Week 4: Brushstroke

4: BRUSHSTROKES
(SORRY LONNIE!!)

Our brushstrokes lecture brought me to a new level of understanding in terms of the the bruskstrokes came to be, and the variations among them. I already knew the basic 3, but hearing about their alterations and the subsequent invention of new, or altered brushstrokes was eye opening.  

The idea that followed me around most this was the concept of F2. In a camera, the F stop indicates the width of the aperture, and hence the depth of field of the photograph. Of course, when we start talking about F2 on a fixture, I immediately start trying to unpack the comparisons. 

 

 The photo on the left was shot at F 16 or 22, the tightest the aperture on the lens I used could be. The photo on the right was shot at F1.8, the largest the aperture can open on the lens I used. On the camera it becomes a matter of how much light you want to let in, and how much detail you want to reveal. The picture of the Swedish country palace was shot in broad daylight, and I wanted to get the gravel in focus as well as this palace that was really far away. With the spoons, I wanted them to feel cozy and intimate, and the lighting was also very low. Convenient. The comparisons between light design and photography are limitless.

In essence, one of the more complex elements of "brushstroke" is focus point. The edges of your subject can be blurred or crisp. The point of focus can be small, or can be large, and based on the shape of the reflector, it changes. It's all starting to make sense. You can obtain different angles of Lekos in order to change this.

I was backstage yesterday during As You Like It and noticed a pattern along the SR wall of the house- and instantly thought, HM- what kind of light is being used that this pattern is being picked up through this mesh? How far away is the light? Where is it? Had I not been going on stage in a matter of seconds I should have liked to figure it out. The light must have had F2 in the right place to be picking up a pattern and throwing it on the wall.

Brushstroke is probably the element that people consider least when thinking about stage light (when they AREN'T lighting designers) but aside from angle it seems to be one of the most important. It's the first elements that influences the quality of light.  

Week 4: Stroke, stroke, stroke

(SORRYYY LONNIEEEE)

I think my favorite part of this week's lecture was how much deeper we dove into talking about brush strokes and the different uses. I was seriously amazed by how subtle the Fresnel was. It is quite the sneaky light. And of course, PAR is still my favorite. A lot of the week's lecture was review, but a wonderful one at that because now I feel like the information is imprinted in my brain.

I went to see Shakespeare Unscripted this past weekend at Pasadena Playhouse. It's a very lovely little theatre and I noticed the lights above me instantly (I don't think I'll ever walk anywhere again without noticing what lights are used). It was to my surprise that they mostly only had Fresnels and Lekos. (Maybe a couple little PARs). During the show it didn't feel complete and I wonder if it was because of the missing brush stroke which may have added another layer of complexity to the plot. It could have also just been that there was no source really and therefore I just felt uneasy.

I also saw As You Like It yesterday and I must say I LOVED the lights. I completely bought everything, largely because of the magical fairy tale element that was a major player in the production. One of my favorite cues was when a couple of the men were up on the set and the walls, and stage floor was lit completely with a gold, rectangle pattern gobo. It was so dang pretty! The rain cue was also completely gorgeous. It was mostly white which I realized made it believable (my first thought was cooler, bluer). In general the use of colors and patterns were well done. I was much more satisfied with this show's lighting than the Shakespeare Unscripted one.

Week 4: Canvas

I'd intended to dig out my notes from 50C (I'm using the same notebook as I was in 157, so I had those review notes with me) and thus appear like I remembered every single moment of every class from my first quarter. Luckily, even though that didn't happen I've been involved enough in classes and projects since then that the knowledge hasn't completely escaped my brain.

I find myself thinking about which brushstrokes are likely to be most suited to which kinds of space. Designing in the Nixon this quarter, I suspect I'm going to be dealing less with par-cans and fresnels, but they may have a place in the worlds I'm lighting (or, I guess, painting). I'd never really thought about it in the context of realistic theater - maybe because the creation of a realistic world successfully doesn't usually draw direct attention to the lighting as separate from the production as a whole, where more abstract lighting is viewed in a different way?

Working on compositions in 157, and having conversations with the other designers, there always seemed to be a general consensus that the more abstract the design the more "fun" it was. I wonder if that's a result of less pressure to make the stage appear strictly realistic, or from a freedom of color, or just because moving further away from realism feels like stepping out of the box. Bigger gestures are allowed when realism is not the first priority, I would think. Maybe it's easier, or maybe it's just a different kind of challenge.

