but indeed there is a record of attempted enforcement of Cage's copyright on the silence. Richard, Keith Arsenault sent a link to NationMaster with an article about 4'33" and there are many references at the end of the entry about other "homages" to Cage and the suit brought about against Mike Batt: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/4%2733%22 In July 2002 composer Mike Batt (best known for being behind the 1970s novelty/children's act The Wombles) had charges of plagiarism filed against him by the estate of John Cage after crediting his track "A Minute's Silence" as being written by "Batt/Cage". Batt settled out of court for an undisclosed six figure sum in September 2002. Here is the link to the resolution of the suit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/2276621.stm HTH, Michael Eddy Eddy Marketing & Consulting ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 10:21:30 -0400 From: Stephen Litterst Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Message-id: <42A8506A.E221593E [at] ithaca.edu> Organization: IC-Dept. of Theatre Arts References:

usctd [at] columbia.sc wrote: > --------------------------------------------------- > When is it OK for someone who is not an expert to try this type of effect, > or any type of flying effect for that matter? (I understand the > ramifications of the word "try" but humor me here.) Folks on this list > say "You need an expert!" Hey, I don't mind, it gets me an extra > paycheck. But philosophicaly speaking, when do we say, hey, do this and > it will work? I speak for me, and me alone... It's ok for someone to try it for the first time after they have been thoroughly trained and have assisted a qualified operator enough that the supervisor feels the person is competent. This is not only true for flying people, it's true for flying *anything*, hanging lights, firing pyrotechnics, mixing sound, etc. The training period may be shorter for some of those other tasks, but I think people should be trained no matter what they're doing in theatre. (And they should be trained to do it the way *I* want it done! :)) Steve LItterst -- Stephen C. Litterst Technical Supervisor Ithaca College Dept. of Theatre Arts 607/274-3947 slitterst [at] ithaca.edu ------------------------------ Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.0.20050609105341.02ee6838 [at] pop.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 10:53:45 -0400 From: "Paul H. Sullivan" Subject: Re: Copyright of silence While on the subject of music and composers Some child-development info.............. The Mozart effect A new report now says that the Mozart effect is a fraud. For you hip urban professionals: no, playing Mozart for your designer baby will not improve his IQ or help him get into that exclusive pre-school. He'll just have to be admitted to Harvard some other way. Of course, we're all better off for listening to Mozart purely for the pleasure of it. However, one wonders that if playing Mozart sonatas for little Hillary or Jason could boost their>intelligence, what would happen if other composers were played in their developmental time? LISZT EFFECT: Child speaks rapidly and extravagantly, but never really says anything important. BRUCKNER EFFECT: Child speaks very slowly and repeats himself frequently. Gains reputation for profundity. WAGNER EFFECT: Child becomes a megalomaniac. May eventually marry his sister. MAHLER EFFECT: Child continually screams - at great length and volume - that he's dying. SCHOENBERG EFFECT: Child never repeats a word until he's used all the other words in his vocabulary. Sometimes talks backwards. Eventually, people stop listening to him. Child blames them for their inability to understand him. BABBITT EFFECT: Child gibbers nonsense all the time. Eventually, people stop listening to him. Child doesn't care because all his playmates think he's cool. IVES EFFECT: the child develops a remarkable ability to carry on several separate conversations at once. GLASS EFFECT: the child tends to repeat himself over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. STRAVINSKY EFFECT: the child is prone to savage, guttural and profane outbursts that often lead to fighting and pandemonium in the preschool. BRAHMS EFFECT: the child is able to speak beautifully as long as his sentences contain a multiple of three words (3, 6, 9, 12, etc). However, his sentences containing 4 or 8 words are strangely uninspired. AND THEN OF COURSE, THE CAGE EFFECT -- CHILD SAYS NOTHING FOR 4 MINUTES, 33 SECONDS. PREFERRED BY 9 OUT OF 10 CLASSROOM TEACHERS Pax Paul H. Sullivan Production Manager Times Union Center for the Performing Arts Jacksonville FL 32202 (904) 633-6192 (904) 633-6190 fax ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 15:32:28 GMT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Message-Id: <20050609.083247.24305.27080 [at] webmail02.lax.untd.com> I think that there is insufficient analysis of the totality of some rigging projects, and that perhaps some persons are 'painting with too wide a brush' in the areas of effective solutions. I would have no problem from either a 'safety conscience' or a legal liability standpoint, with awarding a rigging contract to Delbert, with my specification that he sublet the harness design, engineering, and construction to the Foy shop in LV, for example. Then, I have TWO large insurance companies/policies, not counting my own E&O insurance or the hardware/cable manufacturer's carrier, to look to, should a mishap occur. 