Frontlight
- Thread starterlighttechie5948
- Start date
Esoteric
Well-Known Member
An important thing to remember is the limitations of your space. I'm designing two shows at the moment in two very different spaces. One is at my high school. Our proscenium is about 40' wide, but the FOH pipe is only 25' wide and comes in at a very shallow angle. I can just barely get straight-on front light to all downstage areas, so full-blown McCandless on the sides is out of the question. Also, our "box booms" are just pipes mounted to the walls that come in at about a 20 degree angle. So we don't have lots of choices for front light. Generally what I do is use two straight-in systems for a warm and a cool tint, then load up the sidelight with saturated colors to help add more dimension. When I design, I tend to add the toning lights (sides, tops, backs) first, and then add in FOH only as much as is needed. Just because your entire ensemble is on stage, does that mean you need to shoot the place full of front light? I generally light the ensemble with tops and sides, then add just enough fill from the fronts to get rid of any annoying shadows - basically, like designing for dance. Then I just have a follow spot track with the soloist(s) and it looks pretty good.
I just got hired to design another show at another local high school. This theatre just got renovated, and it's very nice (except that its all Strand). The box booms are large and easily accessible and in a perfect position for washing the stage. The FOH cove is at a perfect 45 degree angle, but you cant' hang instruments wherever you want. There are five windows cut into the ceiling where the catwalk is, and these are the only places you can hang lights if you want them to hit the stage. That effectively limits you to 5 front light instruments. For that show, I'm using 5 areas across and lighting them straight-in gelled in a neutral color. Then I'm loading up the box booms with color washes, and I will use these as a variation of McCandless. I can wash the stage in different colors from the two sides if I wanted to, or just from one side, then add in the neutral fronts to get rid of shadows. Or just use the neutral fronts with some saturated sidelight and toplight to get a specific effect.
Personally, I don't find myself using McCandless very often. For a straight play I will usually use some form of McCandless to get the proper relationship of key and fill light. But the main limiting factor that I have found is that your directions of key and fill are pretty much set. For most musicals, you have drastic changes in time, place, and mood throughout. In one scene I might need a bright sunrise, while I might need a dark night in the next. If I had enough instruments to double hang then I would love to use McCandless, but I've found that it's generally best for me to shoot fairly light tints straight-in from the FOH and then shoot the actors full of saturated side and top light. Having said that, I do want to play around more with the McCandless system and see if I can use it better than I am. Am I thinking too inside the box here? I love the modeling effect McCandless can make when I set it up just to play with it, but I just can't see it being practical in the shows I do.
(Side note: Something kind of interesting is that Wicked uses just one system of straight-in front light, gelled in a neutral color. That's it. And these linstruments are only used in two scenes, one for a very short time if I remember correctly.)
Yeah, I think you are being a little too literal with McCandless. It doesn't have to be perfect 45 degree angles to be McCandless. But there has to be some separation of angles and colors. For example if I have to I will often do 30 degree angles on the front. Or if I have to I will do 45 degree angles at the center of the stage and move to straight on front light towards the edges. I can't imagine doing single straight on front light unless I had no other choice (or like in Wicked I only used it once or twice a show).
I also can't imagine using a saturate light as a front light.
I think of lighting like cooking. You use different layers and different amounts of different ingredients to make your dish.
Want night? Start with a layer of saturate blue back light, add some dark lav tops, then light the acting areas with the cool part of your McCandless and add a touch of the warm side for fill and use your neutral box book for sculpting.
Want day? Use an amber top or high side, then add a touch of light amber on the scenery, turn up your McCandless in the acting areas you need.
Want morning? Use the same amber top and light amber scenery, use your warm McCandless, with a touch of cool, and some neutral box boom action for molding.
Add in specials and patterns when needed. Night in a forest? Use night, but instead of the fronts and sculpting use a pattern wash.
If the show wants it, half your McCandless can be patterned. Don't have any night or cool scenes? Use a warm and a neutral or a warm and warmer (neutral warms will look warm by themselves but turn cool with another warm color on).
Don't use area 5 cool ever? Don't hang an area 5 cool. Etc, etc.
I guess I like McCandless (although I use three point and four point in thrust spaces) because my primary purpose in the play is visibility of the actors. So I begin with lighting the actors the best I can and move on from there for "artsy" stuff.
But you are on to something with lighting a crowd scene like dance and then picking out the primaries with a spotlight. I do that all the time.
Anyway, these are just my thoughts. As usual, your mileage may vary.
Mike
Esoteric
Well-Known Member
Where does the Jewel Box Method come from? I wasn't taught it and an internet search didn't turn up anything.
Why not offset the front light and get more sculpting? I wonder what a front light setup like that would look like in normal use?
