Front lighting advice

[jagwirez]

Hey all,

I'm making plans to upgrade our church's stage lighting. All they have right now are par cans. So I'm making plans to get some lekos. I am looking at the Leviton EL40-42B, which has a nice feature to adjust the lens to make different angles.

I understand the mccandless method and plan to set the stage with 1-key 1-fill for each spot. Where I am scratching my head is for the overlapping. By example, these fixtures will shoot about 18' field at a 25' throw. I would like to know how much overlap to have so the whole stage can be washed and not have any 'cold spots' when walking from one light to the other. My guess is to divide the stage in 10ft areas to have 4ft overlap on each side and that should cover body and heads. If you have any thoughts, please let me know. Thanks.

 

[jglodeklights]

Honestly, my thought is to stick with some form of PAR. They are overall slightly more efficient in regards to brightness than a Leko, and much easier to create even washes with. The ETC Source 4 PAR MCM may also be a good fit as it is engineered to pass less heat through in its beam, meaning a more comfortable stage. Three of them across with MFL (medium flood) or WFL (wide flood) lenses installed would create a nice even wash of light. They are also available in white, which depending on your space may fit better into the overall look.

 

[Esoteric]

Just hope you don't care about spill. ;-)

Mike

 

[jglodeklights]

Oh, Mike, that is what barn doors and top hats are for! Yes, they make the units a little ugly, but they control spill great.

Besides, I highly suspect that by the time you frost those Levitons the OP is looking at to even out the hotspot of the beam you'll have ended up with more spill than a S4 PAR .

 

[jagwirez]

I'll take this with a grain of salt, but I'm not sure about pars. The ones we have (cheaper end, not equiv to S4) really dont look good and they are already set at the 45 angles as they should be.

We'll have times in the future where we'll need some spots, so having the shutters on the ellipsoidals is a great benefit.

 

[shiben]

Oh, Mike, that is what barn doors and top hats are for! Yes, they make the units a little ugly, but they control spill great.

False. PARs have a beam that is really not controllable, when you slap a beam control device on it it just makes it dimmer.

Now, for lighting areas, the size I have heard the most is 8'. You dont define the overlap via feet and inches, but rather you want units in a line to have all of their field angles overlapping, but not their beam angles. Anyhow, I would also use something other than those ERS and grab something from Selecon or ETC, or even Altman. I had never even heard of that ERS...

 

[DuckJordan]

Actually 8ft areas are more for theater where you want the areas to be very controllable. On thing I wonder for the op have you tried some fresnels? They are better controlled than a par but still give a nice even wash.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk

 

[Les]

I would also use something other than those ERS and grab something from Selecon or ETC, or even Altman. I had never even heard of that ERS...

My sentiments also.

When you say that the Leviton has a feature to change the beam angles, I'm guessing that it's either a zoom ellipsoidal, or more likely, you can reconfigure the lens train to create a different spread. I would probably venture to guess that you'd get it to a usable configuration and just leave it, so in that case, I'd just do a little math and figure out which degree lens train you'd be dealing with and buy properly sized ETC or Altman fixtures. If you're on a budget, the ETC Source Four Jr would be a very good choice. Behind that would be the Altman 360Q, most likely in either 6X9 or 6X12.

EDIT---

Just did a quick search and the Leviton model you mention appears to be the equivalent to the old Colortran 5/50 series, which actually isn't such a bad light. Pretty similar in concept and operation as an Altman 360Q. Amazon and others list it at $118 (with C-clamp, safety cable, color frame and installed Edison connector), so maybe that isn't such a bad deal. I'd get my hands on one and use it for a while to see how you like it before buying bulk. That's not a bad idea no matter what brand or type of light you're buying.

 

[jglodeklights]

False. PARs have a beam that is really not controllable, when you slap a beam control device on it it just makes it dimmer.

There are several problems with your statement here. First, my comments were in regard to spill. And yes, an accessory such as barn doors or a top hat will be useful in reducing spill. Secondly, barn doors will not inherently make a S4 PAR any dimmer, nor are they inherently ineffective at further shaping it's field. They are less effective at further shaping the ovoid beam of a MFL or WFL lens in regards to the shaping the short axis of it. As it is already smaller, you have less room to play with before you have begin to cut into the actual beam projection versus the field projection. In cutting down on the long axis, you have more room to play with before cutting into the beam. Barn doors are inherently considered more useful with wash fixtures with inherently less control built into their design, IE Fresnels, but you can still begin to cut into the beam thereby causing dimming.

The solution here may not necessarily be one type of unit, based upon how much area control is needed. How much spill control is needed? Also, in what way do the PARs look badly? Are the beams uneven and thus difficult to make a nice wash, or are they too harsh looking? What type of events are on this stage? Is it Church services, music, shows, all of the above, etc?

