Lighting in China

[Ike]

Honestly I wouldn't care and why should I? You haven't deprived me of anything, if you were intending to purchase the DVDs, videos and software then you would have deprived the copyright holders of money which I agree is not good and leads me nicely onto my final point.

Sorry, but reality proves that your wrong: Manufacturers have to calculate those losses into their product price calculation. At the end those honest buyers who are willing to pay for what they are using need to pay the part of revenues you did pay by illegaly stealing products and services.

My point is that unless you were going to buy the original product in the first place there isn't a loss of revenue.

 

When you say reality which reality do you mean? The idea that pirated music and video is costing the industry x amount as calculated by the RRP of the stolen items is somewhat dubious to say the least. I don't have figures to hand but I suspect people who do download a lot of music will have more than they could have ever afforded if they had purchased it. Similarly most of the people I know who buy pirated DVDs are from poor backgrounds and couldn't afford a fraction of the titles they illegally acquire.

 

Again I'm not saying it's right or that I do it I'm just trying to give a bit of balance.

[steve h]

You haven't deprived me of anything

 

My point is that unless you were going to buy the original product in the first place there isn't a loss of revenue.

 

The idea that pirated music and video is costing the industry x amount as calculated by the RRP of the stolen items is somewhat dubious to say the least....... Similarly most of the people I know who buy pirated DVDs are from poor backgrounds and couldn't afford a fraction of the titles they illegally acquire.

 

 

If I walked into a store and walked out with a product I would be arrested. I never intended to buy the product, and the cost to actually print the individual cd/dvd would be minimal. Yet its still theft, its still wrong and it shouldnt be done. The argument that people cant afford the music is rubbish. If people bought all their music then they would purchase music that they wanted, not everything under the sun.

 

Moving this argument over into industry, and saying that it would allow people who wouldnt normally afford it to get the equipment. If people learn that they can use cracked or cheap equipment when they are young, what will stop them using it when they can afford the better stuff, and spending the extra money on more cheap chinese imports. Why should one production benefit because they are willing to use some cracked software rather than one that wont do it.

 

And as for the argument that manufacturers will give large discounts to big business, yet full rates to am dram etc is a valid one. But business is business, and a company would not do this if it would not bring them more money. But bouncing quotes from different companies off each other I recently turned an £18,000 quote into a £12,000 one for my school - nothing wrong with a bit or bartering (sp?)

 

I hope my points come across in all of this

 

Steve

[lichtwicht]

When you say reality which reality do you mean? The idea that pirated music and video is costing the industry x amount as calculated by the RRP of the stolen items is somewhat dubious to say the least. I don't have figures to hand but I suspect people who do download a lot of music will have more than they could have ever afforded if they had purchased it. Similarly most of the people I know who buy pirated DVDs are from poor backgrounds and couldn't afford a fraction of the titles they illegally acquire.

Your statement has two misconceptions and prove that you're not really into economics (I don't want to sound harsh, but as economist it's hard for me to read such statements):

 

First most people ripp stuff they're interested in. So they surely wouldn't buy everything they ripp instead, but at least a fraction. In order to keep your statement true nobody were allowed to ripp stuff (or buy knock-off) he's interested in.

Second it's daily business work that stealing, copying and ripping stuff costs money - not necessarily the money of companies as there are means to keep the realized losses small but at the end its the national economy as whole and the individuals who have to pay the bill.

 

There have been done enough theoretical and empirical research that prove this interconnection. So either believe it or go to the next library and read some economical journals...

[ceecrb1]

I´m going to dip back into this just to say.

 

Cheap chinease imports do NOT bother me.

 

COPIES bother me, and I´m sorry I´m reading all these posts with great interest and I just cant take on any point that anyone has made trying to justify copying of gear.

I dont care that other brands have done it in the past, I didnt like it then either.

 

Using ideas and creating your own method to tackle the issue, understandable. But measuring everything and jsut copying and selling it as "yours", its just NOT justifiable at all.

Particularly in the case of the STONE I saw a while back, they even took avolites manual, and just used word´s search to remove the words "pearl" and "avolites"

there were NO other changes, I had both manuals side by side.ç

 

I dont care what their PR guys say. I have 24 in my warehouse, the fineart fine 2000 IS a copy of a mac 2k performance and it IS made of sub standard parts. Softer metals, cheaper plastics, the motors bands stretch, I´m having to replace them ALL with originals, the menus dont use real english "on" and "off" is "open" and "close" (??????)

