PC based control or lighing desk control, which?

[runciblespoon]

Hi, I look after all the lighting equipment in a school with 5 theatres. Currently all of them are equipped with normal DMX consoles, but these are getting to the point of needing to be replaced.

 

The Drama teachers want to replace them with PCs running a programme called PC Stage, as they contend this will be both cheaper and more flexible.

 

Sadly I have no experience with PC based lighting control systems, and feel the need of some advice in this area.

 

Do any of you have any thoughts as to whether it is better to work with "normal" lighting desks, or with a PC, or is there really no difference in the degree of control and flexibility between the two systems?

 

Any comments would be very welcome.

Tony Cole

[dbuckley]

As a PCStage evangelist, it would be remiss of me not to say go for it!

 

On the other hand..... I'm normally wary of suggesting PC based anythings in these types of circumstances, based on the fact we're dealing with teachers and yewts... Particularly teachers, who tend to be not very with it on PCs and things... But, if the teachers want it, and have put the effort in, then that consideration is wiped out. Their logic is not wrong, you do get ridiculous bang for the buck, and PCStage does huge amounts more than just operate lighting.

 

Of course, it prepares said yewths for a lifetime of disappointment when they get in front of a real console and when they ask the real console guru how you set up recursive submasters the guru says "whaaayt? Or where you load the audio tracks...

[StevieR]

Personally, I would go for a dedicated hardware desk anytime. Although the PC based solution is often very good value there is always a risk of general PC problems, normally as the result of additional software/utils being installed. Also, I do prefer a 'button for every function' approach so you can quickly access the function you require without having to flick through a couple of menus or fiddle with the mouse.

 

Steve

[Jivemaster]

A pc is terribly vunerable to students with a disc installing games and other resource hungry stuff and the malware that goes with moody copies of things.

 

The industry seems (I havent asked everyone!) to be desk based. So a PC will not prepare students for the real world.

 

As with desks some progs will be better suited to a theatre cue stack and others to busking for bands. Check what the school will really have to do, prob both!

 

I don't doubt the cost preference of a PC system esp if the PC can be an old one discarded by the IT dept! and the same licence is to be installed in each of several PCs! I hope someone will be able to keep the install clean.

 

Educationally a base model of an industry standard item is a better teaching tool than a unique product, that will give students no help if they move into pro theatre.

 

Though a desk is a PC inside, retail PCs have a poor service life compared to some desks. Run on a laptop the system risks a poor service life and a high theft risk.

[PJB]

I have been using the Chamsys software with an Enttec dongle for the past 2 years for small (48 channel) to larger (500 channels) productions. The software is suited to both busking and theatre cue stack and although PC based, covers all of the concepts you would need to learn in programming a conventional desk. The beauty of the PC based option is that the Chamsys software is free to download and use, students can have there own copy to practice on at home and that show files can be transferred easily on memory sticks/cd writables. The Enttec usb dongle is rock steady having suffered no problems, even with the fastest moving show. I would definitely recommend the Chamsys/Enttec open usb dongle option.

[Tomo]

PC-based control is generally cheaper to buy - but it is almost NEVER used in theatrical productions.

It may also be more expensive to maintain in the long run.

 

The exceptions are when the "brains" of the outfit run on a PC, and an external 'Wing' is used for the control - eg Jands Vista S3, Chamsys MagicQ w/ wing, ETC Emphasis LCS (although ETC supply the PC)

 

I would also say that PC-based control is much LESS flexible, due to the physical UI

- EG, in a busking situation, it would be an utter nightmare to have to use a keyboard and mouse, when compared to running the show on a Congo or Pearl with all their multitude of faders, encoders and other dedicated and carefully-laid-out buttons.

 

Pure PC is good for certain applications - generally theme parks - but for anything requiring actual busking, they are horrible.

 

To all those who advocate PC-based solutions - how do you go about grabbing several groups of lights and fading them up and down at different arbitrary rates, immediately?