Mike
I believe Sony means "jewel lighting," and it comes from our favorite author, Howard Bay. See the Collaborative Article: McCandless System - ControlBooth. I believe there's mention of it in Jean Rosenthal's The Magic of Light as well.
theatretechguy
Member
I hear ya, Wayne! For years I lit many shows on less than 36 dimmers in a small community theatre. I lit shows like "Cats" "Beauty and the Beast" and "Miss Saigon" (no color changers/movers in the rig, either!) It's all entirely possible to do these things, but it takes pre-planning and sacrifice (I'm giving up this wash so I can do this gobo, etc).
I'm partial to McCandless, it's the method I learned in high school and college (and I was one of those guilty of using R02 and R60 too much). I'm finding with larger venues (with larger inventories), color changers (and movers) now that some of that creativity and simplicity is getting lost. The nuances get lost in a large rig on a large stage.
That being said, the situation the OP is in probably calls for "do whats best for the space you're in". If the design is going to take a major hit (inventory/circut/dimmer-wise) by using a particular method, find what works best within the limitations of your theatre space.
I'm partial to McCandless, it's the method I learned in high school and college (and I was one of those guilty of using R02 and R60 too much). I'm finding with larger venues (with larger inventories), color changers (and movers) now that some of that creativity and simplicity is getting lost. The nuances get lost in a large rig on a large stage.
That being said, the situation the OP is in probably calls for "do whats best for the space you're in". If the design is going to take a major hit (inventory/circut/dimmer-wise) by using a particular method, find what works best within the limitations of your theatre space.
Esoteric
Well-Known Member
Interesting. That method was never really addressed in our design classes (maybe because it was born out of necessity that no longer exists since most houses now have house beams/house truss). I would never think to use side light as anything other than fill except maybe in musicals or dance.
This method seems like a bastardization born out of a need that no longer exists. But I like the molding and sculpting that comes from different angles. Seems there is some good discussion to be had there.
Mike
Cudo's for asking a really good question, I've really enjoyed reading this thread.
You know something Cool? I just thought I'd throw this into the mix. I worked with a designer in college who realized that you can combine a jewel system ( which I though came out of Russian Ballet ) and a McCanllis system. I've never been able to pull off this "combined" system in any other house professionally, but I've always wanted to. It really doesn't eat up more FOH circuts than a three color 90 wash, but it give you almost unlimited modeling potential. Something to think about.
Also, I was taking a break from researching a design for the show, High school Musical one, and I found out a lot of what Disney did with their production is a lot of quick camera changes during the songs. Most of the filler is static, but the camera moves a lot when the kids are singing. Watch out because on stage that sense of motion during the singing is going to fall on you as the LD. So cuing is going to be just as important as modeling.
good luck and post what you come up with if you get a chance.
Thanks
-gopher
You know something Cool? I just thought I'd throw this into the mix. I worked with a designer in college who realized that you can combine a jewel system ( which I though came out of Russian Ballet ) and a McCanllis system. I've never been able to pull off this "combined" system in any other house professionally, but I've always wanted to. It really doesn't eat up more FOH circuts than a three color 90 wash, but it give you almost unlimited modeling potential. Something to think about.
Also, I was taking a break from researching a design for the show, High school Musical one, and I found out a lot of what Disney did with their production is a lot of quick camera changes during the songs. Most of the filler is static, but the camera moves a lot when the kids are singing. Watch out because on stage that sense of motion during the singing is going to fall on you as the LD. So cuing is going to be just as important as modeling.
good luck and post what you come up with if you get a chance.
Thanks
-gopher
Esoteric
Well-Known Member
Yeah, my old professors used to say that anyone can hang a million lights and get what they want. Design is hanging what you need to get the job done.
We got points off on our project if we hung too many lights that we never turned on (accounting for lights you hang fully intending to use them and a scene gets cut, or a wash doesn't like).
Mike
Esoteric
Well-Known Member
Yeah, you can never count on a show to look in a theater the way it does on video. Just like lighting for a concert live is totally different than lighting for a concert on video.
Mike
Sony
Active Member
Well thanks for basically saying all my designs are crap...since thats basically all I use. You want to see what "Jewel Lighting" looks like? Here are a few shows I've done.
The Women of Lockerbie
Dead Man Walking
Orestes
It doesn't leave the face totally flat and without definition you use the sidelight to sculpt the face. Just because your teacher never discussed it...doesn't mean it's not a perfectly valid method. McCandless isn't the only method out there. Sorry for the fuzzy pictures heh.
Esoteric
Well-Known Member
Hey man. Nothing personal. I was talking about the history of the approach and trying to spark discussion. I did however notice that you are lighting in a thrust space and not a procenium. In a thrust the jewel method turns into four point lighting depending on your POV. I use a lot of four point lighting in thrust spaces, it works out wonderfully. But when you use the jewel method in a procenium there is only one POV and so it is not four point lighting.