'Belt and Suspenders'? Perhaps. We are talking about the possibility of death or serious bodily harm, here, not just property damage, and my investors want to sleep easily at night, as do I, so you just have to budget for it, or delete the effect, just like Cubby Broccoli had to budget for a very expensive Stunt prior to the opening credits in the James Bond Movies. I will now step off my soapbox... /s/ Richard When is it OK for someone who is not an expert to try this type of effect, or any type of flying effect for that matter? Folks on this list say "You need an expert!" Hey, I don't mind, it gets me an extra paycheck. But philosophicaly speaking, when do we say, hey, do this and it will work? Is it just about the liability? Considering how so many of us started doing this very type of work, it seems odd to me that we sometimes shut everyone else out of the circle. This is just something up for discussion. I am not endorsing the notion, I am just interested in peoples thoughts on this. Eric Rouse ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20050609153859.86794.qmail [at] web50604.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 08:38:59 -0700 (PDT) From: b Ricie Subject: When is it safe? In-Reply-To: When is it safe? or is it, when do I feel confident enough that I know what I am doing. I know, in the time I have spent working, there are a number of things I have "lived" to talk about, yet would never do again. Younger people tend to have less fear, as they have had less failures in life. I think the challenges that life gives us affects our descrestion in a good way. Unfortunatly wisdom and pacients only come with time. 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 ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 11:48:59 -0400 From: Delbert Hall Reply-To: Delbert Hall Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In-Reply-To: References:

On 6/9/05, Stephen Litterst wrote: >=20 > I speak for me, and me alone... >=20 > It's ok for someone to try it for the first time after they have been > thoroughly trained and have assisted a qualified operator enough that > the supervisor feels the person is competent. This is not only true > for flying people, it's true for flying *anything*, hanging lights, > firing pyrotechnics, mixing sound, etc. The training period may be > shorter for some of those other tasks, but I think people should be > trained no matter what they're doing in theatre. (And they should be > trained to do it the way *I* want it done! :)) >=20 > Steve LItterst I wish Steve were correct, but unfortunately he is not. How many actors have we seen in plays or musicals who have had no training, or who are just plain terrible actors, singers, dancers, etc? Probably too many. Likewise, who is hurt when someone with no experience, training, or skills at sound mixing, mixes sound poorly? No one. As Peter has pointed out, some activities do place others in physical danger and this is where liability comes in. I don't think any of us would disagree that a play with truely terrible acting, scenery, lighting, sound, and costumes is better than a play where someone gets seriously injuried. I am reminded of the old hang gliding adage "Never fly higher than you are willing to fall." To apply this adage to what we do, "Never do anything that you are not willing to take responsibility for." A person should ask himself, "what is the worst thing that could happen and am I will to stand before the world and accept responsibility for my actions if things do go wrong?" Obviously, a lot of people do not mind committing "bad acting." But fortunately it is a different story when it comes to doing things that might seriously injur or kill someone. And that is a good thing. Do you have the knowledge and do this job properly? Do you have the proper tools and equipment to do this job properly? Do you have the time to do this job properly? In some cases, unless you can answer the questions "YES" then you should not attempt to do this job. In other cases, like acting, it is unfortunately OK to attempt the activity even if you have no skill or training to do it. -Delbert Delbert Hall Phone: 423-773-4255 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 13:10:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? From: Bruce Purdy Message-ID: In-Reply-To: This has been an interesting thread. Whilst I DO NOT disagree with the safety concerns and advice given, permit me to play "Devil's advocate" for a moment: I recall a time in the early '60's when my father got badly banged up and cut falling out of a tree in the woods out back, building us a tree house. Despite that, and the inherent danger, My brothers and I were not dissuaded from climbing high into that tree house, and loved it. These memories, (whilst making me as a modern parent tremble) I would gladly live again. Heck, even a rope and board swing hanging from a branch could get a kid hurt if he fell off - or jumped as we used to do. In our modern "Safety conscious" world, it seems that the very thought of a tree house is unthinkable, or at the very least, kids should wear fall arrest gear, and be professionally trained before climbing more than a couple of feet up a tree! I'm not sure that this is entirely a good thing. Certainly, I am ever cognisant of the safety of everyone on my stage, and I don't want to be responsible for anyone getting hurt in any way. Still, there is a part of me that feels that a life with all possible risks removed is no life at all. Bruce -- Bruce Purdy Technical Director Smith Opera House ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 13:31:04 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A0196C83C [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" > This has been an interesting thread. Whilst I DO NOT=20 > disagree with the safety concerns and advice given, permit me=20 > to play "Devil's advocate" for a > moment: >=20 > > > Still, there is a part of me that=20 > feels that a life with all possible risks removed is no life at all. Agreed on this point, especially w/r/t raising kids. The two areas are separate, IMHO, in