 

- With a console that has faders - it's only limited by your hands (and feet?)

- On a PC-based console - it's impossible.

 

For most schools I'd usually recommend SmartFade or SmartFade ML, depending on whether you want moving light control or not.

 

The "Can have the software at home" argument is moot as well, as almost every good quality console has an offline editor freely available for download.

 

(The SmartFade ML OLE is still under development, but will be out by PLASA)

 

Security - off-the-shelf PCs are fundamentally insecure, and often of poor build quality.

The machines used inside lighting consoles are relatively locked down, and even if wierdness is installed it's usually the work of half an hour to wipe them back to factory-installed software.

 

Finally - Support.

If you buy an ETC, Zero88, Chamsys, MA, Compulite or the other major manufacturers physical consoles, you also get support.

If you have a problem with your ETC console, you can phone me or my colleagues 365 1/4 days a year and talk to someone who can help you.

 

If you use paid-for-software, you only get support for the software - NOT the PC on which it runs.

If you use free software - you get no support at all.

[tvi675]

I would definitely recommend the Chamsys/Enttec open usb dongle option.

 

We are currently used in many educational environments, both the PC version and consoles so if you have any questions send me a message! For more reliability than the Enttec open dongle we also support the Pro, or you can use one of our ArtNet or USB-DMX boxes.

 

The industry seems (I havent asked everyone!) to be desk based. So a PC will not prepare students for the real world.

 

And the advantage is that the software operates exactly the same as the real thing :)

 

Matt Lemon

ChamSys Ltd

[PJB]

Thanks fo that Matt. I have had a check of the PCStage software this morning and it seems very cumbersome with loads of pull down menus and submenus. By using the groups and pallettes in Chamsys a show can be easily busked from a PC. I say if anybody hasn't tried Chamsys magicQ, download it and give it a try, they will be pleasantly surprised.

[dbuckley]

Ah well, back to familiar territory...

 

I would also say that PC-based control is much LESS flexible, due to the physical UI

 

Pure PC is good for certain applications - generally theme parks - but for anything requiring actual busking, they are horrible.

I agree that for busking, the only thing that matters is how many controls you can get your paws on, and a mouse is not the best tool for that job. Lets put that one to bed right now. However, if I tack on a MIDI user interface with lots of buttons, then for many sorts of shows, the PC + (what is now an ) external wing is good enough. But enough of busking.

 

However, I would argue quite strongly that the only real difference between a theme park show and a scripted theatre show is that in a theatre you don't do the same show many times a day. Theatre and theme parks both have the common goal that we do this show by the script with a few a c0ck-ups as possible. Thus for a scripted theatre show a PC is no less appropriate than any other console. Lets not forget the Strand M24, which as standard had no faders, but one could run shows on it. In fact, I think it was doing shows on the M24 that made me question what the hell we were doing with ordinary consoles in theatres.

 

I do know why PC based systems are not used much in the professional world, and its not really much to do with technology, its the people. Firstly, theres lots of BR members who get paid good money 'cos they can programme and operate certain specific consoles. Theres probably not much call for M24 programmers these days, but if you can programme a 550i you can get work. Generally if you want a 550i programmer you dont pick someone with hog only on the CV. So, there is a vicious circle; production houses have to have the kit that people want to use, and the people need to know how to operate the kit in the houses.

 

The other big reason people don't get some kinds of PC lighting controllers is because they quite deliberately don't work like consoles, they require a different approach to programming. People who "do lights" start from the idea of a fixture up, then a channel, maybe a softpatch, then a scene which we memorise, and then we move on to the next scene, and then we build a stack, and then we have a show.

 

I (and this is all first person) start with a show. Then I build my cuelist of whats going to happen in that show. Then I'll build a bunch of presets without levels. At this point I haven't touched a light, but I've got the hard yards done. And I haven't set foot in the theatre yet. Finally, I'll finalise the hang plot, allocate up the channels on the computer, and put the guessed levels into the presets.