Week 4: Brushstrokes

First of all I have always enjoyed when an instructor compares lighting design to painting it really builds a strong image in my mind. I first heard it called that in my senior year high school when I was first designing my first show, Little Shop of Horrors, when a former student came in to teach the second year tech class students some more complex programming, mostly effects and macros. He described the board as his palette and the stage as the canvas. I imagined the literal painting of light, and his words have stuck with me ever since.

I was happy with Monday's class even though it was a review its always helpful to get a different perspective and explanation of each instrument. It did make me reconsider using Fresnels in my design for the week five DCP. I had a realization that the space was much smaller for the amount of selection I want for the pieces. Fresnels would be too wide and sloppy for their purpose, so I stuck to the Lekos.

Week 4: GO FOR LIGHTS

A ton of lighting information was thrown at me in the past few weeks, that I'm pretty sure I am ready to enter the field and begin my career as a designer... just kidding, but wow, my time as a programmer/board op has been an incredibly fascinating experience.

I think the best way for me to approach writing about all of the information from the brushstrokes class and from tech/programming for Physical Graffiti is to discuss all under the transcending concept of designer intention and the use of rhetoric.

The brushstrokes lecture was a ton of information in a very short amount of time. It was difficult for me to grasp all that Lonnie was attempting to explain in one sitting, especially because I am a visual (and messy) learner, and have to experience things for myself to be able to completely understand conceptual thought. However, working in the Claire Trevor with Martha and Naomi has proved beneficial in instilling these concepts about brushstrokes as they designed the various pieces in Physical Graffiti. In many of the pieces, the audience enters a specific world that conveys an underlying theme. This is where I truly realized that certain brushstrokes can aid in deepening the audience's understanding of the piece's world, or can extract from the audience's understanding. I noticed that harsher brushstrokes, including texture, can be oppressive, raw, and exposing. In a particular piece about feminism, Martha used a textured system to convey the inner turmoil that the choreography was expressing. In contrast, softer brushstrokes can present a more ethereal and angelic look. In another piece about Divinity, Naomi uses Source 4 Pars, and it evident to the audience that a higher power is present and is dictating (communicating and manipulating) the arc of the piece. 

So about programming/tech: buttons are awesome, Martha says that I am a rockstar. It took me a solid day to re-familiarize myself with the board, but seeing the light plot on a screen proves beneficial to designing. While I learned about operating the board, what surprised me about programming was the importance of accepting messiness as a designer. I am a perfectionist at heart, and it is difficult for me to not attempt to get things correct the first time. In the programming process, the designers were at first nervous and overwhelmed as they were attempting to create a "perfect" design for tech rehearsals. They were able to work more efficiently when they allowed themselves to be messy and to make mistakes and to accept that the editing process is a huge part of designing. This is so pivotal to all that I aspire to be (if this makes sense). As a designer in both dance and someday lights, I, as a perfectionist, must accept mistakes because in the end, these mistakes solidify a design. Because I know dance well, I was able to offer suggestions (at both designers' convenience). It was helpful for me to be a part of the designing process, because I had an opportunity to communicate and discover (and better comprehend) the relationship between piece and lights: lights can either compliment or, for lack of a better term, 'contrast'  the piece, and this is where intention plays a huge role in design.

Week 3: I have more fun when I scream.

First of all, I had a BLAST hanging out with everyone (Claire you were there in spirit) back to back for our field trips! Best field trips I've ever been on.

Anyways, so I was shocked at how many different positions of lighting designers there were when it came to theme park and architectural lighting, and all the types of lighting (i.e. facade, character, story/ride). It was fascinating to discover all the ways designers have tried to hide lights to make rides look and feel seamless, effortless. I never noticed before, especially on the Pirates of the Caribbean ride that for each lantern, there were two lights, one to light the inside of the lantern and one to light its surroundings. The latter of the light being hidden.

This trip has also reconfirmed the idea of how important it is to collaborate with fellow designers and that you are only trying to help one another. Space Mountain was a great example of how designers did not work well together, or consider one another at that.