that the amount of time and amount of competing stimuli and distractions in the workplace make, for example, working at height on a jobsite more inherently dangerous. OTOH, the experience one should have by the time you find yourself employed at such a site SHOULD make you more able to deal with it...but often times, it only serves to provide a false sense of security. Kids need to be kids. They need to be exposed, within reason (and with appropriate supervision), to a certain amount of risk and danger. They've got to have the opportunity to push the envelope in order to learn where the envelope is. I strongly believe that my son will be safer and more competent in the long run if he gets the chance now, while his body is a bit more pliable and quicker to heal than mine, to climb trees and rocks--despite my occasional bouts of vertigo! Granted, we sometimes get strange looks from friends who see him (with us, mind you) in the kitchen with a big ol' chef's knife wanting to help cut the vegetables for dinner at the age of three. Or getting his own screw gun for his birthday. But he's learning how to handle these things safely from the beginning...and in the long run, I know deep down it'll be for the best. It sometimes causes one to develop a few extra gray hairs (or would, if I had any), but that price is worth it. ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Scheu Consulting Services" Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 13:38:41 -0400 Organization: Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. Message-ID: <000301c56d1a$13e306f0$c9fea8c0 [at] ROXY> In-reply-to: Bruce Purdy wrote: >In our modern "Safety conscious" world, it seems that the >very thought of a tree house is unthinkable Unfortunately, I, too, can see a scenario where a poorly built tree house would result in a fall, and someone would prosecute... the town, the neighbor's kid's Dad... for "negligence" in the shoddy build ...I loved my tree house when I was a kid. >Still, there is a part of me that >feels that a life with all possible risks removed is no life at all. It's a question of managing risk, and understanding the consequences of failing to manage that risk. While skydiving is a risky pursuit, the risks are managed. The adrenaline rush makes "life worth living" (or so I'm told... never done it myself). Putting someone else in danger may be an adrenaline rush for some people, but not for me. And I'm sure not for a skydiving instructor, either. I bet your Mom and Dad kept the household chemicals locked up when you were little, and kept gun cabinet locked - you are from upstate NY??? ;-) Taking risks in life are great, and often well worth it. But a prudent person takes steps to make sure they (and their fellow human beings) can live again to risk another day... Peter Scheu Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. www.scheuconsulting.com ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 17:39:50 GMT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Message-Id: <20050609.104041.27851.29230 [at] webmail11.lax.untd.com> "Raising Kids is a Job for Amateurs". Experimentation IS allowed, but there is no provision for Double-Blind testing. /s/ Richard > > Still, there is a part of me that feels that a life with all possible risks removed is no life at all. Agreed on this point, especially w/r/t raising kids. ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20050609104114.03cdceb0 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 10:44:53 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In-Reply-To: References: At 10:31 AM 6/9/2005, you wrote: >Kids need to be kids. They need to be exposed, within reason (and with >appropriate supervision), to a certain amount of risk and danger. A good example is a cousin of mine. She grew up in a condo building with an elevator. Her mother NEVER let her near stairs, because she might fall. My cousin grew up not being able to negotiate stairs very well. It was sad seeing a teenager who could hardly get on a bus because she couldn't walk up the steps. ---------- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 13:46:09 -0400 From: Delbert Hall Reply-To: Delbert Hall Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In-Reply-To: References:

Bruce, I agree that this is a good thread, and I agree with your statement "a life with all possible risks removed is no life at all," but there is a big difference in putting one own's life at risk and putting another person's life at risk. I used to be a rock climber, and I understood and accepted the change that I was taking when I climbed, but this was probably a risk that most people would not have accepted. They are risks that most people accept - like riding in a car or a plane, and risks that most people feel are beyond the level that they feel are acceptable - repelling off the top of a 14 story building. I guess part of our responsibilty as adults (or competent practitioners of a particular activity) is knowing the difference between what is an acceptable risk and what is not an acceptable risk for the general public. I was once told by my insurance company that an adult actor should know that a flying effect is potentially dangerous and accepts the risk (in part) by agreeing to participate in the effect. A child actor may not fully understand the risks in participating in a flying effects and therefore gets more protection under the law (lets please=20 just accept this and not turn in into a discussion on law). Audience members have every right to believe that they will be completely safe while attending a theatrical performance, and therefore receive the greatest amount of protection under the law. ZFX requires all performers who fly to sign a form saying that they understand the dangers of the activity that they are