Automated Fixtures ETC D60 Frustrations

[joshua]

We (Swarthmore College) spent the summer discussing what kind of fixture to purchase as we were replacing our old Color Commands. We wanted a unit that was energy efficient, had good punch, and could change color. After a number of demos of a variety of products we settled on the ETC D60 Lustr+ fixture. I did a little research and discovered that the D60 ships with a 9" 25º lens (round field). That lens would be perfect for our application. On page 2 of the Selador D60 Spec Sheet it mentions that the unit ships with a 25º lens. We then ordered 15 of the units.

When we received the fixtures I addressed all of them on the deck before putting them into the air. As I was doing this I discovered that two of the fixtures had fans that didn't work. I called ETC and had two replacement units shipped out and returned the non-functional units. Once we had all the units working and addressed, we hung them from our grid and turned them on. We were very surprised to discover that the field angle seemed much smaller than the 25º that we expecting. I then took one of our Source 4 26º units and set it next to one of our new D60's. Indeed, the 26º was substantially larger than the D60 with the 25º lens. I then hung a Source 4 19º next to the D60 and the field spread seemed about the same. We were quite shocked and confused at this.

I then called ETC and left a message with Jim Uphoff explaining our confusion/aggravation/disappointment. Jim called me back and left me a voice mail explaining that the 25º lens isn't really 25º, it is more like 20º. I then dug around the ETC website some more and eventually found the D60 Lustr+ photometry files. In them I found that the 25º lens is really a 21º lens and that the 35º lens is really a 27º lens. Had we known this, I would have ordered the units with 35º lenses.

To solve this issue, I ordered the 35º (really a 27.3º) lenses and just put them in. Lo and behold, they aren't right either! There is no way that they are even 27.3º. So I ended up installing bot the 25º and the 35º lens. That just barley solves the problem. This kind is not the kind of product I would expect from ETC.

My complaint is that the product says it comes with a 25º lens but in reality it is 21º. That makes a difference. If I wanted a 21º spread, I'd get that product. Now I have to order an additional set of lenses and further delay the implementation of out new gear. If the 25º lens is really 21º, just call it a 21º lens. Likewise, the 35º lens which is really a 27º lens should be advertised as such. This is very misleading. Am I now not to trust that a 19º Source 4 really is 19º?

To compound my aggravation at all of this I discovered that the profile for the D60 in the ETC Ion that we have doesn't accurately reflect the color picking options of the unit. All of the colors that the unit's output are yellow. R80 is very green. If I use the color wheel, I discover that the problem still persists. Am I supposed to make custom R80 only to have the software for the console updated and the profile change?

I have lost a significant amount of faith in ETC and will think long and hard before I make a purchasing decision involving ETC equipment in the future.

 

[derekleffew]

... Am I now not to trust that a 19º Source 4 really is 19º? ...

As a matter of fact, yes--do not trust the lens tube designations. The latest (Version G) datasheet.pdf shows the 19° as having a 15° beam angle and an 18° field angle. It has always been this way, and varies slightly with each lens tube revision, across all beam spreads.

The picture from your other post does illustrate your point nicely.

...The unit on SR is the D60 with a 25º Lens. The unit on SL is a 26º Source 4. See what I mean?

Not to defend ETC, but:
1. All (almost all?) manufacturers lie about their luminaire's photometric performance. ETC provides more data/information than any other manufacturer, and thus may be the most culpable, and easily-challenged.

2. Determining 1/10 and 1/2 cut-off angle is particularly more imprecise with soft-edged wash fixtures than with ERS s.

3. In hindsight, just as one plans to change bottles in a PAR64, or lenses in a Source Four PAR, I'd factor the cost of various lenses into the purchase price of any LED unit (non-zoom).

 

[Wood4321]

I agree with Derek on this one, I would expect lensing to be part of the cost of purchasing those fixtures.
Comparing ERS' to Wash fixtures really is apples and oranges.
That being said, I am quite sure my dealer would have taken the incorrect lenses back in exchange for the correct ones.

As for your color issue,
It sounds a bit like your color temperature is off.
What mode are you running the fixtures in?
Is the desk set up for the same mode?

 

[joshua]

The lenses are really off though. I mean to call it a 35º is a joke. Just call it what it is. I know that all the manufactures fib a bit but that's really too far.

As for the color rendering thing, I've got the fixtures and the console set to stage mode. When I was on the phone with ETC the tech support person said that they, ETC, were aware of the problem and that it was in the profile on the light board. She said that they were going to try to fix it with software version 2.0 but that the new software would also change any custom colors I had made for my units.

It's aggravating that they can't get their people together to solve these problem before the products go out the door.