The detailing at Disneyland makes the theme park remarkably successful. But even more than that, the creation of the different lands and how each land has its own feel, look, and theme. In another class, we had to discuss why the Lord of the Rings franchise was so successful to the point of having a cult following after the movies came out. One of the reasons why was definitely the cohesive creation of all the different "worlds" from elves, to hobbits, to dwarves, that made it such a visually, multi-award winning trilogy.

Then on the flip side to architectural lighting that we saw at the mall, I figured that the theme was still there, just a lot more subtle. It is after all, a mall, and the fact that the lights are focused on the items being sold with slight variations to characterize whatever name owns the shop provides the sense of a theme. There were wonderfully lit shops that knew exactly how to attract customers in and those that knew what type of customer they want to go in their stores. From the over bearing bright, crystal chandeliers which drew the money spenders, to the industrial and inexpensive feel of the affordable stores. The designers of the shops definitely needed a sense of "Why, what and for who am I lighting this for?" In general, probably the basis of themed lighting designers.

I would never have imagined how much light could make or break a ride, land, or store. Whether or not people are aware of it, they respond to it which makes lighting such a huge and important factor to any form of production.

Week 3: Disneyland and South Coast Plaza

I have to start off by saying that Sunday was a dream come true for me. Ever since I started to become interested in lighting, I have wanted to learn how a theme park like Disneyland is designed. I felt as though I was a small child discovering Disneyland for the first time with how much information was given throughout the day. The different pieces in which the areas were broken up for design was helpful because it all seemed overwhelming at first, but as we went along, we were able to classify each lighting fixture whether they were show/ride, area development or facade lights, and whether they were accent or character fixtures. It was all very eye-opening, and it made designing for such a large area not as complicated as I originally thought. It confirmed for me that whatever it is that is being lit has to tell a story.

Last night at South Coast Plaza was another eye-opener to the different techniques designers use when designing for large areas; especially malls because there is a cohesiveness to the stores while still maintaining an individuality in each store. For the majority of the mall because of its modern and upper class look and feel, the lighting reflected that tone throughout the mall. Some stores like Armani and Tiffany had better success with their designs than others. Armani with the use of the recessed down lights while still having the small movable lights to focus on certain items of clothing or areas of the store, was effective in singling out elements of the store while still keeping the visibility of the store. Tiffany broke the store into two parts, the overall jewelry side and the diamond/engagement ring side. The feel of the engagement ring side was completely different because of the temperature of the lights on the color of the walls. It gave the whole room this sparkling, cool and very expensive feeling while the rest of the store had a more inviting and warm tone due to the wood and more earthy tones on the walls.

Week Three: TURTLES! .. and Architectural vs. Themed Design

Sorry about the title..  I had to seize the opportunity! THIS IS GOING TO BE LONG(warning):

Wo, so much lighting in less than 24 hours. The only way that it makes sense to structure this blogpost is to separately discuss architectural lighting design and themed design separately:

Themed:
Usually when I go to Disneyland, I pay very little attention to the many assets that create the fairytale, storybook land in which I am always fully immersed. And while often times I find Disneyland boring after four hours of waiting in lines and looking at the same things, I felt that I was completely engaged and interested throughout our Easter field trip's entirety. It was really neat to take a separate, spectator's approach to how Disney is able to create an environment that is completely welcoming, but also themed in various parts. In Disneyland, one of my absolute favorite rides is Pirates of the Caribbean. One asset to this ride is the use of rising water  (for lack of a better word) that results because of exploding canons in the huge ship scene. I had never realized this, but I now understand that it is so vital that these explosions are lit, not only to draw attention to the explosion, but to create the war-at-sea atmosphere that the entire movie is based around. In this instance, I notice that themed lighting does aid the designers in conveying an idea and a story.

What I found most interesting on our venture through both parks was the use of color in design. In many attractions, I could understand why certain colors were used: in Cars Land, the use of neon signs  created a mo-town vibe. In the Animation Studio's main room, the use of color changed depending on the story being told: I noticed that Tarzan had a ton of greens and blues, while Mulan used many cherry-blossom-like colors. However, Tower of Terror was one exception, as I felt that some of the colors used to light the elevator room made no sense whatsoever to the eery, dusty, industrial feel that the designers were attempting to portray. There were splashes of bright purple that lit parts of walls, and usually purple reminds me of: deep, dark, royal, evil, and not: eery, antique, haunted that I expected. I suppose that if I had one question for the designer of this ride, it would be, WHY the random purples?

