Performance Comparison: ETC S4WRD vs. HPL 575Wx

[BillConnerFASTC]

Could we use a 1K T12 on an autotransformer as the basis please?

 

[DELO72]

I find it fascinating how meters matter for Film & TV, but don't matter one iota for Theatre or live events. So for a camera, yes- the data on the meter matters. For Live events meters are USELESS in determining what is brighter. For live events, the only thing that matters is audience perception. Back in grad school myself and three other grads. tried to switch from FELs in our ERS fixtures over to GLCs/FLKs. Our professor's argument was that because the FEL put out so much more lumens, it was not a comparable switch. Our argument was that because the FLK/GLC operated at 115V (thereby having a higher CCT when operated at 120V) and had a more compact coil design (allowing it to be collected more efficiently in the reflector), that they put out as much or more PERCEIVED light. So we did a shoot-out. We put two fixtures side by side, and we all agreed the one on the left (with the 575W lamp) was visually brighter to the eye than the one on the right with the FEL-- however our professor metered the two, and the one with the FEL put out more ACTUAL lux. Our argument was-- perception always trumps reality when talking about light. Unless the audience is sitting on stage and all holding light meters, the fact that the meter registered more was 100% moot. It's what the EYE sees and interprets that matters. (At least for LIVE events.)

So for theatre use, I guess my point is, who cares what the meter says? If it looks as bright, then it IS as bright. Perception > reality in the realm of light.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

I agree with Mark on this. Perception is all in live theatre. I recall the introduction of the S4 at an LDI (I think - maybe a USITT) and it seemed brighter using a 115 volt lap on same power as the 120 volt lamp units in the shoot out, but it was actually "whiter" or higher color temp. (You could also read a newspaper with the light leaks - I think the most noticeable difference - but they soon fixed that.) Not to take away anything from the major advancement of this, which looked "better" to some, which is all that matters. (I grew up pre-quartz, primarily T-12 and T-20 incandescent, liked the color temp and a lot of amber nearly red drift, and especially liked the hot centers and nearly 50% less light at the edges - but that was then.)

Shoot outs - preferably in a space with which you are familiar - is the only good way to judge - and with your eyes primarily.

 

[robartsd]

You could also read a newspaper with the light leaks - I think the most noticeable difference - but they soon fixed that.

When I was first starting out with theater lighting and I heard someone call a fixture a "LEKO" I thought it was a nickname based on the amount of light leaking out through the vents. It was quite a while before I learned that LEKO was what some people call an ERS. (Perhaps the fixture was a genuine LEKO, I don't know.)

 

[RickR]

I too believe in the eye for live events, especially when combining the venue and multiple lights. It's the end result that matters.
For cameras the meter is a closer guide to how the camera will see.

However, I prefer a meter to a video anytime.

 

[TuckerD]

The most interesting thing to me from the video is how much more even the field is on the S4WRD. It's not hugely different, but it was noticeable. And depending on the lens barrel and throw it could be a big deal. I was really surprised to see that, and IMO that is a huge bonus for the LED retrofit.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

When I was first starting out with theater lighting and I heard someone call a fixture a "LEKO" I thought it was a nickname based on the amount of light leaking out through the vents. It was quite a while before I learned that LEKO was what some people call an ERS. (Perhaps the fixture was a genuine LEKO, I don't know.)

Not to insult anyone, but just to spread some historical context, its a leko because it was invented by Joseph Levy and Edward Kook - LEvy and KOok - of Century lighting in like 1933? It was a significant step forward from what was available before that, and the basis for today's Source 4, which I still occasionally and inevitably refer to as a leko, or a Source 4 leko when feeling snarky.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

The most interesting thing to me from the video is how much more even the field is on the S4WRD. It's not hugely different, but it was noticeable. And depending on the lens barrel and throw it could be a big deal. I was really surprised to see that, and IMO that is a huge bonus for the LED retrofit.

Interesting, since I thought the greater flatness of the S4 when introduced was unfortunate and that LEDs greater flatness is an even more unfortunate development. But then I like 5K a Dynabeam. (Dynabeam should be in the wiki.)

 

[theatricalmatt]

The deal with having an even field is that it's much easier to adjust an even field to being uneven -- ie, fuzzing out the edges -- than the inverse.

I wonder how templates look with the 4WRD. Every once in a while I hit on a template that doesn't look great in a Lustr, due to the LED matrix and how certain color LEDs are distributed in the fixture. Usually resolvable by rotating the template, although that's not always desirable either.

 

[SteveB]

The deal with having an even field is that it's much easier to adjust an even field to being uneven -- ie, fuzzing out the edges -- than the inverse.

I wonder how templates look with the 4WRD. Every once in a while I hit on a template that doesn't look great in a Lustr, due to the LED matrix and how certain color LEDs are distributed in the fixture. Usually resolvable by rotating the template, although that's not always desirable either.

The video shows a generic breakup side by side.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

The deal with having an even field is that it's much easier to adjust an even field to being uneven -- ie, fuzzing out the edges -- than the inverse.