participating in. While this may not relieve them of all responsibilities in case of an accident, it may be used to limit the damages. (Sorry, I do not have copy of that form in front of me to quote from it.) Eric, does Foy use such a form? Remember all the grief that Michael Jackson received for holding his son out over a balcony when the child was an infant? Did Jackson expose his son to an unacceptable amount of danger? I guess that depends on who you ask. But my point is that we must be able to justify our actions and untimately accept responsibilty for them. Delbert --=20 Delbert Hall Phone: 423-773-4255 ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 17:55:12 GMT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Message-Id: <20050609.105517.27851.29487 [at] webmail11.lax.untd.com> I think that Dr. Davidson would agree with my view that while you cannot eliminate risk altogether and still be reasonably productive, you definitely can manage risk, and should do so. At least that is what we both have been able to implant in the minds of juries. /s/ Richard Bruce Purdy wrote: >In our modern "Safety conscious" world, it seems that the >very thought of a tree house is unthinkable Unfortunately, I, too, can see a scenario where a poorly built tree house would result in a fall, and someone would prosecute... the town, the neighbor's kid's Dad... for "negligence" in the shoddy build ...I loved my tree house when I was a kid. Peter Scheu ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 14:02:58 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A0196C840 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" Cc: peter [at] scheuconsulting.com > I bet your Mom and Dad kept the household chemicals locked up=20 > when you were little, and kept gun cabinet locked - you are=20 > from upstate NY??? ;-) I am from upstate NY, but my parents didn't lock up the chemicals. They just stuck those big green "Mister Yuk" stickers on them. I still get one of those scared feelings in my gut when I think of the commercials. When I was four I used to hide in the bathroom when they came on cuz they freaked me out so much! ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 18:07:35 GMT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Message-Id: <20050609.110807.27851.29667 [at] webmail11.lax.untd.com> Dear Delbert, Why not? The way we all do our jobs is prescribed and circumscribed by law constantly, and law has a legitimate place in this thread, IMHO. /s/ Richard Bruce, A child actor may not fully understand the risks in participating in a flying effects and therefore gets more protection under the law (lets please just accept this and not turn in into a discussion on law). Delbert ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 14:46:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: When your son is old enough, or maybe even a little before, I'll hire him. 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 on 6/9/05 1:31 PM, Paul Schreiner at pschreiner [at] rmwc.edu wrote: > Granted, we sometimes get strange looks from friends who see him (with > us, mind you) in the kitchen with a big ol' chef's knife wanting to help > cut the vegetables for dinner at the age of three. Or getting his own > screw gun for his birthday. But he's learning how to handle these > things safely from the beginning...and in the long run, I know deep down > it'll be for the best. It sometimes causes one to develop a few extra > gray hairs (or would, if I had any), but that price is worth it. ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 14:47:39 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A0196C842 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" > When your son is old enough, or maybe even a little before,=20 > I'll hire him. Bill S. Trust me, I'll be saving this email! Now to get him those Tinkertoys and an erector set...since I don't have the cash to buy him his own truss rig and chain motors to practice with! ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Scheu Consulting Services" Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 14:49:41 -0400 Organization: Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. Message-ID: <000501c56d23$ff102be0$c9fea8c0 [at] ROXY> Paul Schreiner wrote: >I am from upstate NY, but my parents didn't lock up the >chemicals. They just stuck those big green "Mister Yuk"=20 >stickers on them. No, it wasn't any indigenous upstate NY chemicals I was referring to = (though we've more of those in the ground around here than we'd like to admit = to), it's the proliferance of gun cabinets up here (lotsa hunters). BTW - to those who care - I have no problem w/ hunters. But you've made my point exactly. Even a label on something is a risk management tool. Now if we can only get "Mister Yuk! stickers for some things in our industry. Any suggestions? My first vote goes to "Uncle Buddys" =20 (now there's a hand grenade tossed into the crowd!) ;-) Peter Scheu Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. www.scheuconsulting.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Scheu Consulting Services" Cc: pschreiner [at] rmwc.edu ('Paul Schreiner') Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 14:51:51 -0400 Organization: Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. Message-ID: <000601c56d24$4cf593e0$c9fea8c0 [at] ROXY> In-reply-to: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A0196C841 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> Paul Schreiner wrote: >Ah, but you missed mine. Education is a better risk >management tool than prohibition of access, and the earlier the better. Here, Here!!!! 1000% in agreement. Peter Scheu Scheu Consulting Services, Inc. www.scheuconsulting.