Architectual:
So this happened today. It was interesting for me to see South Coast Plaza for the first time, and admire the higher end stores in comparison with the other side of the mall. The main part of South Coast Plaza that obtains the higher end stores (like Tiffany's) had a very sleek, clean, modern but classic, rich feel. The designer definitely contributed to the vibe of 'walking in luxury' by highlighting (for lack of the correct term) the ceiling and creating patterns with smaller circular lights on the ceilings. I felt out of place walking through the halls of this higher end area,because I felt as if it was designed to cater to people who have more money. On the other side of the mall (across the cool lit bridge) I felt instantly comforted and welcomed. I felt that the overall design of this side of the mall was very earthy, organic, and still high end, but more affordable. I believe that the designers did a great job in using colors to add a more relatable approach for people who wouldn't normally feel welcomed in the higher-retail (white, beige) side of the mall. I loved the ceiling lights, with the different, fluctuating shades of blues and purples with gobos that reminded me of earth (butterflies, flowers,)-- more organic designs catered to a more grounded audience (this could also be because of random bird art in the middle of the mall).

Although it was so much lighting crammed in 24 hours, I feel that it was really interesting to see two separate approaches to lighting design that I have always taken for granted (usually I notice more in the theatrical setting, which is so unfair, because lighting design is LITERALLY in everything that we do). When explained the differences between architectural and themed design, Lonnie said something that really stood out to me, "Architectural reflects what you see, or what you want others to see, and themed tells a story." I really meditated on this as I was reflecting on our field trips, and I feel that I can even contribute a little bit to this description. I feel that often times in retail, customers  have certain expectations of stores (the vibe that the store gives off, how they will feel walking into the store, how the product makes them feel, etc), and the lighting designer (while also attempting the highlight certain aspects of a store) must find a way to meet these expectations. For instance, when we walked past Bare Minerals, I instantly thought: organic, and polished, because this is how I know Bare Minerals. After looking at the design of the lights and the colors of the wall and how each complimented each other, I felt as if the designer created an environment that was to be expected, and I saw the store in light of what I wanted to feel. In themed lighting, a designer has room for interpretation: there is so much opportunity for a designer to be creative and to pull their audience in, ultimately constructing the environment and the way in which they hope their audience will feel. While the two areas of design can also relate to each other, I find that design is a form of rhetoric: how is the designer going to convey a point, and what tools does he/she use to convey this point? Hm.. more on that later...

Week 3: "Ewoks will make me forgive a multitude of sins" (Or: GOAT!)

Claire already made the Shakespeare pun, so I went with the quote.

As You Like It tech was a great experience to observe, because not only had I had the opportunity to closely observe (and take part in) programming and a little focusing earlier in the week, but Darrin had also been kind enough to walk me through his magic sheets and systems, so I was able to see how they were working together to create cues. It was cool getting to see the adjustments as it went along, as well as the interactions between the designers.

Architectural lighting: AN ADDITION. Okay, so apparently I'm writing about South Coast Plaza for this blog, and not the next (whoops). Let me say that I appreciate the lighting in buildings more since blogging for 157, and although I'd never actually been to South Coast Plaza, the obvious amount of time (and money) spent on the melding of decor and lighting is impressive. It's fairly obvious who the mall the is target towards, and what messages most of the stores are trying to send. Their varied success (Tiffany's is, I think, very successful, while Barney's cultivates a dark air that I find off-putting as someone who has never shopped there) is interesting, and while we pointed out a great many of the reasons for this (lack of coherence, clarity of focus, a clear sense of intent) I'd never really thought about the idea of legacy - or, I guess, the inheritance of lighting that just has to be dealt and worked with. Now that I'm thinking on it, there are places that I know several stores have gone through (in various places I've lived) that probably had to deal with the established architectural lighting and had many of their decisions/looks already dictated.

Disneyland: Thinking back, the only times I really notice architectural lighting are when they make some kind of beautiful picture (have some character of their own).  I notice when I walk into a space - like the Disney Hotel - and see that the lighting compliments the decor, but I don't really think of them as separate entities. I also notice them if they aren't adequate (bad lighting at night, dim lighting in stores, etc.) I expect its easier to notice in a place filled with character (like Disneyland), but I'll definitely start paying more attention.

