Lighting in the Academic/Educational World

[icewolf08]

I am starting this hread because there were a bunch of things in the short hijack of the Jands Event 416 thread that got me thinking, and instead of further hijacking the thread, this seemed like a better idea.

In any event, if you didn't read that thread, there was a little debate on what types of equipment is best suited to the educational market, industry standard or not (to be blunt).

I come from a background where I learned on all industry standard equipment for the most part. My first lighting console in middle school (I don't remember the brand) was an analog 2 scene preset that connected to the wall with a cable as thick as my arm. After that we upgraded to an ETC Acclaim 2-scene and from then till college I was on ETC gear. I have to admit, that in terms of ease of use and teach/learnability it is a good way to go. But this is not to say that some other consoles/equipment wouldn't be the same.

Once I got to college I met people that came from all different backgrounds, from people who went to school practically across the street from High End Systems so they had all HES gear, to people who never really touched a memory console. At college we had an Obsession II in the proscenium space, and a Strand 300 in the theatre in the round. The thought was that they could teach students both industry standard consoles. This actually is what turned me into a "Strand Guy." It was quite impressive the number of ways we found to break/crash/piss-off the Obsession, plus for me, the Strand OS just seemed more intuitive/user friendly (EOS might convert me back...). We also had 6 Martin moving heads, and after I graduated thy bought a bunch of VL1000s. This is in addition to the 500+ conventional unit inventory which includes units older than myself and modern units. We had plenty of effects devices too, from scrollers to atmospherics to fiber optics.

Now, chances are, it would have been quite beneficial to me as a student focusing in lighting tech to have exposure to other gear, because in reality there aren't a lot of non-commercial theatres that are outfitted like my college was. I worked on a cruise ship for a while where they have lots of high tech gear, but it isn't always high end equipment. I had never worked with Clay Paky fixtures before, they aren't considered top quality as it were, and people at my college would have frowned on them. Now I work in a large regional theatre with very good budgets, but when I got here, half the inventory was still old Strand radial units (they were calling them "Top Loaders"). The theatre had a bunch of Chroma-Q scrollers, Meteor Elipscans, we even have some GAM Scene Machines (which are pretty cool). I had never touched equipment like this once again because at college it was considered sub par. But, making the transition was not hard for me because one of the biggest pushes at school was in principle, not just with the equipment we had.

I personally believe that it doesn't matter if you learn on low end or out of date equipment as long as you learn the principles. I am not saying that schools should have a multi-scene preset board to teach, but the people who only learned on one are not less qualified. "Channel 6 at 20" whether recorded as a cue on a disk or on paper is the same thing. If you learn how to load a gel string in a Wybron scroller, it is almost exactly the same as loading a gel string in the original Revolution scroller, which is similar to loading a Chroma-Q.

The following quote is from the aforementioned thread:

Originally Posted by Sean

I know it isn't always good to "follow the herd," but for those of you tasked with selecting gear for educational institutions: buy the gear that's being used. It will make the students' experiences that much more useful to them when they leave, and make supporting the gear easier for you.

And whoever out there is still requesting 360Q's (yes, they are still being sold) ought to be shot.

I can't say that I agree with statements like this. I think that it is more important to get the job done then to buy the newest gear. A 360Q, in functionality is almost exactly the same as a Source 4. If you teach someone how to change a lamp in a 360Q they will have no trouble doing the same for a Source 4, the principle is the same. If s school is outfitted with a NSI console, chances are the student who learned on it will be able to sit down in front of an ETC or Strand and pick up the basics in a few minutes. Besides, if you learned on an Express(ion) then sitting down in front of say a GrandMA is not going to be a walk in the park.

This is theatre, in other words, it is make do with what you have. Our industry has been this way since the beginning. If you learn how to put on the show with the equipment that you have, then moving to better/ higher end equipment should make life easier. If you start with the easy life in school you may end up being just as unprepared for your first job as the graduate who came from the low budget school.

What do the rest of you think?

[soundlight]

I was about to post a long rebuttle, and carefully explain my theory, but I just wanna see how this one plays out - keep in mind that by not industry standard, I was saying not industry standard, but of comparable quality, price and features.