Its not moral.

[martinw]

Chinese universities graduate more engineering students every year than the rest of the world less India combined

That might be the case, but the quality of the education is nothing like as good as you'd get from a European of American university. The following quote is from an article in The Economist (16th Aug 2007) on skill shortages in Asia, and summarises a report by McKinsey Global Institute:

The study, which covered a broad spectrum of businesses and surveyed more than 80 human-resources managers, found that less than “10% of Chinese job candidates, on average, were suitable for work in a foreign company.” In engineering, for example, graduates were criticised for being too immersed in theory and not enough in practice. It concluded that the available pool of engineering talent in China was no larger than that in Britain, which now has a mostly service economy.

 

Martin

[Ike]

Lichtwicht,

 

I will confess I don't know much about economics as it really isn't something that interests me in the slightest, that said I did study business studies (and got an A*) at GCSE after I found out a girl I liked was in the class but that's another story. <_< My thoughts were based on my own experiences and those of friends and colleges. I buy CDs and listen to a lot of streamed music online, the latter does not affect the former in the slightest. The same seems to apply with friends and downloading.

 

I haven't at any point said downloading doesn't cost the music industry, just that the figures that so frequently get banded about by the record industry seem to be somewhat inflated from my personal experiance.

 

 

 

Ceecrb1,

 

Like I said some bad apples, I would however suggest investing in a spelling and grammar checker before criticising the English skills of those for whom it's not their first language.

 

 

 

Martin,

 

Very interesting quote. Thanks for sharing.

[RobOwen]

Ceecrb1,

 

You caused a bit of a stir here when you went on open forum and openly slated Fine Art fixtures, saying they are all in your workshop after the first use. You then write in this post that the problem, as I originally suggested, was caused by the shipping company manhandling the goods. I note that you didn't go back to the topic and clear the issue and help us wipe the undeserved egg off our faces.

 

Instead you go again on open forum and then slate the metals for being soft, the plastics cheap, and the rubber belts stretchy. Let me tell you, replacing the parts with so called originals is a complete non-starter, as your unit was fitted with originals. Martin MAC parts for the most part will not fit, although I will concede that the 2k may accept more Martin parts than Fine Arts later products. ( The 2k is at the end of its product life anyway, its soon to be superseded by a newer and better model)

 

Most metals will bend when the fixture is dropped. Although the fixtures are not made from lead they are equally not made from titanium. When a fixture gets dropped badly and it breaks, I tend to blame the person who dropped it as opposed to the fixture for having "soft metals".

 

Your fixtures have been dropped. This will probably bend parts inside, which will make you belts stretch as it will make the part harder to move. Some of the belts inside the FINE 2K are sourced from Pioneer. This is not a problem unique to Fine Art.

 

The plastics issue you come up with last time saying you couldn’t get the lids on. If the chassis is bent you probably will have issues. I checked our 2ks and they were no problem at all.

 

Also, I don’t think the fact that the fixture says “open” instead of “on” is a major problem that makes the fixture unfit for purpose.

 

There is also the question of inevitably comparing it with the MAC equivalent. The original design, as explained before, was conceived as a result of looking at the many other companies who had tried to take Martins crown as market leader. Most other companies, while having the same features as the MAC, never managed to get people to speak about the two products in the same sentence. Take futurelight for example, blinding bits of kit for the money, but does anyone on here associate their 1200w fixture with a MAC 2000? The features are the same, but no-one ever compares the two. Fine Art knew this and needed a way of getting people to look at the FINE 2K in the same light (excuse the pun) as a MAC 2K. They therefore made it look like one. In my view the biggest mistake and headache they ever made, but it worked. People compare the two. The MAC may well be better, but it’s hugely more expensive.

 

Anyone that manufacturers, such as Martin or Vari-lite, who spend big money developing and that is viewed by a panel as being innovative they are granted a patent. Martin has tonnes of patents on their kit, and rightly so, they thought of it so they should be protected. The point people miss here about Chinese fixtures is that in order for distributors and users not to end up in prison the fixtures must not breach these patents. So while the Chinese may copy some aspects of design, the original manufacturer has not been able to demonstrate that part of the design is original and innovative. This is the main reason Vari-Lite couldn't take Martin to court in Europe over the concept of Moving Heads, because they couldn't get a patent over here for it. Therefore, the Chinese cannot really copy the ideas that really cost the money to come up with and develop.