Theme Park Lighting I find so interesting, because it seems to me like it's a marriage of architectural and theatrical (I think dance, because that seems more abstract to me, but the storytelling element is more clear). Last time, when I went on Haunted Mansion, we were hypothesizing about the ghosts dancing (which are so incredibly cool and clearly MAGICAL). I think because it's a theatrical space we - or at least I - am more prone to noticing the ways that light is being used (we even looked back a few times during that  - or maybe it was Pirates - and I can remember being impressed with Space Mountain's lighting effects).

 I think I'm going to think more on these things, but it feels at the moment like so much to absorb (next time: thoughts on World of Color, because I am processing), and whole other world of "ordinary" and
"extraordinary" design I didn't really consider all that often.

Plus, you know, magic.

Week 3: As You Light It

When I realized that my observations for tech and focus had to be on As You Like It, of course I was a little worried about how it would all work, as I am in the show. Yet, it all went swimmingly, and I must say it was an extraordinarily rich learning experience. I was not needed as an actor for the first night of tech, and I was able to sit at the tech table. The next morning I came in early for tech notes and was able to see the ways in which Darrin was adapting to what the director wanted.

At tech: I observed Darrin through the entirety of the first night of tech. I sat right next to the board operator, Dan, and was right in the action as he asked Stacie, the assistant lighting designer, programming questions. She explained to him how to remove soft blocks and I felt really smart that I understood what she was asking him to do.

There was so many different categories in which I was observing- on the fly composition, programming skills, and most notably, the dynamics between designer, director and stage manager. It seems every single tech challenge we have discussed in class occurred, and Darrin gracefully handled all of them. I recall one moment where the director called over to him, "Why does it look like we are on the moon?" nearly two seconds after the cue came up. After hold was called he quietly restated what they had discussed for the look of the scene and immediately began editing the cue. In such a small space, nearly every critique became public. There were plenty of moments where the SM announced that we were "holding for lights" and the pressure was never evident on his face. Despite any communication challenges between management and direction Darrin always kept his focus on the integrity of his work, the story, and doing his best to take input and peacefully collaborate. I also noticed: directors want more front light. A lot of it. I saw a lot of rich, angular compositions become flatter and warmer. He would get notes like "This is the first time we see the character, we need to see his face," or, "the text has to speak for itself here, I don't want the lights giving it away."

I did notice a few moments where I felt the light was proceeding the action. However, I wish a few times that the team would have considered the looks a little longer, as it could simply be a cueing or a timing problem. The director may have liked the cue more if it followed the action in a more natural way. It seemed nearly impossible for the timing to be perfect on the first go round.

At focus: Darrin was kind enough to deliberately show me a few things about how to focus as a designer. He at one point let me direct the electricians- asking them to sharpen, drop color, refocus, pan, tilt, the whole bit. It's so much about the order and efficiency of the language you use. He showed me how to stand so that I can see how the light hits the floor, and showed me how to look at the light on the back of my hand and look for dips in a system of lights. He told me what he was going for and then asked me to decide when it looked good. (Scary, but so rewarding whenever those lights come up and I'm on stage, I think, Oh hey, those look so good.)

I am in tech again now, sitting back by the table, watching intently as Darrin programs mirrors to create more face light on some entrances. I wish I could watch this show in completion, as I think it's quite the accomplishment. It's incredible how much work goes into a design like this and then how much it changes based on the tech process.

Cheers to Darrin and his team!

Week 2: Program Intensive Magic

This week, I faced my fear of the word "patching."

I feel like in the Nixon the word patching is code for: "we don't know how to operate the board properly and something isn't going as planned so we're going to blame it on the commonly used word that we don't understand, which is patching." This in essence leads me to face my overarching fear of numbers, as well as my small paranoia about electrical outlets. Apparently as a kid I tried to kill myself A LOT with forks and electrical outlets, and now as an adult I seem to be notorious for touching the wrong cord and shocking myself. I also grabbed a TON of hot wire livestock fences growing up. My cousins thought it was funny to watch my hair stand up.

I was told as a little girl (as many women are) that my strengths were not in math, and this led me to begin to hate it and veer away from it and tell myself I'm horrible at it, and really steer clear of something that in essence is kind of beautiful as a universal language. I think of math and I think of quantum physics, the expansion of the universe, and music. All things I would like to learn about. However math in practice for me has been being compared to my engineer parents and bio sci older brother as the little art girl who can't do long division.

