We already fought with this for our (usual) commencements. We park a couple projectors on a mezzanine at the top of bleacher seating, and tape off seats two rows in front to prevent people from blocking the projector and getting odd tans on the top of their heads. Tape won't work. Signs don't help. If they want to sit there, they'll do it. Our current setup is to ratchet strap AV carts into the seats, and cover the whole thing with a couple taped-down tablecloths to hide it's workings. Marginally works, but they still try to scoot it to the side and sit next to it.
One major thing I think is being missed in this discussion is the types of shows you will be able to have when you have to apply social distancing to the cast and crew as well.Personally, I think all this is a nice discussion... but just like all the restrants that are opening that are empty I think we'll be in the same boat. I don't see a world where people come to shows even with all this stuff in place. Shows will be more expensive to produce and make less money. One breakout traced back to a theatre and the whole thing is shot. We'll need legit guidance from government on this. In my state I think the guidance will be "stay closed". I would go at this the other way, write up what a "normal" day looks like, hand that to your public health expert, and see what they come back with.
Loving your ballet lift example!That ballet lift at 6' apart will be something. There will simply be a large segment of performing arts that should not be done. Solo and small ensemble where people can spread out a little maybe possible. Vocalists will reject the masks though perhaps not necessary as sufficient distance. No end to the challenges.
Hopefully there will be a vaccine eventually and immunity will last. Until then, public assembly seems risky.
This got shut down hard today. Why? Because they didn't get approval from the state health agency, it was scheduled for 3 days BEFORE the re-open start date, and no proof of any protocols in place. So the Governor said "No" and squashed it. To which I shed zero tears.
Yes. The Arkansas Alcoholic Beverage Control Board told Temple Live they'd get their liquor license revoked and Temple decided maybe doing a show was a bad idea after all.
I think you mean a radius of 3 feet, not a diameter of 3 feet. ( and a circle with a radius of three feet has a diameter of 6 feet)small tidbit. If you are doing layout for maintaining a six foot distance between people, you should be using a 3' diameter circle (or what ever shape you prefer) and not a 6' diameter one. heck, if you want to get real nitty gritty, you might consider 3.5' to account for the fact that people are finally small like a dot in the middle of that circle. point being a 6' diameter circle would get you a 12' distance between two people.
We've developed a solution that is scalable to the size of the application and is both user friendly and effective; if dealing with larger groups of people who are entering all-at-once, the camera can scan up to 30 heads at the same time, helping you direct only those who might have a fever to secondary scanning; if you're in a smaller environment, then you may just need tablets.I would STRONGLY suggest you look into hiring an outside consultant to help created your procedure or delay until resources like the ESA release guidance. The liability fallout of an outbreak will be disastrous and at this point there is insufficient data for the average "user" to develop a reliable and effective plan. This is not in any way a comment on your personal ability or qualification, but rather that even the experts in public health crisis don't yet agree on what works.
Not the case at all. While a certain number of cases do present asymptomatically -- or, at least, without a fever as one of the symptoms -- the majority of cases seem to include an elevated temperature as an indicator. Additionally, an elevated temperature is still a reliable indicator of a whole host of other contagious diseases, so the system helps catch those folks, too. No system will be 100%, but using this type of technology is very effective; so much so, the FDA and CDC have published guidelines for it's use. Also, if you've flown to Asia (HK, Seoul, Tokyo, etc.) in the last ten years or so, one of these systems scanned you while you were waiting in the customs line...Checking temperatures of a mass of people seems like one of those things that makes us feel safer, but actually doesn't accomplish much.
That article specifically addresses the value of temperature screening as it relates to international travel, not re-opening procedures for entertainment venues in the US (or, apparently, meat-packing plants, auto factories, Amazon, warehouses, etc.). While it will not catch 100% of sick people (whether with CV19, SARS, MERS, the "common" flu or some other infectious disease), the medical fact remains that a fever is strong indicator that your body is fighting an infection of some sort. Using this type of systems provides the venue operator with more information than they would have without it, which allows them to make a more informed decision.
I would look at what the others are doing before making that decision. For instance, if the all the place with thermal scanning does is thermal scanning, and the other place requires mask for customers and employees, provides for social distancing, shows evidence of regular deep cleaning, perhaps will offer on the spot testing in the near future, etc., the thermal scans are of little concern or value to me.If I am planning a night on the town and I have a choice between two venues, one with thermal imaging tech and the other without, I am taking the one with the tech 100% of the time. m