I am trying to decide between buying the Altman 1000q and the Altman Comet followspots. The price is about equal. Looking at the photometics - the Comet appears to be much brighter. I have attached both spec sheets. But in talking to an Altman sales rep - he says the 1000q is brighter. What gives? Anyone have experience with both of these units? Which is better?
Which followspot?
- Thread starterdramaboy
- Start date
http://www.controlbooth.com/threads/altman-1000q-vs-comet-buying-new.28675/
http://www.controlbooth.com/threads/getting-new-spotlights-hopefully.33128/#post-290947
Just search Altman Comet here and theres a LOT of reading for or against either of those and then some other options, often the FS400. Lots of good stuff in there.
http://www.controlbooth.com/threads/getting-new-spotlights-hopefully.33128/#post-290947
Just search Altman Comet here and theres a LOT of reading for or against either of those and then some other options, often the FS400. Lots of good stuff in there.
I think that the choice of which is better is largely dependent on the throw distance. While the 1000Q may put out more total light with the iris fully open, the Comet has better punch due to a narrower beam angle. The venue I've used a Comet in is a church rec hall with a stage on the end of a basketball court. With a throw the length of the basketball court the Comet is great. Two other church buildings have stages on the side of the basketball court and both have what I believe to be 1000Q's (I haven't checked the model, but I everything I remember about them seems to match). The Comet wouldn't work well in those spaces because it doesn't produce a wide enough beam. Needing 2 followspots for some shows, we've borrowed the 1000Q's in the space with the stage at the end of the basketball court. I don't think they have enough punch at that distance - for the show I'm working on now, I plan to try the 1000Q's from the sidelines at half-court. If I had 2 Comets available, I'd be able to get the results I want with them positioned at the rear; hopefully I can get the second Comet into the budget for the next big show we do.
JD
Well-Known Member
The optics on the comet are better especially for longer throws. Remember, you are using a 360 watt lamp in the comet, and a 1000 watt lamp in the 1000Q (most times), so the fact that they even compete tells you a lot! At close range, the old 1000Q will dump more light, but a a long distance the comet will hit more light on the subject.
Always loved the 1000Q myself, but I come from the 1970s/80s era. Time has moved on
Always loved the 1000Q myself, but I come from the 1970s/80s era. Time has moved on
I do prefer the 1000Q's iris and shutter controls on the back of the instrument to the Comet's controls on the top. It seemed to me that it was more natural to follow and adjust the iris with one hand on the knob on the back than using a hand on the back handle to follow and a hand on the iris lever; but that could just be because that is what I learned to use first. Before we got the Comet, I used a 1000Q as the only followspot in a production of "The Music Man". In the library scene, Marian and Prof. Hill both needed to be followed, but at times were on opposite sides of the stage. I set the shutter to trim the height of the stage and left it there for the entire show and irised in and out as Marian and the Prof. Hill came together and moved apart through the number. (I used metal damper in the filter unit to bring the spot in and out.) The setting of the shutter was also useful during curtain call. The Comet's beam fully irised out is only about half the width of that stage, so I couldn't have accomplished the effect with it.
JD
Well-Known Member
Depends if the lenses are set for spot or flood. The comet gives you 21' at 100' and the 1000Q gives you 25' at 100'. Not a huge difference. As for the controls on top, in an educational environment, I think the controls on top better prepare the user for larger commercial followspots which are for the most part the same way. Having server a "tour of club duty" in the early days (when the board op and spot op were the same person), I liked the 1000Q because you could run it with one hand (short of a color change) as your iris and chop plate were all accessible without moving your hand! Same with the HMI Altman Satellite.
I was mistaken, my experience with Altman followspots with rear iris and shutter control was not with the 1000Q but the 902 and/or dyna-spot. The specs show that the 1000Q is better than that. Yesterday I got the 902's into my space. Although moving the spots closer to the stage helped with the brightness, I'm pretty sure the director will still want the brightness of the Comet in the show, so I need to recuit and train 3 followspot operators.
JD
Well-Known Member
If I remember correctly, the 902 was notoriously inefficient. Don't have the specs handy.
Altman provides some documents for discontinued products including the 902. I think the Comet replaced we have replaced a Dynaspot (if I remember correctly that instrument had a fan, unlike the 902's that we still have).
JD
Well-Known Member
Yep! Altspot 2100 which had a 2100 watt lamp!
(This one looks to be set up with a smaller 1500 watt lamp, but same animal)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Sup...-Transformer-Stand-Working-Good-/281162463609
Cool thread!
Brings back memories from high school days a thousand years ago! Had those ancient things and a room full of autotransformer dimmers running border strips onstage. Really high tech back then!Similar threads
