I've never used groups before, even when I set them up and try to remember them.
Nope. There's no one who benefits in our theatre from that. Then we get people coming in who need a piece of paper to cross-reference circuit numbers with channel numbers. I've found it a real PITA with a patched plot when someone calls out "Circuit 149" for that light they just added or were just troubleshooting. If the light isn't patched, I have to take the time to patch it. If I'm working on an RFU, that means running up to the console in the both. If it is, that probably still means running up into the booth because there's not a snowball's chance I'm going to remember what I patched that as. Either way, there's lost time waiting to get the light turned on, and if I'm the only one in the theatre at the time and I'm in the scissor lift, it now means as much as an extra 10-15 minutes getting the thing patched before I can turn it on and focus it.
Our rep file in the console does include a graphical light plot in it. If someone asks for the "third red fresnel on the end", I can either grab my group for Down Red and then quickly Next through it to get to my light, or I can just use the trackball on my console to arrow to that fresnel, click on it, and bring it up.
Elaborate patching systems are great for touring acts that have to worry about doing the same show on different dimmers each night. They're also great when you're console is as dumb as bricks and you need to compensate for that by having an encyclopedia's worth of useless numbering schemes logged in your head. For us, our console, and our shows, we stand only to waste time with those numbering schemes though. I know this from experience because for a few months I tried and only found it to make my life a rotating cycle of listening to people come to me and say "Why doesn't this work?" and "That's...uhhhhh...channel.....51?...61?...maybe?" and "Bollocks! I need to run up to the booth to patch that new circuit in before you can bring it up on the RFU."
We have a hard patch and mults but still a 1:1 house, about key is just another step in a process that I may have 15 mins to light a show...
The issue that you seem to be overlooking (at least from my long distance perspective) is that time you might save in hang/focus is lost in cueing, if you need to keep looking at paperwork to find the unsequenced number for a specific light, rather than knowing (because your channeling is always the same reguardless of where the light ends up being plugged in) what number it likely is, or at the worst--it's one higher or one lower. I find that theres always more time earlier in the process, and so to me, I'd rather hang take 20 minutes longer--or focus take 10 minutes longer, than for cueing to take a cumulative 30 minutes longer.
I'm honestly shocked. This would be as surprising as a sound engineer saying "I never EQ my system for the space I'm in".
I have never seen a touring show that doesn't patch, maybe not for focus, but come cueing time they're always patched.
The issue that you seem to be overlooking is that time you might save in hang/focus is lost in cueing, if you need to keep looking at paperwork to find the unsequenced number for a specific light.
I think the difference is production schedule. Either way you do it you have to either spend extra time at hang patching or extra time during programming. The decision is based mainly on the schedule. If youve got alot of time for hang and then a quick tech week youll make it easy onyourself and patch. Ifyouve got a two hour hang and then two weeks of rehearsals, theres alot more time for programming and alot less for implementing a patch.The issue that you seem to be overlooking (at least from my long distance perspective) is that time you might save in hang/focus is lost in cueing, if you need to keep looking at paperwork to find the unsequenced number for a specific light, rather than knowing (because your channeling is always the same reguardless of where the light ends up being plugged in) what number it likely is, or at the worst--it's one higher or one lower. I find that theres always more time earlier in the process, and so to me, I'd rather hang take 20 minutes longer--or focus take 10 minutes longer, than for cueing to take a cumulative 30 minutes longer.
You grossly underestimate how powerful my ETC Congo lighting console is. I never have to look at paperwork. When I want any fixture on stage, my console can get it for me faster than it takes the LD to tell me which light they want. It's not unusual for me to know what the LD will want before or just as they're asking for it. Before they reach the period at the end of their sentence I can have it on.
.
I think the difference is production schedule. Either way you do it you have to either spend extra time at hang patching or extra time during programming. The decision is based mainly on the schedule. If youve got alot of time for hang and then a quick tech week youll make it easy onyourself and patch. Ifyouve got a two hour hang and then two weeks of rehearsals, theres alot more time for programming and alot less for implementing a patch.
Also, for those of us in schools where the day of a talent show you were notified of yesterday you have a kid focusing on the cat witb a crackly broken walky talky, or even worse, you are focusing and the inexperienced freshmen is behind the console, there is no confusion when the circuit number displayed is the number on the console. Just some thoughts.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.