Hi there,
I just wanted to take a moment to gripe a little about an article in the May 2005 Lighting & Sound America.
The article "Creating a Custom Scenic Automation System" touched a pet peeve with me and I guess I just had to tell someone. The solution to the problem the TD came up with, while good, and slick, and shiny and aluminum and possessing of a sexy name is nothing exciting. While working for Chicago Scenic Studios almost 10 years ago we employed the same battery operated, dc servo motor, Futaba radio control solution for a production of Baby that I project managed. In that case, the actuator was pulled out of stock and re-configured from a production of Big River from at least 5 years before that.
I'm not claiming credit for the solution for myself or for the shop. I just think it is unfortunate when someone re-invents what is easily 15 year old technology and gets press out of it.
I don't off the top of my head remember what state of the art in lighting was 15 years ago, but if someone cobbled together a really slick memory lighting board of that vintage today I don't believe they would have gotten a national magazine spread.
Its hard enough to get the name of an institution out there; when people get free press for re-inventing the wheel it is just irritating.
Also, there is no automation in this solution. The cuing and control are the truly difficult part of any automation solution. This is radio controlled mechanization. The distinction is important. This solution requires an operator per axis, and is *performed* in real time every single performance. The number of axes are limited by the available frequencies. The radio control itself is typically unreliable due to FCC restrictions on the power of the transmission from unlicensed transmitters.
So not only is what was done here re-inventing the wheel, but the language used to describe it implies that it was even more than it really was. This school does not do automation, they do mechanization, state of the art mechanization for 1986. I guess they can be proud of that, but its not really worth a national magazine piece. There are other programs doing much more interesting and more contemporary work.
Sorry about the rant.
db
Saturday, June 18, 2005
David Writes a Cranky Letter
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I read that article too. No, it's not automation. And while I agree that it was no breakthrough in scenic technology, it did provoke a slight "I wonder if I would've thought of that." Perhaps the problem here is one ore more of the following (ahem): 1) Not everyone has done everything and things like this, no matter how outdated, are still genuinely new ideas to some. I think there is still something to be rewarded if this is the case. 2) Maybe these types of publishing organizations are stretched for material. Sure it's not Show Motion or Hudson or AnyBigShopOrUniversityHere, but think about how many small production organizations are still well behind the University in question here. 3) Perhaps we need to change our point of view to not expect a monthly breakthrough in technology. Computers are obsolete within 6 months, but I think we'd all be hard pressed to find a theatre that moves that quickly. I propose that the handful of magazines dedicated to our branch of entertainment search for more simplistic solutions on the same basis. This would work way better than b-boards or mailing lists because no one could reply his/her argument to the topic and cause an endless peeing contest (for lack of a better term). Imagine it, a monthly highlight feature on the triscuit, or strength characteristics of 5/4 platforms vs. 2x4 vs. 1x6 vs. honeycomb, or a pictorial of destructive testing of compression sleeves vs. wire rope clips. And Frank Wood wouldn't be able to put his two cents in no matter how much he steamed. It's not cool and sexy and aluminum but how many of the people who read those mags afford things like that? A small minority I would imagine. And I'd be willing to bet that the small minority who can afford such things aren't going to do it out of a magazine article. So how about some straightforward info we could all use whether new or a reminder? I guess I'm thinking about the USITT Tech Expo format, but spread throughout the year. In closing, good for said University for their own personal technological breakthrough, good for David for doing it sooner, and good for anyone who can spread unbiased information to others in the hopes to further all our endeavors as a whole.
-deano
Post a Comment