 

Almost everyone who "does lighting" thinks from the bottom up. All the consoles I've played with don't support top down design, you have to start from bottom up with recorded states.

 

To all those who advocate PC-based solutions - how do you go about grabbing several groups of lights and fading them up and down at different arbitrary rates, immediately?

Well, I pretty much don't have to.

 

Ask a sound engineer how he grabs all the faders for all those mics for the drum kit at the same time to turn the drums down, and he'll point out to you that he has a drum subgroup (or VCA), and he just adjusts one fader and the entire drum kit level is altered, without disturbing the relative balance between the multiple mics. Much of the mixing is done on subgroups.

 

PCStage allows one to do the same thing with lighting; I build the overall look on stage from a series of smaller looks, using recursive presets. So if I need to drop USL out I operate one virtual fader, either manually with the mouse, or by issuing a command, or by syntax, and out it goes. Note that recursive presets are additive in series (exactly like audio subgroups, but not limited to one level, you can have looks within looks within looks etc), and that this is very different from palettes, which are additive in parallel, and LTP means only one contributor is actually doing anything.

 

So the short answer to your question is that I make the problem go away by using the tools at my disposal.

 

Now obviously things can still go wrong, and one needs to do what one needs to do to get through the show, but when it is possible things are going to go wrong (like an important event fails to happen around which the next set of things depends), the show controller in me makes me build a plan B in to the show, so if an alternative go button is pressed then an alternative path is taken. So for (a real example) example if a quick costume change isn't completed in time the stage manager throws an actor on from ten lines hence, and when the quick change happens we slot that bit in out of sequence a few seconds later. If "Arrgh Bugger Bex not ready, I'm going with John, DAVE GO ALTERNATIVE" comes over the cans, then I bang F8 rather than F12 and the show goes on with the right looks, and only the most script-aware would be aware something non-sequential has happened...

 

I think they call that flexibility.

 

Finally, although this discussion is about lighting control, lets not forget that PCStage is a full show controller, lighting is just one thing it does, it also handles your audio playback, MIDI triggering, video, lighting is just one of it's capabilities. Again, its easy to see why thats a problem in professional-ville :) In the interests of full disclosure, PCStage is a poor moving light package, it doesn't have LTP or palettes, even though it has some other movers features that are quite handy for scrollers and that sort of thing.

 

For those who may not be aware(!) my website (address below) has a section about PCStage.

 

Edited for speeling and to add some more stuff.

[runciblespoon]

wow, I did not expect so much information so quickly here. Many thanks to you all for the considerable food for thought you have thrown my way. It is pleasant to find people who are not fundmentalist about this as well, as so far the few people here (Beijing) who I have asked about this have all reacted along the lines of "PC?!?! No way!!!" or "PC? Absolutely! Only way to go, consoles are from the Ark!" which isnt exactly helpful.

Our situation is a very mixed one, we have formal, plotted shows, mostly designed, etc and run by students a couple of times a year, and for the rest, it is done by myself or one of my assistants, busking it This last happens anything up to 4 or 5 shows/events a day.

 

My chief reasons for contemplating this change are: a: Standardisation across the theatres here (we currently have consoles of diferent makes in each venue - for historical reasons) and B: economy. We have computers coming out of our ears here, so the hardware would be effectively free, only costs being any sort of interface needed and software licences.

Owing to the plethora of computers, we would be able to have dedicated computers for each theatre, and when it is a case of students running things, they can use their own, thus obviating the real risks of infection.

 

Anyhow, I shall now settle back in comfort, eat a good North Chinese supper and think deeply about all of the info you good folk have given me, so once again, many thanks, and enjoy playing with lights..

 

Tony

[gnomatron]

Almost everyone who "does lighting" thinks from the bottom up. All the consoles I've played with don't support top down design, you have to start from bottom up with recorded states.

 

I don't know about that - seems to me that most folk start much as you do, with an idea of the scenes they have to light and how they want to do it, i.e. top down, but they do it with pen and paper rather than an LX desk. I guess the difference here is that you seem to use the software as a design tool rather than just a controller.