 

[josh88]

Like Derek said, you just can't take "name" numbers as fact because that's what they are calling it. The photo metric data shows the reality of the facts. Checking those details before buying would have shown what the real degree was. I agree it's confusing and a bit misleading but I feel like its less of a "lie" when they say look, here's the data, you can see for yourself it's not quite what we say.
The color problems are a known admitted issue, that has gone around for a bit and they've been working in it for awhile. At least they are fixing it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[icewolf08]

With the coverage issue, you have to remember that there is a big difference between field angle and beam angle, usually much more notable in wash fixtures. This is why the photometric data is available (as mentioned). As was also mentioned, most respectable dealers would have taken the lenses you didn't want and exchanged them for the ones that you did. Also, as mentioned, comparing a wash fixture to a profile fixture is like apples to oranges.

On the color mixing issue, it is a profile thing, and ETC will tell you that the gel picker and color picker are only approximations. They don't actually have someone test every single color mixing fixture and device and match every color in the swatch book. It would take a crazy amount of time, too many products and colors on the market to even attempt it. They set up some baselines and calculate colors as best they can. If you have 10 different types of color mixing fixtures and you set them all to the R80 swatch in the color picker, you better believe that none of them will be the same! That of course is not to mention the fact that Rosco blues have very poor quality control (IMHO) and the sheet of R80 you buy today probably won't be the same color as the one you buy next month.

 

[MNicolai]

They do actually test a lot of the gels. If you use the Gel Picker, you're picking from colors that are calibrated between the fixtures and those gel colors. That said, it matters which mode you have the fixtures in (boost, theater, etc.). It also matters what you considered "a perfect match". Obviously a Source Four PAR with an R377 isn't going to put nearly as much light out on that color as a D60 could, so the D60 may appear much brighter and could seem off in that regard.

ETC brings a person in to do color calibrations, but understand that it's a very subjective process even it's done via scientific means. There are still a lot of different variables at play that will prevent you frequently from being able to just grab a color from the gel picker and run with it. If a perfect match is what you're looking for, grab the gel you want and then tweak on the encoders to get closer. Or -- as much as is practical, do what we do and throw caution to the wind and don't bother matching gels; we just go for the exact color we want.

That said, there very well may be issues with the fixture profiles. It wouldn't be the first time. Sometime it's only a couple colors that are "off" and other times it's a plethora. This is an iterative process and though it may be frustrating now, trust that ETC is working on it and will fix it as soon as they can in an upcoming software release.

LED's are just a different beast than tungsten when it comes to color and anyone at ETC will tell you that. Any dealer worth their salt will tell you that too.

As for the lenses -- yes, it is a known issue. We had the same problem and it was our understanding they were considering reclassifying their lenses so that they were less surprising to users in their degree angles. If you're truly dissatisfied contact your dealer and see if you can get them swapped for the next size out, or see if you can get a set of samples in and test for yourself what you think will work for you. As I recall, they aren't cheap so it's not unreasonable to get them swapped or get a sample kit before you make any final decisions. If you're dealer can't or won't, contact ETC directly.

 

[joshua]

Well, on their website is this:
http://www.etcconnect.com/docs/docs_downloads/datashts/7410L1006_Selador_D60_SpecSht_vF.pdf
Look at page 3. It says 25º and 35º lens. I'll grant you that buried on that page is the IES file that shows otherwise, but that is really shady of ETC.

As for the color issue, we have a cyc full of Selador units and their color is much better. Also LED, also made by ETC.

 

[DuckJordan]

seriously joshua, its not that big a deal. Being miffed about not doing your research came and bit you in the butt and now you're blaming someone else. I challenge you to find any light fixture that states exactly what degree their instrument is. READ THE DATA SHEET. My crew who knows basic lighting knows when they go to purchase a light with a specific degree the number on the barrel is just a ballpark not the exact. It sounds more to me that you made a jump decision. I understand how frustrating that can be but to be so miffed about a little odd info is just stupid.

 

[techieman33]

Well, on their website is this:
http://www.etcconnect.com/docs/docs_downloads/datashts/7410L1006_Selador_D60_SpecSht_vF.pdf
Look at page 3. It says 25º and 35º lens. I'll grant you that buried on that page is the IES file that shows otherwise, but that is really shady of ETC.

As for the color issue, we have a cyc full of Selador units and their color is much better. Also LED, also made by ETC.

They're all "selador" units, most not if all etc lights fall under the "selador" brand. When making an expenditure that big you should have brought in a demo unit/units with multiple lens options to figure out what you really wanted, not guessed at what you would want. And color pickers are great when your in a hurry for a one off concert or something, but otherwise I'll always take the little extra time needed to match what I want exactly.

 

[cbrandt]

While having had my own host of frustrations about not being careful enough with these particular lenses, I'd still argue that they're the best ones available. I've seen piles of major manufacturer diffusions/microfilms/lens spreaders for LEDs that are dramatically worse than just using standard gel diffusion. At least out of the ETC lenses, you get a good even spread, with relatively little light loss. The ovals ARE a bit on the linear side, but because of the minor light loss, you can get away with stacking lenses to achieve what you're looking for. I was pretty miffed the first time I realized my labeled lens tubes weren't as marked. Refused to call them 19 degrees for a month.

 

[traxman25]

The lenses are really off though. I mean to call it a 35º is a joke. Just call it what it is. I know that all the manufactures fib a bit but that's really too far.