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <014D202957F6D8118924000F20D7342B072A3799 [at] az33exm01.corp.mot.com> From: Wood Chip-P26398 Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 11:56:16 -0700 Can you still get Tinkertoys and Erector sets? I thought the safety police had banned those as being too dangerous. My grandson really digs Legos, especially the weird ones with antennas, rockets, motors, and other stuff they didn't have when I was a kid. Sigh!!! -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Paul Schreiner Now to get him those Tinkertoys and an erector set...since I don't have the cash to buy him his own truss rig and chain motors to practice with! ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20050609122210.0170e208 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 12:22:10 From: CB Subject: Re: Hey, >Hey, back at you. Can you change the name of either your spam >reporting address or stagecraft so they aren't next to each other. Or >at least trim your post <> wink wink ;-) Point taken, I had been checking the outbound addy (I thought religiously) but it seems that I am incapable of making the destinction. I am re-naming the offending reporting addy 'AAASpamReport'. I hope that this resolves the problem, as the only other solution I can think of is to resign from the list in abject shame... My apologies again to the list et al, and hopefully, the last. 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: <6.2.1.2.0.20050609121412.029edcc8 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 12:14:31 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In-Reply-To: References: At 11:49 AM 6/9/2005, you wrote: >Now if we can only get "Mister Yuk! stickers for some things in our >industry. Any suggestions? My first vote goes to "Uncle Buddys" > >(now there's a hand grenade tossed into the crowd!) ;-) A picture of Dr Doom waving a finger at you. ---------- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 15:42:00 -0400 Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? From: Bruce Purdy Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Great responses! Great thread! Here are a few miscellaneous replies: > I bet your Mom and Dad kept the household chemicals locked up when you were > little, and kept gun cabinet locked - you are from upstate NY??? ;-) I Lived in many places and regions growing up. Cleaning chemicals were always just stored in the broom closet, and I had no interest in getting in to them. Lots of more interesting things to play with. There was no "Forbidden fruit" temptation to get in to them, they were just there. Aside from a daisy air rifle, there were never any guns in our house - or so I thought. It wasn't 'till I was an adult that I found my Dad had always had an old rifle stored in his closet. An old military souvenir. I assume that he had it at least partially disassembled though. > It's a question of managing risk, and understanding the consequences of > failing to manage that risk. > Agreed completely! > While skydiving is a risky pursuit, the risks are managed. The adrenaline > rush makes "life worth living" (or so I'm told... never done it myself). > Putting someone else in danger may be an adrenaline rush for some people, > but not for me. And I'm sure not for a skydiving instructor, either. > And Delbert said: > there is > a big difference in putting one own's life at risk and putting another > person's life at risk. I used to be a rock climber, and I understood > and accepted the change that I was taking when I climbed, but this was > probably a risk that most people would not have accepted. I think that is an important delineating point. There are many risks I'm willing to take on myself, but wouldn't submit anyone else to. We have a 65' ladder to the loading gallery and grid, straight up the wall with no cage or fall restraint. (I know, I know, it's on my "Wish list".) Before I came on board, lots of people were going up and down it. I have locked a board over it to prevent unauthorised access. I won't allow most people to go up there, Just the occasional union rigger that knows the score and is willing to take the risk. Otherwise, I am the only one to use the ladder, and it doesn't bother me at all. Frankly, I don't think I'd be quite as careful climbing it if I knew I had a safety system. ("Crutch" syndrome). > They are > risks that most people accept - like riding in a car or a plane, and > risks that most people feel are beyond the level that they feel are > acceptable - repelling off the top of a 14 story building. A lot of folks are deathly afraid of getting in a plane. Me, I was on one of the first planes to fly after 9/11. The grounding of all aircraft had delayed my trip to Seattle. A lot of people thought I was nuts, but I felt "I'd rather be in one of those doomed planes, than live my life in fear of what "Might" happen. > Audience > members have every right to believe that they will be completely safe > while attending a theatrical performance Unless they are in the front row of a "Gallagher" performance. ;-) Jerry wrote: > Her mother NEVER let her near stairs, because she might > fall. My cousin grew up not being able to negotiate stairs very well. Too many people are overly "Risk averse". Kids raised in that environment are less able to cope with the real world, and inadvertently put themselves at a higher risk! My first employer - at a convenience store in California - told me that when I wet mopped the floor, I should NEVER mop in THAT area. I asked him why, and he said " Don't you see that electrical outlet? If you splashed a little water up there you could be electrocuted"! Have a realistic understanding of what the risks actually are, and adjust accordingly. Don't be stupid, don't put others at risk needlessly, but use your brain. Bruce -- Bruce Purdy Technical Director Smith Opera House ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 16:20:09 -0400 Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: According to the lawyers I have spoken with (30 odd years in the rigging business???...Yeah, I've spoken with more than my share of lawyers) and they all seem to be in agreement on this one. Waivers of responsibility are normally not worth the paper they are written on. It seems that if there is just one tiny thing wrong with the waiver the judge throws out the entire document. No quibbling over the details, just toss the thing out with the trash. And if you were the defense lawyer I bet dollars to donuts that you would find something wrong. We don't use them here at SRI. Richard? Whatcha think? 