 

Anyway, re the OP's question - 5 theatres is quite a few! do the all have the same lighting equipment and general usage, or are they differently equipped spaces? It may be that you should look at different solutions for different spaces; if you have a rig with half a dozen fresnels you probably don't need anything especially complicated, whereas if you have 48 ways of dimming and a dozen movers then you'll need something a bit cleverer!.

 

Also, there's a lot to be said for the immediacy of a desk with a bunch of faders on it that you can push up and have lights go on, too - not all of it positive, mind you!

[Matt Riley]

We've got a big chamsys pc solution, and if I can use it, then it can't be that hard! I would contend that anyone who can program a magicq system would also be able to pick up a hog 2 like a duck to water.

 

I would also suggest that the magicq might be a good solution because you can take a lo spec pc, and run the linux version for added reliability. Also there are good user control options for the smaller spaces which don't have trained ops, and there are loads of different, reasonably priced wing options for proper physical control, so for a smaller performance space you could have a linux box running chamsys with their baby fader wing, locked down so that no-one can break it, while bigger spaces could get a much more powerful solution.

 

M

[daemon]

I don't know about that - seems to me that most folk start much as you do, with an idea of the scenes they have to light and how they want to do it, i.e. top down, but they do it with pen and paper rather than an LX desk. I guess the difference here is that you seem to use the software as a design tool rather than just a controller.

 

 

I would agree totally. Any designer worth their salt will have a reasonably detailed cue synopsis well before any programming takes place. It really makes no difference how the show is programmed from there.

 

IMHO lighting desks should be lighting desks... They are only there to store and recall/play back the looks required. I would find it incredibly difficult to light a play by doing all my work on the desk.

 

Ben

[Nick S]

I agree that for busking, the only thing that matters is how many controls you can get your paws on, and a mouse is not the best tool for that job. Lets put that one to bed right now. However, if I tack on a MIDI user interface with lots of buttons, then for many sorts of shows, the PC + (what is now an ) external wing is good enough.

[...]

I do know why PC based systems are not used much in the professional world, and its not really much to do with technology, its the people. [...] Generally if you want a 550i programmer you dont pick someone with hog only on the CV. So, there is a vicious circle; production houses have to have the kit that people want to use, and the people need to know how to operate the kit in the houses.

 

I disagree - I think it's all about the interface. I challenge anyone to find me a PC based system that can offer the UI and the usability of a modern day console. Take, say, the ETC Eos. I can't think of any PC based system that can give me an equivalent control experience, in terms of usability. That's the key here. People aren't using PC based controllers in droves because people prefer the usability of consoles. MIDI wings don't offer the same kind of custom design work that goes into a console...a lot of the time, you're trying to do lighting work on a tool designed for audio work!

 

 

I don't totally buy your argument about people being the root cause either. There's very few people in Britain who are fully trained and able to operate an Eos (ETC tells me there are only two consoles sold in the country), but people are still going to be buying them and replacing 500s with them. If or when PC based software can surpass console solutions, people will buy them over consoles, and people will retrain to support them. It happens all the time - every new generation of consoles requires new skills and training. Production houses do have to have the kit people want to use, but when that equipment becomes defunct they replace them with new equipment...equipment that fewer people know how to use.

[SteveAATW]

I use ShowCAD Artist in a club installation - for control of moving fixtures and with a midi keyboard hooked up it's real time access to cue's it's second to none. From my days of doing theatre stuff I can appreciate it's a slightly different kettle of fish between clubs and shows - most people will want the reliability and hands on approach of a desk, but from my memory of doing some fairly large school shows, nigh on all of them were just a list of stored que's in a strand desk that we cross faded between, it was a rare event that we ran anything on the desk manually live. For small scale stuff, schools etc, if your doing all the setup before the show and then just going through a list of ques a PC based system with a midi interface can probably do all that quite easily and at a fraction of the cost of the desks with similar feature sets.