As for the color rendering thing, I've got the fixtures and the console set to stage mode. When I was on the phone with ETC the tech support person said that they, ETC, were aware of the problem and that it was in the profile on the light board. She said that they were going to try to fix it with software version 2.0 but that the new software would also change any custom colors I had made for my units.

It's aggravating that they can't get their people together to solve these problem before the products go out the door.

Ha, version 2.0, don't hold your breath! I've been hearing about 2.0 for quite a long time now.

 

[sk8rsdad]

Version 2.0 got derailed by Gio but it IS coming. I don't know if colour matching is part of the release but they are constantly tinkering with the fixture libraries so I expect something will change, possibly for the better .

 

[rochem]

Version 2.0 got derailed by Gio but it IS coming. I don't know if colour matching is part of the release but they are constantly tinkering with the fixture libraries so I expect something will change, possibly for the better .

I've been running 2.0 beta for a while now. It's coming, but they're (rightfully) taking the time to make it as good as it wants to be. The reason 2.0 has been so long in the making is because they kept finding new features to add, and rather than wait to issue those awesome new features, they released them in a 1.9.x form. IIRC, we started the 2.0 beta when 1.9.6 was released, and they've just changed the name a few times in order to get key features out to customers sooner. But I assure you, the implication that v2.0 is coming slowly because of slow product development could not possibly be further from the truth.

 

[DrPinto]

Silly me. I always thought that a 25 degree instrument would be, oh, 25 degrees!

Why the BS? And "It's always been that way" in not a very good answer.

I'd expect better from ETC.

 

[derekleffew]

I found Mike Wood's article Non-Gaussian diffusers in the Fall 2012 issue of Protocol , pp. 22-25 particularly enlightening.

The most relevant portion:
When using two diffusion filters, the result is not arithmetically additive, but the square root of the sum of the two squares. I.e.,
two 40° "lenses": output angle = sq.rt.(40[SUP]2[/SUP] + 40[SUP]2[/SUP]) = ~57°; not 80° as one might suspect.

The same holds true for a 40° film on a 20° beam fixture:
output angle = sq.rt.(20[SUP]2[/SUP] + 40[SUP]2[/SUP]) = ~45°.

There's this disclaimer (there's always a disclaimer in stage lighting photometrics, isn't there?):

Note: The described method of summing the squares and then taking the sqaure root of the result is an approximation, but is accurate enough for our application.

Perhaps the most important point of the article:

With LED-based units, this addition method means that we get the widest range of beam angle control ... when the native beam angle of the LED with its primary optic is as narrow as possible. ... You can always make a light beam wider, but it's much tougher to make it narrower again.

This follows the philosophy of a TV/event gaffer I met in the 1980s who only bought VNSP PAR64 lamps and various grades of diffusion media. Easier to change a gel than a lamp to achieve the spread required. YMMV.


EDIT: from http://www.luminitco.com/FAQ , a major manufacturer of diffusers:

2. What does FWHM mean and how do you measure it?
A. FWHM is an abbreviation for Full Width Half Maximum angle of diffusion a collimated laser would see after passing through the diffuser. A 10° diffuser will produce a beam width of 10°. When used with divergent sources like LEDs which have an angle of divergence (ά), the resultant angle of diffusion (β ) can be estimated using the following equation: β =√(ά2 + Δ2) , where Δ is the angle of the diffuser).

 

[derekleffew]

So let's see if the maths works. From the ETC cut sheet referenced earlier:

Optical
• Primary field angle of 17° and beam angle of 8°
• Secondary lenses available for multiple beam spread options
• Each fixture ships with a 25° lens; additional lenses must
be ordered separately
• Refer to accessories charts for lenses available

With the 25° lens on the 17° fixture, resultant field angle should be ~30°, and beam angle is ~19°. Is this reflected in the photo in post #2 above?

Maybe it is a matter of semantics? A "25° lens" doesn't TURN the fixture into a 25°, it only widens by [a factor determined by √(x[SUP]2[/SUP]+25[SUP]2[/SUP]) ]. Likewise for 35, 45, 75°, and the non-rounds?

 

[SteveB]

Maybe it is a matter of semantics? A "25° lens" doesn't TURN the fixture into a 25°, it only widens by [a factor determined by √(x[SUP]2[/SUP]+25[SUP]2[/SUP]) ]. Likewise for 35, 45, 75°, and the non-rounds?

Yet if you put a 36 degree lens tube in an S4 ellipsoidal, you expect that the field angle is going to be reasonably close to 36 degrees. And that's always been the case with ETC ellipsoidals. Thus it's not unreasonable to expect that a 25 degree diffusion lens on an LED unit will yield a fixture field spread close to 25 degrees.

I'm of the opinion that ETC needs to go back and get some real world measurements and publish new data.

 

[techieman33]

I'm of the opinion that ETC needs to go back and get some real world measurements and publish new data.

Agreed, I shouldn't have to stop and think about what degree a 26* lens will actually produce. Yes I know it's probably not going to be exactly 26* but it should be close.