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 on 6/9/05 1:46 PM, Delbert Hall at delbert.hall [at] gmail.com wrote: > ZFX requires all > performers who fly to sign a form saying that they understand the > dangers of the activity that they are participating in. While this > may not relieve them of all responsibilities in case of an accident, > it may be used to limit the damages. (Sorry, I do not have copy of > that form in front of me to quote from it.) Eric, does Foy use such a > form? ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 16:22:03 -0400 From: Delbert Hall Reply-To: Delbert Hall Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In-Reply-To: References: Richard, you are quite correct that law does have a place in this thread, but I thought it would be more productive if me kept the discussion focused on the professional and ethical requirements of safety, rather than digressing into the legal aspects of safety (not that we ever digress on on this list). Taking chances is just a part of growing up, but those chance should be limited to age appropriate activities. It is fine for twelve year olds to dare each to climb a tall tree, race their bikes down a steep hill, swing on a tire swing, and similar activities that are challenging but not foolhearty. Other activities, like driving a car on a public street, working with high voltage, and operating a large chain saw while hanging in a tree, are probably not things that you want twelve year olds daring each other to do because their lack of knowledge and skills make the change of a injury or death extremely likely. There are still other activities, like racing cars down dark public streets at 130 mph, taking certain drugs, and not wearing fall protection when working at heights, that are just plain foolhearty and no one should do them, so here the law tries to protect us from ourselves and each other. I think Eric's reason for starting this thread had more to do with "should we be more supportive and try to teach people the correct way to accomplish a task rather than simply telling them to hire someone to do it for them instead of learning to do it themselves." (I hope that is correct Eric). If I am correct, I totally agree with Eric, as long as the person 1) wants to learn to properly do the activity, 2) has the ability to do the activity, 3) is willing to aquire the tools/equipment to properly do the activity, and 4) is willing to spend the time needed to do the activity properly. -Delbert --=20 Delbert Hall Phone: 423-773-4255 ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1f2.b757884.2fda050d [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 16:48:13 EDT Subject: Re: Can you hear me now? In a message dated 6/8/05 4:40:16 AM W. Europe Daylight Time, sdwheaton [at] fuse.net writes: << What has hearing got to do with that? The Bosendorfer is the one with the whole passel of extra keys at the bottom end and the really thin spruce sides. >> I meant, by listening to it. My Steinway has the characteristic metallic sound in the high register.Neither Bechsteins nor Bosendorfers have this. Nor, Heaven forgive me, Yamahas. ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <102.62c32e7d.2fda050a [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 16:48:10 EDT Subject: Re: DXF file and old VW... In a message dated 6/7/05 11:43:16 PM W. Europe Daylight Time, steve.jones [at] glasgowplazatheatre.org writes: << I have an DXF file I am trying to import into Vectorworks 9.5.0 on a Mac. I get an "OpenDWG Library Error 287: Internal Error" when I try to open it? Any thoughts as to what is up? I can't upgrade VW right now, as I can't afford it. >> I don't know Vectorworks, or MACs.I do know DXF files. They are plain, straighforward text files, in a DOS format. I have written programmes to extract data from them, and insert it into other applications. I have always found it useful to have something around that will read files byte by byte. X-Tree was my favorite, but it has been superseded. ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <149.46ac7683.2fda050c [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 16:48:12 EDT Subject: Re: Stubborn carriage bolts In a message dated 6/8/05 6:34:22 PM W. Europe Daylight Time, Lamplighter [at] tcon.net writes: << > the nuts are seized up on the bolts and the head has no gripping > power. It just spins and spins and spins. >> Use an angle grinder to cut a screwdriver slot in the domed head. If that fails, use it to cut off the nut. And, don't ever use carriage bolts. ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <1c5.29b08e81.2fda050b [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 16:48:11 EDT Subject: Re: Can you hear me now? In a message dated 6/8/05 3:35:06 AM W. Europe Daylight Time, psyd [at] cox.net writes: << >Ah, but they don't really know if tinnitus is caused from overexposure to loud sounds. Hearing loss is definitely tied to exposure and/or heredity, but the jury is still out with tinnitus. Lots of causes are suspected. And none proved. It is believed, although not proved, that that is what Beethoven suffered from. We don't know. With overexposure to loud noises being the chief suspect with many other accomplices and minor perpetrators. I wouldn't take this lists advice about tinnitus any more than I would a heart murmur. I love you guys, but I'd se and MD in both cases. See the doc. I've done my time in the rock world, on both sides of the amps, and I still have better eharing than most folk my age. >> Count yourself lucky. As one ages, the HF end of youur hearing goes away. At 66, I doubt that I can hear 15KHz any more. I will check when I get back to London. Exposure to high Sound Pressure Levels is something that worries Health and Safety people, I have heard mutterings about the potential problems of orchestral musicians. And, in that trade, your hearing is vital. ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 16:52:41 -0400 From: Delbert Hall Reply-To: Delbert Hall Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? In-Reply-To: References:

Bill,=20 My lawyers told me the same thing, so I stopped doing waviers of responsibility around 1984. There must be a lot of people who think that waviers of responsibility have some merit since I continually see notices in hotels stating that they are not responsibility if anything get stolen from my room, or if my car is vandelized while in their parking lot, or if I drown in their pool. I bet you have seen these too. ZFX's decision to use these waviers is probably based on something their lawyers told them, but I do not know what since I am not an owner in the company and I cannot speak for them. I do not know if such waviers do any good or not since I have never been sued.=20 I suspect if I were sued my lawyer would be saying, "If you had had that person sign a wavier of responsibilty you would be in much better shape." Maybe Eric will tell us if Foy uses them. -Delbert --=20 Delbert Hall Phone: 423-773-4255 ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <4d88776b3b377991e6c97d034f52693e [at] dejazzd.com> From: Greg Bierly Subject: Re: Hey, Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 17:27:57 -0400 > My apologies again to the list et al, and hopefully, the last. > Chris "Chris" Babbie No problem. I just found the irony too good to pass up. Thanks for the giggle at your expense. ;-) Greg Bierly Technical Director Hempfield HS ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 14:54:35 -0700 Message-ID: From: "Joe Golden" Check this out http://tinyurl.com/brjsf=20 --------------------------------------------------- Can you still get Tinkertoys and Erector sets? I thought the safety police had banned those as being too dangerous. My grandson really digs Legos, especially the weird ones with antennas, rockets, motors, and other stuff they didn't have when I was a kid. Sigh!!! -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Paul Schreiner Now to get him those Tinkertoys and an erector set...since I don't have the cash to buy him his own truss rig and chain motors to practice with! ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 23:47:58 GMT Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Message-Id: <20050609.164841.26750.34303 [at] webmail29.lax.untd.com> Dear Bill, Your position appears to be the increasingly more popular one. The key these days is to have company manuals that cover every conceivable combination of factors that could effect any company action or activity that could possibly happen in the operation of a business, from what do if there is a claim of sexual harassment, to having MSDS forms in every language available on each jobsite,, to exactly when a certified welder is brought in, to the recordkeeping that must be retained by the company that shows that the company followed its own rules as reflected in its manuals, plus plenty of insurance, of course. Having plenty of insurance does not necessarily make you a target, as was shown at the MGM fire, where Dover Elevator had the most insurance, with $100,000,000 in coverage, but had to pay no defense or other costs. /s/ Richard Richard? Whatcha think? Bill S. ------------------------------ From: "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" Cc: klyphstanford [at] earthlink.net ('Klyph Stanford') Subject: RE: MSDS Resources Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 19:09:20 -0600 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The Hazard Communication Act covers all of this. Not only read it but comprehend it, communicate it to those who use it, and enforce the specifics of the Act in the particular chemical substance and MSDS. 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 Klyph Stanford Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 10:07 AM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: MSDS Resources For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Jerry Durand asked : "Actually, is there a requirement that anyone read the MSDS? " I would think the law could be interpreted that any supervisor instructing an employee to use a chemicall would be required to know the potential hazards of that substance. Otherwise, how could he/ she instruct her/ him in it's proper use? I am sure Dr. Doom could shed some light. \ Klyph ------------------------------ From: "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 20:16:20 -0600 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: And, let us consider the product itself, the rigging, the harness, all components, and of course the person who is directing the show, and the training of the person who is directing the flying or jumping. It is more than just insurance and liability, it is the total package of thinking about all the individuals who are in line for professional direction. In high school I believe that lets most if not all people out of the picture. Training and procedure, etc. are all part of this. 