I wonder how templates look with the 4WRD. Every once in a while I hit on a template that doesn't look great in a Lustr, due to the LED matrix and how certain color LEDs are distributed in the fixture. Usually resolvable by rotating the template, although that's not always desirable either.

Well, I have never considered evenness across the field to be the same as sharpness of focus - shutter curs and templates, etc. I like the natural hotspot towards the center of the pre S4 ers. Beam angles to centers gave a very even wash across the stage very easily, not to mention actors hit the hot spots as intended.

 

[TuckerD]

Sometimes I have found myself wanting a really strong hot spot. So I certainly understand that thinking. But I've usually been able to get close enough by lamp adjustments. I would say that if one of the theaters I work with was going to get a bunch of these I would keep around a few of the regular S4s just for cases like that.

Long post made short, I can relate to what you are saying Bill.

 

[RickR]

Blending S4s is much harder than older ERSs. Is that a bug or a feature?

Has anyone perfected the hole in gel trick, with diffusion to compensate? I haven't gotten that desperate yet, but a rig of super flat beams might drive me to it.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

Blending S4s is much harder than older ERSs. Is that a bug or a feature?

I'm glad you said it. I though I was pretty good in my teens and 20s and even into my 30s working with pre-axial ers fixtures. The change to S4s and now LEDs nearly relegates me to a museum as far as actively designing lights for productions. Maybe with a young assistant......

 

[SteveB]

I guess I'm in the minority, but I prefer a flat field ERS and have no issues with most of the S4's. I think my 19's and 26 deg. units don't get soft enough at certain distances, but have no issues with gel burnout, as with an earlier generation.

I recall as well my Colortran 6" 15/35 zooms, that had a cupped washer on the lamp alignment cap that allowed a true flat field. Wonderful light and easy to blend area lighting.

To each his own.

 

[Michael K]

Sometimes I have found myself wanting a really strong hot spot. So I certainly understand that thinking. But I've usually been able to get close enough by lamp adjustments. I would say that if one of the theaters I work with was going to get a bunch of these I would keep around a few of the regular S4s just for cases like that.

Long post made short, I can relate to what you are saying Bill.

The S4WRD still has the field adjustment knob on the back (see PDF page 11 of the manual) I didn't think to try it out at the demo, but I would think it would have at least as much range as a regular HPL S4.

 

[techieman33]

I think that these days you almost always have to take cameras into consideration. You may not be recording video, but someone will be taking selfies and other pictures to post on social media. If your doing straight theater maybe you don't care though. I don't like pictures of shows and events that I'm lighting being posted all over the internet and looking bad.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

I think that these days you almost always have to take cameras into consideration. You may not be recording video, but someone will be taking selfies and other pictures to post on social media. If your doing straight theater maybe you don't care though. I don't like pictures of shows and events that I'm lighting being posted all over the internet and looking bad.

And flatter fields or not flatter make them look not bad?

 

[MikeJ]

And flatter fields or not flatter make them look not bad?

I think this was more of a response to perceived light vs actual

I find it fascinating how meters matter for Film & TV, but don't matter one iota for Theatre or live events. So for a camera, yes- the data on the meter matters. For Live events meters are USELESS in determining what is brighter. For live events, the only thing that matters is audience perception. Back in grad school myself and three other grads. tried to switch from FELs in our ERS fixtures over to GLCs/FLKs. Our professor's argument was that because the FEL put out so much more lumens, it was not a comparable switch. Our argument was that because the FLK/GLC operated at 115V (thereby having a higher CCT when operated at 120V) and had a more compact coil design (allowing it to be collected more efficiently in the reflector), that they put out as much or more PERCEIVED light. So we did a shoot-out. We put two fixtures side by side, and we all agreed the one on the left (with the 575W lamp) was visually brighter to the eye than the one on the right with the FEL-- however our professor metered the two, and the one with the FEL put out more ACTUAL lux. Our argument was-- perception always trumps reality when talking about light. Unless the audience is sitting on stage and all holding light meters, the fact that the meter registered more was 100% moot. It's what the EYE sees and interprets that matters. (At least for LIVE events.)

So for theatre use, I guess my point is, who cares what the meter says? If it looks as bright, then it IS as bright. Perception > reality in the realm of light.

For theater, I agree to an extent, measured output does not matter as much compared to audience perception, but I would not recommend that a theater currently using 750w lamps, switch to the S4WRD. For EVERYTHING ELSE, that is not theater(with no cameras or photography) it is very important. Events without video? Do those exist anymore? In a world where high output projection, and LED walls are commonplace, overall output and BALANCING sources are vital. Throw some 3K xenon spots into the mix, and even 750w HPLs and 2k fresnels look like nightlights.

 

[techieman33]

And flatter fields or not flatter make them look not bad?

I was refering to further up the page where you were discussing fixture brightness and the human eye versus a light meter.

As far as fields go I like having a little bit of a hotspot.