 

I don't mean this as a personal rant, but there are laws for everything these days, and rest assured that one of the things the EU is good for is protecting manufacturing in Europe. They will do their best to go after importers of Chinese goods that threaten manufacturing here. The fact that people like Fine Art, PR, Futurelight etc can operate in Europe should prove that the fixtures aren't as naughty as you might think.

[SoLiEn]

I personally wouldnt buy the copy. I want a company/manufacturer to be original, not to copy because it shows a lack of imagination. and IMHO the copy is never going to be as good. look at a sound mixing desk example, the Behringer Xenyx (sp?) yes it is actually quite a lot for the money, but is a copied Mackie onyx (sp?), which would I rather have? the Mackie blatantly as it is made of more expensive components, and they designed it, so they will know it inside out, whereas a company who copied it will just of copied it. christ its like being back at school, you nick my homework its all well and good you getting top grades but if you have to come and do it properly in front of a class you got no ###### clue. I want the companies to develop their own brand, not just copy best sellers.

 

/rant

 

p.s. my apologies if I have gone off topic!

[lichtwicht]

I don't mean this as a personal rant, but there are laws for everything these days, and rest assured that one of the things the EU is good for is protecting manufacturing in Europe. They will do their best to go after importers of Chinese goods that threaten manufacturing here. The fact that people like Fine Art, PR, Futurelight etc can operate in Europe should prove that the fixtures aren't as naughty as you might think.

 

Nop. It just proves how difficult it is to protect something via patents: At least the requirements for European patents are quite high and therefore cannot protect a fixture like the Mac 2k completely, only some technologies within. The positive side is that this forces the manufacturers to continue innovation, on the other side it makes the life for copyist easier.

Actually it's easier to protect the outside style of a fixture than the technologies within...

 

Summing up this discussion I'm really surprised how much simple-minded and naive this huge threat is seen here...

 

EDIT: And comparing the lawsuits between Vari*Lite and HighEnd / Martin with what's happening with the eastern copyist prove that there isn't really much knowledge about patents. While the named companies were arguing about technical concepts (cmy mixing through wheels within moving heads), todays copyist doesn't copy just technical ideas but the fixtures part by part. Besides the conflict between Vari*Lite and Martin derived also from the differences between European and American patent laws.

[ceecrb1]

RobOwen.

I am not changing anything, I am just leaving details out as some things are both best left unsaid, and better held within my or fineart´s companies.

 

So, Ok, here are more details:

 

Such as the poor quality screws, which were clearly placed in by a mechanical screwdriver, and very firmly placed. These two facts together mean that the soft screws bend and deform where the screwdriver bit meets the screw when I first open up the fixtures for repair. After one repair session the screws look like they´ve been through 10 repair sessions.

 

I´m also yet to find a Mac chassis I can bend with my hands unlike the finearts.. For example the silver base plate section where the shutter wheel is mounted.

 

The plastic parts ARE just of lower quality. The god damn covers never line up and I have to bend them to get the four screws to line up to their holes.

Also. I´ve had to order 10 (yes 10, in one month) replacement "pegs" that hold the upper assembly in place (the first slide out "section). I´ve never replaced any on a mac.

 

The reason all lamps were "damaged" during transport is that, the 4 guide wheels holding the shutter system, one has a spring, meaning the "system" is held in place yet removable. The spring is far too weak and the shutter plate drops out its guides ALL THE TIME. This includes in our own gigs, not just after original transportation. The entire shutter system, and its umpteen motors giving it a decent weight, then are loose to bang around inside that section of the fixture causeing mayhem during transportation, loading and unloading of trucks.

 

The bands between motors and effects are not strong enough and stretch. the damn tiny white plastic guide wheel on the tensioning spring for the Iris keeps falling off as the band expands and the spring and guide wheel are no longer tensioning the band and the wheel is no longer forcebly held in place. I´ve ordered a bag of 50 because they are so small they fall through ventilation holes in the fixture and are lost forever.

 

As for your statement regaurding, that "The MAC may well be better, but it’s hugely more expensive." Price should never compromise the experiences I am having. Every week I see at least 2 of these fixtures enter my workshop. It´s ALWAYS for daft little things where each light takes up 30mins of my valuable time I dont have. But thats the problem. They never leave for a job and return 100% intact or in condition, where other brands (not just martin or the mac2k) fair better.