Yet, I'm realizing, I don't HATE math. In fact, it's kind of fun. When it becomes a puzzle, when it becomes something you can use as a skill to assist in the creative process, it's amazing. I think lighting may be my first real experience liking math. I like that it's so objective. There is an answer, and you have to find it, or you might blow the building up.

During the lecture I found myself wanting to figure out all the rules of the patching game as quickly as possible so that I could have all the answers when I got to the board. There is something reassuring about knowing which lights are programmed where- I've never experienced knowing which lights are which numbers because I put them there. This much make the whole deal much faster.

Some day I would love to work on a show top to bottom- designing, plotting, hard patching, soft patching, programming and all that jazz. What I really walked away from the lecture with is that the creative playground of light is even bigger than I thought. It's up to LD to make those decisions that previously had been done for me, but that's not something to be afraid of, it's something to embrace.

Week 2: Get With The Program!

See what I did there with the title?

Anyways, this lecture was awesome. I thought there was a lot of knowledge spewed for the short amount of time we actually had. I do wish if we had more time to play with programming more. I know that's a part of being on a crew and such. So I guess I am more upset that I missed out on it. I definitely feel more comfortable with the idea of programming in the future, whenever needed.

Channels, groups, and dimmers are definitely a lot clearer now. At first, groups were a little hard to comprehend, but after seeing Kristen and Stacie's cheat sheet for Dance Escape I can totally see how it works and helps at that!

I hope I can somehow really learn/ practice programming though.

Update:
Observing the focus for Dance Escape was interesting. I learned a lot of new terms like split the difference, flag it, etc. I also learned more about actually focusing the lights over the house. It was cool to see this in the Claire because I've only done lighting things in smaller spaces like the Nixon and Cohen theatres. It was amazing to see how many lights needed to be focused and how long it was. I think it took the whole 4 hours to focus just the lights over the stage. Kristen was on headset with Jessica who was in the house working the board and taking down notes for her. I do wish I could have actually seen her plot to view how extensive it is compared to the ones we did in 157.

Tech was so cool to observe because I got the opportunity to see a run of the show. Dance shows are completely different from theatrical ones when it comes to lighting because you only get so much time to fix your cues, and oftentimes I saw the lights being adjusted during the run of the piece. Because light cues are as much a part of the dance piece as the dancers are, communication with the stage manager on exactly when to take the cue is as much part of the design as it is any other part. I was awed by how creative dance lighting can be and noticed so clearly how colors can emote a certain feeling and help tell a story. One cue I remember so clearly was in the ballet, the dancers formed a rose shape as they lined up in a circle and moved around. I think I probably only associated the formation of the dancers with a rose because of the rose colored cyc that was behind them. When talking to Stacie after, she told me that it was difficult to light it because the choreographer did not tell her what the piece was at all. It was just a ballet, with no story. So Stacie put in her "own two cents" if you will, on what each moment was. It definitely enhanced the piece tremendously to have some sense of direction with the lights. The pieces that were most successful, both in lighting, and choreography, were the ones where the intention was clear.

Week 2: Comparing the lighting in stores

Over this weekend I went up to San Francisco to surprise my girlfriend for her birthday. She and her friend wanted to go shopping, and I'm not exactly the shopping type. So I found another way to entertain myself. 

  We went to a Forever 21 on Thursday night and they were trying on countless items of clothing so I was sitting outside the dressing room for around 30 minutes. While I was waiting, I had to find something to amuse myself so I started to look up. When I saw the lighting, I was actually shocked at how effective it was. I looked at each individual light, and where it was focused and each position was correct in its angle. It was able to illuminate each rack of clothing without making them look flat. The next day we went to the seven floor Macy's...

  Once here I was very diappointed at the lighting. For a seven floor store I expected better lighting. To keep your customer in a store, I would hope that the designer would have a more welcoming style than there was. In comparing the two stores I feel like the Forever 21 had better lighting than Macy's even though the actual fixtures were visible in the latter. I think the Macy's spent more money on concealing the fixtures more than they thought of how they would affect the merchandise. 