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 ladesigners [at] juno.com Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 9:32 AM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- I think that there is insufficient analysis of the totality of some rigging projects, and that perhaps some persons are 'painting with too wide a brush' in the areas of effective solutions. I would have no problem from either a 'safety conscience' or a legal liability standpoint, with awarding a rigging contract to Delbert, with my specification that he sublet the harness design, engineering, and construction to the Foy shop in LV, for example. Then, I have TWO large insurance companies/policies, not counting my own E&O insurance or the hardware/cable manufacturer's carrier, to look to, should a mishap occur. 'Belt and Suspenders'? Perhaps. We are talking about the possibility of death or serious bodily harm, here, not just property damage, and my investors want to sleep easily at night, as do I, so you just have to budget for it, or delete the effect, just like Cubby Broccoli had to budget for a very expensive Stunt prior to the opening credits in the James Bond Movies. I will now step off my soapbox... /s/ Richard When is it OK for someone who is not an expert to try this type of effect, or any type of flying effect for that matter? Folks on this list say "You need an expert!" Hey, I don't mind, it gets me an extra paycheck. But philosophicaly speaking, when do we say, hey, do this and it will work? Is it just about the liability? Considering how so many of us started doing this very type of work, it seems odd to me that we sometimes shut everyone else out of the circle. This is just something up for discussion. I am not endorsing the notion, I am just interested in peoples thoughts on this. Eric Rouse ------------------------------ From: "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 20:27:15 -0600 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Should get more protection under the law .... should. Perhaps most of you have not worked in secondary schools of late or past, etc. Please care for the student, and a must is training for each and every director, and technical person by a professional. No other way is acceptable. 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 ladesigners [at] juno.com Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 12:08 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Dear Delbert, Why not? The way we all do our jobs is prescribed and circumscribed by law constantly, and law has a legitimate place in this thread, IMHO. /s/ Richard Bruce, A child actor may not fully understand the risks in participating in a flying effects and therefore gets more protection under the law (lets please just accept this and not turn in into a discussion on law). Delbert ------------------------------ From: "Dr. Randall W.A. Davidson" Subject: RE: Rigging Question/When is it safe? Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 20:36:07 -0600 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Richard has the proper, professional, legal approach and I am in agreement. Totally. 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 ladesigners [at] juno.com Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 5:48 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Rigging Question/When is it safe? For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Dear Bill, Your position appears to be the increasingly more popular one. The key these days is to have company manuals that cover every conceivable combination of factors that could effect any company action or activity that could possibly happen in the operation of a business, from what do if there is a claim of sexual harassment, to having MSDS forms in every language available on each jobsite,, to exactly when a certified welder is brought in, to the recordkeeping that must be retained by the company that shows that the company followed its own rules as reflected in its manuals, plus plenty of insurance, of course. Having plenty of insurance does not necessarily make you a target, as was shown at the MGM fire, where Dover Elevator had the most insurance, with $100,000,000 in coverage, but had to pay no defense or other costs. /s/ Richard Richard? Whatcha think? Bill S. ------------------------------ From: "Sam Fisher" Subject: Used Dimmers Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 22:45:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I'm looking for someone in the market for some used (mint condition) Sensor Portable Packs, 12x2.4K, cam lock in, stage pin out. I have 4 available that I am seeking to swap out for smaller 1.2K dimmers for a church in Virginia. Sam Fisher VP - Fisher Theatrical, LLC. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <001001c56d8d$78b2d790$6401a8c0 [at] tamiasuis> From: "Christopher K. Nimm" References: Subject: Re: Stubborn carriage bolts Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 02:24:42 -0500 I'm curious: what sort of fastening method do you suggest in place of carriage bolts? Chris Nimm ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Stagecraft" Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 3:48 PM Subject: Re: Stubborn carriage bolts > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > In a message dated 6/8/05 6:34:22 PM W. Europe Daylight Time, > Lamplighter [at] tcon.net writes: > > << > > the nuts are seized up on the bolts and the head has no gripping > > power. It just spins and spins and spins. >> > > Use an angle grinder to cut a screwdriver slot in the domed head. If that > fails, use it to cut off the nut. And, don't ever use carriage bolts. ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #423 *****************************