[ship]

Won't vote on it because I think both are important but more so in the latter for a basis of knowledge. By the time you get out of what ever school and get to use the gear, most likely it will be obsolete. What was it just like eight years ago the Mac 600 was the main light for the industry? Highly agree with the above concepts in learning a base of knowledge rather than emphisis on modern. Also teaches you a respect, and say when a beam projector is on a show, knowing what the heck it is.

"And whoever out there is still requesting 360Q's (yes, they are still being sold) ought to be shot."
Gee, me in specifying to a customer that they should buy these fixtures for their low budget theater in getting more bang for their buck should than be on your hit list. Should be shot... and you should be stuck in a place without modern gear and be expected to do your job in making art anyway. A 360Q with a HPR 575/115v lamp still out punches and has a more even flat field of beam spred than that of a S-4 fixture.

[Sean]

Alex,

It seems I'm the first to vote here, and I have the same opinion as you seem to (about learning to "make do and get the job done"). I wholeheartedly support that view.
My comments made in the other thread are about buying new gear. Yes, the 360Q is a decent light. However, why should one specify it in a new project? There is better gear out there.

Also,

Originally Posted by icewolf08

A 360Q, in functionality is almost exactly the same as a Source 4. If you teach someone how to change a lamp in a 360Q they will have no trouble doing the same for a Source 4

True. But it won't teach them how to rotate the gate. Or to use a drop-in iris. Or about a gel clip. That's the TEACHING part. I think it's actually easier to work with gear that is less complicated than you know already. So teach a S4, and they'll figure out a 360Q faster than the other way around. Anybody else think this way?

I don't suggest that every school out there pitch everything they own and buy all new. I suppose it would be great if they could, but what school could do that? I do think that those responsible for academic inventories should keep as much gear as they can safely operational. When money becomes available they should buy what most of the rest of the professional world is buying. When you buy new buy the most current, widely used technology that you can afford.

Originally Posted by icewolf08

This is theatre, in other words, it is make do with what you have. Our industry has been this way since the beginning. If you learn how to put on the show with the equipment that you have, then moving to better/ higher end equipment should make life easier. If you start with the easy life in school you may end up being just as unprepared for your first job as the graduate who came from the low budget school.

I counter: Would you buy gear for work that isn't being purchased by any other large LORT theatre? Planning on buying some new 360Qs? How about some American DJ-type scanners (as a legit moving light, not as a "throwaway" effect)?

Again, one vote for "get it done"....but a very well argued post!

[Sean]

Originally Posted by ship

Gee, me in specifying to a customer that they should buy these fixtures for their low budget theater in getting more bang for their buck should than be on your hit list. Should be shot... and you should be stuck in a place without modern gear and be expected to do your job in making art anyway. A 360Q with a HPR 575/115v lamp still out punches and has a more even flat field of beam spred than that of a S-4 fixture.

Ship,
First, I do apologize if I offended. Perhaps I did choose language in the too-strong range.

If it's a low budget theatre, why not have them buy used S4's? If/when they get more money in the future then their additional gear would have a better chance of matching what they have already.

Also, just to put this whole conversation back in its original context, the post that started this discussion was about a proposed list of equipment for a school potentially getting a $30,000 grant.

--Sean

[Footer]

Well, I didnt read all the post above me because frankly, I'm tired (we open tomorrow/today I guess...). My personal feeling is that in the education realm teaching the technology is very important. I feel that students should get to expierience the full gambet of technology, from 2 scene preset for your basic level classes to inteligent lighting and all that good stuff for their capstone. But, I fall on the end of "the basics" more then anything else. Look at full sail, they have the best gear money can buy, but their students get out with the attitude that if they don't have that gear around, they can't do anything. I have made lighting that looks like it was done with inteligents with a rather simple rig. You get the basics, you can apply those to anything.
....now my rant...As far as consoles go, any institution that is teaching their students on a console that does not track the way strands/obsessions do is doing a dis-service to their students. Cue only consoles should go away. period. I also feel that students need to get their hands on proper video gear... ie watchout systems or the like. My feeling is the institution does not have to own it, but bringing it in for a show here or their every 2-3 years to give a "heres whats out there" thing is great. Also, all schools should have a subscription of all the trade mags, and the students should actually READ it. This also goes for paroozing lightnetwork, here, and other ponds of knowledge. Also, they should heavily push their students to get the hell out over the summer and actually go do something, and preferably not summer stock at the university. Go work, learn, and make some mulla.