Week 2: Light Strikes Back

My relationship with programming prior to this week was virtually non-existent, and having only worked with horizon before (not as a designer, but as a stage manager). I'd picked up a few things during techs (helping a light designer fix a cue, so I knew how to take lights out and bring them to full, but that was pretty much it).

Retaining it for seven weeks is going to be another matter, but I think that I got most of the basics (although I'm also bookmarking the user manual online, just in case.)  At the very least, the undo button will be my friend.

Tracking was easily the most confusing thing, but I can see the benefits of it in making adjustments to cues that are recurring/consistent (sunlight, for example). (Soft blocking, on the other hand, not so much). It was actually kind of nice to realize how many things I had remembered (from tech, or 50C, or even Composition in the Fall). If nothing else, know that acronyms work(W=VA!)! A great deal more of the programming is intuitive, I guess, but it's a matter of tuning into the logic of the board. That sound like sci-fi. Oh, well.

Hard patching and soft patching were something that I was stressing about before, and while they're still a little daunting I now understand what everyone was telling me when they said I would be fine as long as I documented everything well.

I guess my summary is that I hope to be able to retain all that information, but even if I don't it's nice to have the background and ~sort of understand what's going on.

All Things Programmed

This week's class was extremely helpful for me to gain a little background knowledge about programming lights. Although we covered many areas of programming (and at times I felt tangled in a web of terms and phrases), I believe that I have gained a sufficient amount of insight on what to expect in the tech process of Physical Graffiti. 

The electrical theory that we briefly covered at the beginning of class was very interesting, and clarified some of the reasons behind the concept of twofering electrics. I never realized that dimmers have a certain wattage maximum (which makes complete sense, I just never took this into account), and that a designer must be mindful of which lamps are being twofered together. As the dimmers in the Nixon are 1800 watts, a designer must take this into account and do simple math so as to never exceed this watt limit. As I have been on two hang crews during my time in UCI, I now understand why Darrin, Martha and Kristin (when wanting to twofer) had to take moments throughout the hang process to think about which lamps were going to be twofered so as not to exceed the dimmer limit (things make sense now), especially since there are many different ways that one can twofer to a dimmer box.

While learning how to work the board was helpful (and confusing at times), I found that one of the most important concepts that I need to grasp is the idea of communicating correctly and efficiently in the programming process. When a designer is programming, they must efficiently speak in terms of the board in hopes of preserving time and working quickly. As a programmer, I now realize how important it is to pay close attention and truly listen to the designer, all the while making sure that I am paying very close attention to instructions and how the board is operating (especially because tracking can be a result when recording  in between cues and we do not always want this to happen).  

Week 1: Candle lit surprise

Two nights ago, my door bell rang at nearly midnight. I woke up, came outside, and my entire block had been decorated with live flame votive candles. I  followed a trail of them toward a bench with what looked like a little alter, and found flowers and chocolate and some drawings. Just as I started to cry, I heard singing the bushes immediately next to me, as two of my favorite crazy people in the whole world started to sing some kind of folk version of Happy Birthday from inside the shrubbery.

I was torn between taking in the beauty and documenting it- but after about 10 minutes of absorption, I busted out my tripod. The little candles were an overwhelming sight. The feeling of them was also really hard to capture.They made the world seem so sacred and beautiful for a moment.

What strikes me about this photo is the different colors of the lights. The warm straw gold color of the live flame makes the post Jeremy and Alex are leaning against seem sooo green. I immediately went to change that in post because it didn't feel right in terms of the essence of the photo, but I thought I'd leave it for the critique. We also have an amber/pink sort of wash coming from a taller lamp just to the right of the bench.

I love how I cannot see their faces in this photo- it feels right to let them be concealed. Although there are tons of little lights in front of them, there is a strong source behind them that is keeping them in shadow.

Week 1: Sparkling

Went out over the weekend in the gaslamp district, San Diego's downtown. This photo is from one of the night clubs. It was a birthday celebration and the sparklers identified the servers coming over to the table to give them the alcohol they bought with their bottle service. 

I thought that this showed a great sense of source. Obviously the sparklers are the source of light in this dark room, but I love how it casts the shadows on the people sitting in front of it, the ones obviously not a part of the group. You get a sense of them being outcast, alone, mysterious. While where the source of light is, the sense of celebration and excitement is emanating. The sparkler's light is only intensified by the reflection on the sheen ceiling, making it look like there are double the amount of sparklers.

