You think white Source 4's are cool?
(Photo courtesy of an ETC employee on Facebook who posted this in the Source 4 fan group I started)
I couldn't find it. Would you tell me who? I want to get some S4 re-painted.
Just what we need...
- Thread startergafftapegreenia
- Start date
I couldn't find it. Would you tell me who? I want to get some S4 re-painted.
len, PM sent.
Elation had to stop making their version of the source 4 b/c it was too much like a source 4. I'm sure these will be the same story. Another cheap knock off that costs about the same as the real thing. This reminds me of yesterday when i went to the body shop to get a new head light assembly and the difference between OEM and knock off was 8 bucks. Come on, i'd much rather spend 8 bucks more and get the real deal instead of a knock off.
I have yet to have my messages replied regarding gobo size, holder dimensions, accessory slot (?), and color frame size. No real hurry to inform a LARGE expendable manufacturer I guess.....
Do you mean the S4 par or ellipsoidal? Their par is still listed http://www.elationlighting.com/product.asp?ProductIDNumber=1148&cat=Stage Lighting I installed some of the Elation pars in a club once. They were modified to accept a standard hpl. Build quality wasn't bad. About what you'd expect for a knockoff. I wanted to try a standard ETC lens in them but didn't get a chance. Didn't get to see them in action so I don't know how they perform.
Don't help the enemy!
Understood, but our goal is to assist and support the Apollo dealers that may have to answer these questions in the future in the unfortunate event someone purchases this item. (Remember, Firestone still made a tire to fit the Yugo, though it's doubtful a Firestone employee actually paid money for this particular vehicle...)
No flame intended, but poor quality customer service is unacceptable.
End mini-rant.
Elation did make an ellipsoidal, that was completely identical to the source 4. But it was quickly stopped. The elation version actually had slightly brighter output than the etc source 4.
True, the SE Asian import was quickly stopped, but I don't believe it was actually made by Elation. I had not the opportunity to check it's photometrics personally-
Ehh, Elation got sued; won't be too long before ETC sends a few lawyers towards Lightronics. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you think about don't Strand and Selecon hold the primary competition for ETC as far as ellipsoidals are concerned? Yes, before the hubbub starts, Altman has their hand in the pot too, but they have to pay royalties to ETC for each Shakespeare they sell because the product is so similar to theirs. However, that's a step in the wrong direction for profits. Unless I'm forgetting someone though, the main ellipsoidal market goes to ETC, Selecon Pacific, Strand, and Altman(but this is more points for ETC in the long run).
You really do have to give them credit though; they were so inconceivably lazy that they didn't even manage to change it cosmetically from the S4. If the pictures weren't labeled Lightronics I'd believe them to be S4's without a doubt. They'd succeed more at selling illegitimate knockoffs than at winning awards for originality.
You really do have to give them credit though; they were so inconceivably lazy that they didn't even manage to change it cosmetically from the S4. If the pictures weren't labeled Lightronics I'd believe them to be S4's without a doubt. They'd succeed more at selling illegitimate knockoffs than at winning awards for originality.
As this is my thread, I feel it is my duty to welcome you to Control Booth! Please, stop by the new member board and tell us a bit about yourself! There is a ton of information on this site. We're glad you've found us. We have a lot of fun and talk a lot of tech. As we say, ask what you want and answer what you can. The only stupid question is the one we've answered three times in the past week, so the search tool is a good friend to have.
I too would not be surprised if ETC decided to go after Lightronics. In my opinion, the Strand SL is really just another Source 4 copy, along the lines of the Shakespeare. The only company really doing anything different is Selecon, and from what I hear, with excellent results.
I too would not be surprised if ETC decided to go after Lightronics. In my opinion, the Strand SL is really just another Source 4 copy, along the lines of the Shakespeare. The only company really doing anything different is Selecon, and from what I hear, with excellent results.
Les
Well-Known Member
Personally I'm glad there are "copies" of the Source Four. It gives people the freedom of choice.
It's like, what if there was only one brand of sports car or SUV? As good as that one may be, it's better to have choices that fit individual requirements and budgets. (I'm more speaking on the behalf of Shakespeares and Strand SL's here, as you can tell some real R&D went into them, and they both come from popular/reputable companies).
I really don't think companies like Altman and Strand are "copying"; more like they are "competing". It's like saying "Ford copies Chevy because they both make big trucks".
It's like, what if there was only one brand of sports car or SUV? As good as that one may be, it's better to have choices that fit individual requirements and budgets. (I'm more speaking on the behalf of Shakespeares and Strand SL's here, as you can tell some real R&D went into them, and they both come from popular/reputable companies).
I really don't think companies like Altman and Strand are "copying"; more like they are "competing". It's like saying "Ford copies Chevy because they both make big trucks".
Les, I believe they are talking about a fairly legit copy. How is that good? Because it sneaks in as minimum bid price, and supplants itself into an environment that should be equipped with S4s?
Les
Well-Known Member
I agree that the Lightronics Ellipsoidal has no real place in this market. It's billed as "just as good only cheaper" but in reality it's $20.00 cheaper, if that and I'm sure that amount is lost somewhere along the lines. I would be willing to take a guess that the Lightronics line are made of thinner materials; with thinner reflectors, shutters and inferior lenses.