 

[shiben]

There are several problems with your statement here. First, my comments were in regard to spill. And yes, an accessory such as barn doors or a top hat will be useful in reducing spill. Secondly, barn doors will not inherently make a S4 PAR any dimmer, nor are they inherently ineffective at further shaping it's field. They are less effective at further shaping the ovoid beam of a MFL or WFL lens in regards to the shaping the short axis of it. As it is already smaller, you have less room to play with before you have begin to cut into the actual beam projection versus the field projection. In cutting down on the long axis, you have more room to play with before cutting into the beam. Barn doors are inherently considered more useful with wash fixtures with inherently less control built into their design, IE Fresnels, but you can still begin to cut into the beam thereby causing dimming.

The solution here may not necessarily be one type of unit, based upon how much area control is needed. How much spill control is needed? Also, in what way do the PARs look badly? Are the beams uneven and thus difficult to make a nice wash, or are they too harsh looking? What type of events are on this stage? Is it Church services, music, shows, all of the above, etc?

I dont disagree that PARs would work well for this situation, but the only device that I have had effectively reduce glare from a PAR is an egg crate, and I have tried many times with barndoors, and they just dim the lamp and dont shape it well at all.

 

[jagwirez]

The reason why I am trying to not use pars for front lighting is from spill and reflection on to the back wall, which is used for projections. Once replaced with ellipsoidals, I will however use these pars for color as more of a downlight and backlight which will not give much reflection on the walls.

BTW, thanks for the input and discussions, this is all great to read and learn. I know the ERS I am looking at is somewhat bottom end, but I will take Les's idea and and buy a couple before going all out. And yes, budget is a concern.

 

[Esoteric]

PAR with a barn door and you are getting close to the price of a Source4 ERS.

Yeah, when you are working around projections nothing beats an ERS for control.

 

[Dionysus]

+1 for ERSs they afford you much more control of where light hits and doesn't, usually without loosing much if any intensity. PARs do get you more intensity for the buck however.

I've never used the 'leviton' fixtures, not sure how the quality or optics have changed since leviton bought colortran and re-branded everything. As long as you realize they are not by any means 'top of the line' fixtures, and there are other fixtures that are a lot 'brighter', etc out there.

I also don't know the beam and field angles for these fixtures off hand.

 

[JChenault]

Hey all,

Where I am scratching my head is for the overlapping. By example, these fixtures will shoot about 18' field at a 25' throw. I would like to know how much overlap to have so the whole stage can be washed and not have any 'cold spots' when walking from one light to the other. My guess is to divide the stage in 10ft areas to have 4ft overlap on each side and that should cover body and heads.

If you look at the specs for the fixture, you should see a reference to the Field Angle ( where intensity drops tp 10% of max) and Beam Angle ( where the intensity drops to ( 50% of max). The traditional way of getting a smooth wash was to look at the beam angle in figuring out how large your area should be. Ie think of the size as beam angle to beam angle and ignore field angle).

In the last 20 years some manufacturers have typically flattened their fields for their photometrics which makes this method not as applicable. For these guys I typically use as my working area a beam about 50% to 60% of the field angle.

Don't forget to figure the size of the beam at your performers head, not the floor.
If your throw is short the angle change as you move from area to area will be a problem and you will need more units.
If things are not even, you can mask the issue with another system. Ie your box boom wash can even out your fronght light to some extent.

 

[derekleffew]

...Where I am scratching my head is for the overlapping. By example, these fixtures will shoot about 18' field at a 25' throw. I would like to know how much overlap to have so the whole stage can be washed and not have any 'cold spots' when walking from one light to the other. My guess is to divide the stage in 10ft areas to have 4ft overlap on each side and that should cover body and heads. If you have any thoughts, please let me know. Thanks.

Obtain a copy of Steve Shelley's A Practical Guide to Stage Lighting and look up "The Slinky Method." This Google Books link may or may not work: A Practical Guide to Stage Lighting - Google Books . In any case, you should buy the book. Used copies of the first edition are very reasonably priced.

 

[jglodeklights]

Another useful tool is John McKernon's BeamWright software, which is free. It has a large selection of different instruments in its library, and you can enter beam and field angle for instruments not in it.

 

[shiben]

Obtain a copy of Steve Shelley's A Practical Guide to Stage Lighting and look up "The Slinky Method." This Google Books link may or may not work: A Practical Guide to Stage Lighting - Google Books . In any case, you should buy the book. Used copies of the first edition are very reasonably priced.

And a really useful book for pretty much every lighting designer or person who works on it. Always on my shelf!

 

[NevilleLighting]

Jag,
If you have areas with a 10' width with a 4' overlap on each side you should have a pretty good wash. Some people aim for a full 50% overlap where the edge of one beam hits at the hot spot of the next beam. I tend to shoot for 30-40%. Since you're at 40% you should be fine. Lekos are a good choice for you since you need a little more control.

 

[Esoteric]

Yeah, I go anywhere from 35%-50% based on the type of unit and whether I am lighting for the human eye or for video.

Mike