Week 1: Davis Sunset

Over Spring break I went up to visit my girlfriend in Davis, I hadn't seen her since New Years, so it was something I was very much looking forward to. I flew in in the morning, and later that evening we went out to dinner. As we are walking out of her apartment I see this sunset, and it was so gorgeous I had to take a picture of it. I don't normally take pictures of sunsets, which I really should start doing, but I just had to for this one. Mostly because I don't see sunsets that often anymore being in an area surrounded by buildings. It was nice to be in a more rural area where the sky was far more visible. 

Now as far as the lighting goes, and I kick myself for not taking a picture of what it looked like on a person, it is beautiful. The shades of pinks and yellows gave off a romantic feeling in me that was already there since I was happy to be around my girlfriend again. The darker contrast of purples and greys against the bright pinks really shaped the clouds, and in a way I saw waves which was very cool to me. I really enjoyed the overcast sky against the vibrant colors it was a contrast that was pleasing to my eye, and I feel like if it was a blue sky it would not have had the same effect on me. I find this picture to be wonderful and I will use it someday to recreate this type of sunset where it is both romantic and mysterious should the circumstance come up. 

Week 1: Rubber Ducky?

Okay, so maybe the duck isn't really made out of rubber, but it was pretty amazing that I was able to snap this picture a mere three feet from where the duck was swimming.

As I am just beginning my lighting career at UCI, from the experience that I do have from hanging and focusing various electrics, there are many elements of  this photo that (effortlessly) attracts my eyes.

When taking this picture, I recall thinking about the angle of which I wanted to capture this moment. I decided to angle my camera approximately at the same level as the duck was swimming in hopes of capturing the perspective of the duck. In doing so, the ripples in the water and the various deep blues are clear to see, and it is as if the spectator is walking into the moment (rather than experiencing this photo from an outside, bird's-eye-like perspective). Now that I recall my efforts to get the perfect photo, I think about lighting designers and the idea of intention. It is interesting to me that every single detail of their design (the use of various lights, gobos, and colors, timing and the way that they are focused) has a specific purpose so as to achieve an overall tone and dynamic to what is being lit. In this photo of the duck, I wanted to achieve (especially because I am SUCH an artist and everything has to have some meaning in my life) a feeling of 'transcendential reflection,' as if the audience has a way in in hopes of reflecting on what lies ahead in their lives (and the fate of the duck), and all the while, I was very much reminded of the this same type of approach in designing for a show (intention, intention, intention).

So now, what do I love about this photo?

The various deep shades of blue and the contrast of white entrance me when I look at this photo (especially when I was snapping this photo). The bottom of the Infinity Fountain is blue, and as the water is reflective (along with the help of the light from the sun), the blues stand out more than usual. What I love most about this photo is that the shadows of the duck and a nearby tree are portrayed by darker shades of blue. In staying true to the theme of this week's blogpost (intention in lighting), I am reminded that a designer has so many shades of various colors (in this case, blue) that they can incorporate into their work. To me, it seems as if each shade of blue represents something, and that is vital in designing. This photo reminds me that there are (sort of) various emotions,thoughts, and feelings (effects) that resonate with different shades of a specific color. For me, the darker the blue, the deeper, more pitted, more powerful and more rooted that object is.

I also really love the way that the ripples of the water take shape, and am instantly reminded of gobos. I actually hadn't thought about it before, but realize that many times, gobos represent actual objects.. like trees and clouds and water (WOW, good one, Sara)! So back to intention, I am currently pondering how a designer chooses specific gobos (and wonder what that represents in their work).

To me, this picture seems almost unreal, as if it were painted. Maybe the duck is rubber after all? To be continued…

Week 1: It definitely happened

I drove back to Irvine on Monday morning of week 1, and that meant that I got to see the sun rise as I travelled south. I did enjoy it, and I stopped along the 5 to snap this on my phone.

(Please note that, although I have posted more than one sunset in the past, this is a sunrise. So there.)

I liked the contrast in the lighting here - the contrails from the aircraft are bright, as is the sunlight that seems to be almost invading the darkness of the clouds and the land.
There's also some variation in color here that I love - I've talked about sunset colors before but I think that the grey here is especially powerful. In another context it might be foreboding, but the way that the light seems to be gradually spilling into it, illuminating the shadow, makes it a powerful balance instead.