My post was in response to gafftapegreenia's post below:
(sorry, I should have made that clearer)
But yes, I agree with everyone here that the Lightronics is a copy, just like L&E copied the 360Q. (Obviously this has been a problem from the beginning, and I personally think L&E should pay Altman for their design).
My post was in response to gafftapegreenia's post below:
(sorry, I should have made that clearer)
But yes, I agree with everyone here that the Lightronics is a copy, just like L&E copied the 360Q. (Obviously this has been a problem from the beginning, and I personally think L&E should pay Altman for their design).
Last edited:
porkchop
Well-Known Member
Should be equipped with S4 Charc, that's a pretty bold statement. What if you just have an all Altman inventory and want it to stay that way for what ever reason (I could think of about 5 off the top of my head). Then an inventory full of Shakespeares would fit right in. I've used them and yes they are so similar to the S4 that there's a royalty paid to ETC for them, but they are also a fine fixture. At my old company we had a dealer that gave us a great deal on them and to my knowledge the company never thought about spending more money to get S4's cause the Altman fixtures worked great.
On another note, yah there's a basic template to an ellipsoidal that's working out very well and a lot of the different companies fixtures are rather similar on paper, but that doesn't mean that you have equal access to dealers. Fixtures aren't all that light and shipping/gas isn't getting any cheaper if you have a Strand dealer that's down the street and an ETC dealer that's 100 miles away who are you going to buy your equipment from? In that light I would argue it's a good thing that so many companies have products that are very competitive performance wise, it allows the little and/or remotely located guys a chance to use modern equipment.
Last edited:
I wasn't saying the SL or the Shakespeare are bad fixtures, in fact I've used Shakespeare's and am rather fond of them. The simple fact is that ETC changed the ellipsoidal as we knew it, and the other manufacturers had to something to get up to date. ERS technology has always been similar between manufacturers. Just consider when the 360Q was the top dog. ETC, Altman and Strand are all reliable companies, and I'd be happy to use either companies product.
We can debate which company's ERS is the best, if fact we have. Source 4 is hte industry standard, and there is something to be said for that, but at the same time, its nice to have options.
We can debate which company's ERS is the best, if fact we have. Source 4 is hte industry standard, and there is something to be said for that, but at the same time, its nice to have options.
I must admit that Strand did a cool thing with the SL that I really like; they have a 360 degree rotating barrel that makes life much easier in tight focuses. Aside from that the SL is junk in my opinion. I work in "the house that Strand built" and the running joke amongst us is that we're Stranded. (But the discussion of the quality of the SL is another thread in and of itself)
I understand competition, but there's a difference between competition and copycats. Lightronics is a copycat, but Strand, Selecon, and partially Altman are competition. I say partially for Altman because Shakespeares don't truly bring anything to the table to differentiate their product besides their brand name, however the fixture is at the same time not a total copy of the S4. Strand and Selecon both are differentiated from the S4 at least.
Meanwhile, if that $20 you saved, multiplied against the 120 fixtures for your new theatre, totaling $2400 of savings, seems really that great. Consider this. The S4's come with lamps, which I don't believe the Lightronics ERS does, though I could be wrong. If that is accurate than you've truly only saved ~$4 per light, and your total savings is reduced to $480 for knockoffs with questionable quality. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd rather purchase two less instruments to cover the difference and have a high-quality inventory than settle for cheaper-but-not-cheap-enough-to-be-worth-it knockoffs.
There is certainly a point of economics to be made here though. How many companies can design the same product in different ways and not be copying? Face it, as is the case with PAR's, fresnels, and every other light, 10 different companies that have their own lines of those products still have similar products with similar features. However, ETC made progress, first with the S4, but then again with the PAR. The ETC version of the PAR does the same thing as an average PAR, but in a different way...but how many times can one company do that, much less five or six companies in competition.
I understand competition, but there's a difference between competition and copycats. Lightronics is a copycat, but Strand, Selecon, and partially Altman are competition. I say partially for Altman because Shakespeares don't truly bring anything to the table to differentiate their product besides their brand name, however the fixture is at the same time not a total copy of the S4. Strand and Selecon both are differentiated from the S4 at least.
Meanwhile, if that $20 you saved, multiplied against the 120 fixtures for your new theatre, totaling $2400 of savings, seems really that great. Consider this. The S4's come with lamps, which I don't believe the Lightronics ERS does, though I could be wrong. If that is accurate than you've truly only saved ~$4 per light, and your total savings is reduced to $480 for knockoffs with questionable quality. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd rather purchase two less instruments to cover the difference and have a high-quality inventory than settle for cheaper-but-not-cheap-enough-to-be-worth-it knockoffs.
There is certainly a point of economics to be made here though. How many companies can design the same product in different ways and not be copying? Face it, as is the case with PAR's, fresnels, and every other light, 10 different companies that have their own lines of those products still have similar products with similar features. However, ETC made progress, first with the S4, but then again with the PAR. The ETC version of the PAR does the same thing as an average PAR, but in a different way...but how many times can one company do that, much less five or six companies in competition.
Similar threads
Control/Dimming
Strand 200 / CD80 - adding DMX LED lights