[DarSax]

Just coming out of a high school setting where I was the student, I'd have to resoundingly vote for number two.
My high school had old Electro-Controls Ellipsoidals, ancient zoom units that you'd never find anywhere else. But once I knew how to use them, I had no trouble when, at 11:30 on Wednesday night before the Thursday opening night, making the decision to rent and eventually being able to light a show using Source Fours.

In fact, I'd have to say that my experience was all the better having made that jump.

I learned the basics of a fixture on the Ellipsoidals, about beam angle and what looks good as far as positions, colors, intensities, etc. When the Source Four was thrust upon me, suddenly I realized just how powerful and useful the S4 really was, so I could appreciate that much more its more modern features, like the rotating barrel and interchangable lens train.

True, to a point that's just pure emotion/mentality but I feel that it definitely implanted and cemented the usefulness of those features in my brain. My thought process as of now is "Well I know if I take a source four and do x and y with it, I can light an actor. But what if I do this and this and this?" I'm more encouraged to experiment, in my opinion. It's the same with consoles. I started out with an ancient Strand, then had a Maxxyz thrust upon me (rental), then an Express (rental), then a Hog 2 (rental). I wish I had been able to use the Express, then Hog, then Maxxyz, so that I could have truly used the Maxxyz to its full potential. I personally would rather learn the basics on, well, a basic instrument, and then use that foundation to move onto more "standard" equipment.

Side analogy, because the jazz camp I'm working at started today. It's the same thing as playing an instrument. If you start on a two thousand dollar horn, you're going to take it for granted, at least I'd think so. If you start on a cheap horn and eventually move on to a professional grade, you're going to really appreciate and learn and study that horn.

[gafftaper]

To me I feel like you are asking the wrong question. I think the question should be phrased something like this... You are a typical educational institution with a decent but not extravagant theater and lighting inventory. Suddently you are given $30,000 to spend. Should you spend it to complete your conventional lighting inventory or should you spend it on two Mac 2k's?

Personally I think it's more important to master the basics than it is to have a little experience with a variety of gear. In organizing the equipment package for our new theater, I considered purchasing Mega Handles for all the instruments. However, while that would be kind of nice for keeping hangs easy, students need to learn how to use a wrench. In a similar way while I hope to have a few cool movers in my inventory, the priority is to first have a full inventory of Elipsoidals, Pars, Fresnels, Strips, Scoops, and Cyc Lights. If you can provide that well, then great, break out the big toys.

[Charc]

Originally Posted by Sean

Yes, the 360Q is a decent light. However, why should one specify it in a new project? There is better gear out there.
Also,
True. But it won't teach them how to rotate the gate. Or to use a drop-in iris. Or about a gel clip. That's the TEACHING part. I think it's actually easier to work with gear that is less complicated than you know already. So teach a S4, and they'll figure out a 360Q faster than the other way around. Anybody else think this way?

Though I don't really want to get involved in the verbal fray here, I have to agree about learning on something more complicated first. It took me, another student, and the dept. head about 10 minutes to figure out how to put a gel frame into a source 4... It goes to the side then up?!

[icewolf08]

First off, it has been quite interesting to read everyone's comments, and I hope that you all find it interesting too. The point of this thread was not to start an argument, but a friendly discussion. I hope that no one has taken any offense or felt attacked by my post or any others. It seemed to me that this could be a very relevant topic to a lot of people.

I am sure that I could have worded some of the things that I said better, especially the poll, but as I was finishing my original post the s**t was hitting the fan during Les Mis and I didn't take the time to re-read things.

I do like Gafftaper's idea on possible revisions to the poll/topic question about how an educational facility would best spend $30K.

I just got up this morning, so I will try to post a more intelligent response later.