Technical Terminology

[SparkySteve]

Intelligence is comprehension, reasoning, understanding, insight, whatever you want to call it. Automated lighting has none of these attributes.

 

so when the fixture listens to data does it or does it not comprehend, understand and respond?

 

otherwise know as inteligence in Mr Hughes' own words

[Brian]

Aha, the old what is intelligence question, which has kept many, many, philosophers in beer for a long while.

 

For a long running discussions of this, have a look at comp.robotics.misc where such enlightening words as...

 

To treat consciousness as a "useless add-on" to intelligence reminds

me of Cartesian dualism if nothing else.

 

Then, you would believe that Chalmers's philosophical zombies may

exist. I would disagree with that!

 

...have been written.

[JMeG]

Surely the use of the word 'intelligent' is on a purely comparative basis? Ignoring the dictionary definition for now, are humans not so 'intelligent' because no other animal can better us mentally? If you were to lay out an order of 'intelligence' of organic beings, you're likely to say something like 'the whale is a lot more intelligent than the whelk' or whatever.

 

Now if you were to do the same with luminaires, fixtures like the Mac are very 'intelligent' when compared to a dusty fresnel. That is, they exhibit far superior qualities in terms of theoretical calculation in their microchips or 'brains'. A fresnel knows how bright to be and it doesn't even 'know' that from a DMX signal (the dimmer works that out) but a Mac as the ABILITY to interpret many DMX signals, manipulate them if necessary, and output them in the form of brightness, colour etc. So, does the ABILITY to do more things make it more intelligent? Some will say no, but are humans more intelligent than goldfish because we have the ABILITY to process more information, like a Mac?

 

Then there's the issue of reaction to one's surroundings; a Mac does not (quote from someone) 'work out the best gobo wash for a stage' so it may not be intelligent. However, in a few years time we may see a moving head that has feedback sensors for such things and can work it out somehow. Indeed, we may, in the future, see a fixture so advanced that the Mac looks as thick as sh*t. Similarly, evolution may produce a super-human with a huge mental capacity - is, then, the 21st century human not intelligent?

 

In conclusion, what I mean to say is that, in my opinion, moving heads are intelligent as they are the most superior luminaire in comparison to all the others in existence. And the reason we are questioning their intelligence is simply because we are more 'intelligent' than them... big deal.

 

Jamie :blink:

[gareth]

A reasonable argument, Jamie - but I still don't agree.

 

I've said all I have to say on this subject, I'm not going to spend any more time going over the same old argument. We'll all just have to agree to call them by the name we prefer to use - which for me is "moving lights" or "movers".

[JMeG]

Well, yes. Don't suppose there's a right or wrong answer, really.

 

Why do I have a feeling this thread will grow into double-figured pages, though?!

 

Jamie

[Tom Baldwin]

Having said all that...I'm not entirely convinced that all the LDs I've encountered were intelligent...remember: statistically, half the people you've met are of below average intelligence...

... but there are days when I'm convinced I only meet the outliers...

 

I've also seen a debate over credits on a show where one desk ran generics, the other ran movers. The generics desk operator was for some reason unhappy to be credited as "Lighting Operator" if the other guy was going to get the credit "Intelligent Lighting Operator".

[lampieman]

I call Moving Lights (heads and scans) by different names, I use Intelligent, Movers, Wigglies, etc. I think I have to say that intelligent lights sum up what they are, take a look around and a lot of people and companies actually have intelligent lights written somewhere.

 

This is however a arguement that not one person can win, as thereis not a correct term for moving lights. Moving Lights is the best for the job. (even then it is incorrect as the whole light doesn't move)

 

Gareth

[Tomo]

Well, if we all know what we mean by Intelligent, Robotic, Remote-Operated, Mover, Moving Light, Wiggly, etc, who cares?

[Stu]

I've also seen a debate over credits on a show where one desk ran generics, the other ran movers. The generics desk operator was for some reason unhappy to be credited as "Lighting Operator" if the other guy was going to get the credit "Intelligent Lighting Operator".

I've been in this situation before, and personally I prefer Moving Light Operator - didn't stop me being credited Intelligent Lighting Operator (or something similar). I don't know, seems a bit tacky to me for starters!

 

Stu

[P. Funk]

I can just imagine

 

"yeah - I've got 103 obedients on my rig for next week"

 

 

hmm..

 

why not compromise and settle for the term 'wagglies'...

 

they are more intelligent than conventionals - which just burn up power that they are fed. moving fixtures interpret a digital signal, and decide what to do with it, what wheels to move, what motors to turn on, etc, so in that way they could be termed 'intelligent'. even though they are not..

 

I feel a horror scifi coming on 'return of the mac500s'...

[Ike]

A fresnel knows how bright to be and it doesn't even 'know' that from a DMX signal (the dimmer works that out) but a Mac as the ABILITY to interpret many DMX signals, manipulate them if necessary, and output them in the form of brightness, colour etc.

The fresnel (well the filament in its lamp) has the ability to regulate the flow of electrons by providing resistance proportional to its temperature and release photons with varying energy, the number of photons being dependent on its resistance, the voltage across it, the voltages waveform etc It also has the ability to stop releasing photons when the current stops, keep its form, not turn into a hedgehog and much much more.

 

All these things are not due to it having intelligence in the way many people think of it, however it is the same as thinking of movers as intelligent.

[JMeG]

A fresnel knows how bright to be and it doesn't even 'know' that from a DMX signal (the dimmer works that out) but a Mac as the ABILITY to interpret many DMX signals, manipulate them if necessary, and output them in the form of brightness, colour etc.

The fresnel (well the filament in its lamp) has the ability to regulate the flow of electrons by providing resistance proportional to its temperature and release photons with varying energy, the number of photons being dependent on its resistance, the voltage across it, the voltages waveform etc It also has the ability to stop releasing photons when the current stops, keep its form, not turn into a hedgehog and much much more.

 

All these things are not due to it having intelligence in the way many people think of it, however it is the same as thinking of movers as intelligent.

But that behaviour is passive. A filament is a piece of tungsten that is unable to alter its behaviour when 'given' a certain voltage by a dimmer. You can hardly call turning off when there's no current an 'ability'.

 

A mover will take a digital DMX signal as an input to a microprocessor and interpret it (manipulate it if it needs to e.g. for pan inverse) to operate the correct outputs. Therefore it has much more ability than a fresnel luminaire which was my entire arguement in the previous post.

 

I looks, to me, like you're trying to be pedantic and 'clever'. All you've really done is describe how a light bulb works. A Mac lamp does the same thing, really (and don't start saying 'ooh it's a discharge lamp with electrons and UV and blah blah).

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not being aggressive or anything...

 

Jamie

[Brian]

But that behaviour is passive ... A mover will take a digital DMX signal as an input to a microprocessor and interpret it

I would disagree with the use of the word 'interpret'. When you interpret speech you take each word, translate them and then, when you have a phrase, go over it and check that it makes sense.

 

I'm with the 'movers are not intelligent camp here' (I am sometimes a bit pedantic too ).

 

It would be possible to make a purely mechanical moving lamp and mechanical desk with no microprocessors (Babbage difference engine anyone?) Would that be intelligent? (The mechanical system not the doing of it)

[themadhippy]

what about a stand alone unit responding to its surroundings? is that classed as intellagents?

[robloxley]

A moonflower is a machine with artificial intelligence???