I never said it wasn't valid. Results speak louder than methods (as long as safety isn't at stake). I never said that your designs were crap. Please don't take it personally. I said that this method (speaking of using it in a procenium which is how it was developed appearently) was born out of necessity and seemed like an inferior way to do something that can be done much better now.
I like the first look a lot. I assume that it was a musical or something?
In the Dead Man Walking picture it almost looks as if she is sitting between two of the lights that are producing a McCandless effect rather than looking directly at the "front light".
But those are nice pics, and I am sure the show looks great. But we were talking about method (and the history of the method) rather than results.
Mike
I never said it wasn't valid. Results speak louder than methods (as long as safety isn't at stake). I never said that your designs were crap. Please don't take it personally. I said that this method (speaking of using it in a procenium which is how it was developed appearently) was born out of necessity and seemed like an inferior way to do something that can be done much better now.
I like the first look a lot. I assume that it was a musical or something?
In the Dead Man Walking picture it almost looks as if she is sitting between two of the lights that are producing a McCandless effect rather than looking directly at the "front light".
But those are nice pics, and I am sure the show looks great. But we were talking about method (and the history of the method) rather than results.
Mike
I did tech theater all through high school in the early 80s. Our Tech Director drilled the McCandless system into us.
Fast forward to 2015 and I have sons doing tech theater in high school. When I start talking about McCandless, two lights from the front at 45 degrees, warm and cool, one or two backlights if you have enough instruments, etc. they look at me like I have three heads.
Am I showing my age? Is McCandless still pertinent? I have seen a show that used the "jewel" method. I thought it looked terrible.
What lighting method are all the cool kids using today?
Fast forward to 2015 and I have sons doing tech theater in high school. When I start talking about McCandless, two lights from the front at 45 degrees, warm and cool, one or two backlights if you have enough instruments, etc. they look at me like I have three heads.
Am I showing my age? Is McCandless still pertinent? I have seen a show that used the "jewel" method. I thought it looked terrible.
What lighting method are all the cool kids using today?
JD
Well-Known Member
The subject has come up here a few times (use "search") and I don't think that it is trending up or down. It is just a method, and as such gets put in the binder with other methods. I always thought it looked a little artificial, but others swear by it. In real life, people are never "lit" evenly. There is almost always a "hot" side, the side facing the sun or the desk lamp or whatever. So, to fracture a cool/warm front lighting scheme would make sense as long as the set environment of the stage supports the reason for the look. My own opinion is neutral.
CanYouHearMeNow
Member
Great overall thread with some great things covered. I will say that back when I learned basic lighting in High School, our greatest limitation was the way that the circuits were setup. We had 2 front electrics that had 3 runs each, so for example, we would have 6-12 on the left, 6-12 center, and 6-12 right. This would be cool for a full McCandless setup, except that the circuits weren't actually centered in the space. That also took away a lot of options because everything was forced 3-ferd. That is the main reason that we usually just had 90º lighting, even though we were always told there were too many shadows.
We were blessed to have a great number of fixtures, but limited options of how to use them, and we were just starting the economical option of LED or intelligent lighting so we had no opportunity to use these things.
That being said, there are some great lighting things you can still do with basic conventional, and a handful of great gobos and a talented LD or student that just plays around.
We were blessed to have a great number of fixtures, but limited options of how to use them, and we were just starting the economical option of LED or intelligent lighting so we had no opportunity to use these things.
That being said, there are some great lighting things you can still do with basic conventional, and a handful of great gobos and a talented LD or student that just plays around.
I can tell you that the majority of my Tech students would react to your question the same way your sons did. There just isn't enough time in my class to go really in depth with lighting design without cutting a different unit.
That being said, the kids that have show specific interest in lighting and that are volunteering for the lighting assignments would be very aware of our friend McCandless.
In fact, if you check the AMAZON page for his book you will find they are proponents of this theory....
Someone mentioned moving lights. The school district just installed the "wiring" to "get ready" for "LED and movable" lights. This seemed odd to me. AC power is still AC power. Yes you need to add DMX connections for control. I thought they would just run DMX to each circuit connection. They added three new electrics over the stage in addition to the four they already have. That seems like a waste of fly positions to me. What makes LED and movable lights so special that they need to add all this. Is this a case of a sleezy sales person.
How many high schools are using LED and movable lights for theater? Its a play, not a disco.
How many high schools are using LED and movable lights for theater? Its a play, not a disco.
I use LED fixtures for my top/ back wash fixtures.
Your thoughts on power are a bit off though. Some movers require 208v, compared to the 110v-120v that most electronics in america run on. Also, LED fixtures should not be plugged in to dimmable circuits because the distortion dimmers cause to the waveform can fry their electronics. Depending on your dimmers, new electics might be necessary.....
That said, it sounds kinda fishy to me. I personally was able to just change the settings on my dimmers so that they are able to play nice with my LED fixtures. 7 overhead electrics sounds insane to me unless the intention is to make a full change over and then scrap three of the old electrics.