 

ON THE OTHER HAND.

 

I have just had a very nice weekend using 16 of our new 24 Fine art Moving LED fixtures at the spanish national indoor athletics competition. (will upload photos in show my show later)

No problems

No complains

were very happy customers (with these)

Everything as we wanted.

(Not entirely true but NOT fineart´s fault!! One got Fried, but so did a space cannon ireos 4th and 10 of our 16 flown lights!!! had very badly installed neutral at our main incommer... tech responsible with be in disciplinary hearing tomorrow...

Truth is, the 15 riggled fixtures had 310 volts across them for 10minutes and only one fried, they did better than spacecannon´s and coemars (% for %) but its the whole story so no details are left out.)

 

We also have 2 fine 700´s that we bought for testing. Again. great light, no problems and I´ve opened it up and does not seem to have some of the problems I am experiencing with the fine 2000´s

 

Maybe its because final products are engineered better when people design rather than copy.

Or maybe I´m just too much of a perfectionist and I just DONT like the idea of ANY fixtures breaking down on site. But why would I want my clients to be happy.......?

[liptontea]

I spend a huge amount of my working days and weeks abroad, in UAE, Africa, etc, and most of the venues I work in have specifically out law these shoddy copies from their own past experience, they simply don’t trust them or don’t know they have them. One venue I visited recently had a bunch of what they thought where genuine Source 4’s. They where not, the light output was appalling and the reflectors where peeling after only 2 weeks. I have no idea where they came from but the venue believe and so did I at 1^st glance that they where genuine products.

 

However this clearly is not going to make any impact on those individuals in this forum who believe that carbon copying people’s products is a fair and a gameful way to innovate and progress the industry.

 

To those people I issue you the following challenge:

 

You go out make a console, moving light, anything with your own money. You pay for all the R&D, test runs of circuit boards metal work etc, software programming and programmers, marketing etc whilst paying your self a salary, then calculate the cost and launch it on the market. Once you have established the product in the market place, send me the drawings and the software and I will sell it and keep all the money in my pocket.

 

It sounds to me like the only way you will appreciate what goes into making a product and why it costs as much as it does, me simply stealing your idea by your standards should be fine. I mean "Honestly I wouldn't care and why should I?" because I would not have "deprived" you "of anything", I would have simply increased your completion. And then who would be "blindly pay whatever established companies want"? Maybe I will blow all my surplus cash on corporate hospitality to drum up some more sales of my copied products.

 

 

 

It’s not making more competition its stifling it. Why should Avolites make any more releases, they should just stop and stop now if your opinion was to prevail, there would be no point in carrying on. Let the programmers in China come up with something more original and better.

 

If these companies (in China) where innovating them selves out of the problems, then I would have no issues at all, my issue is with the copying of established products. If they where to solve it with their own original idea's then that would be fair competition and I would welcome it.

 

 

 

I am encouraged to see that most people on here seem to agree with the larger issue of copying products as being bad. What does concern me is the minority who are willing to put at risk the future of our industry for financial gain that is basically immoral and counter productive to all of us.

[musht]

. While the named companies were arguing about technical concepts (cmy mixing through wheels within moving heads), todays copyist doesn't copy just technical ideas but the fixtures part by part. Besides the conflict between Vari*Lite and Martin derived also from the differences between European and American patent laws.

 

Before the principle of dichroic colour became better known, VL originally went the trade secret route with sick lites repaired in VL hospital out of the sight of prying eyes.

VariLite were really on about the whole concept of a pan tilt body light and various parts inside it, US Patent system allows to `Patent` a new use for a known principle. CMY mixing , more obvious than that, VL have a Patent on wedge shaped filters in a colour wheel.

 

VL have survived the copies and the competition just changed owners, currently Phillips via Genlyte.

 

Advantageous use of the US Patent system award has to go to Color Kinetics, now absorbed by Phillips for a lot more than their p/e ratio would have suggested, with their wad full of patents and agressive style to go with it. CK were infamous for agressively issuing writs on anything with an LED in it virtually, sometimes for maximum effect serving on the `infringing party` at a tradeshow.

 

Patent is a civil right to sue, you can`t just call the cops, you need to try and get a good lawyer off the golf course and start issuing the cease and desist notices, its expensive and you need to recover the cash from somewhere. Where there`s a hit there`s a writ.

[tokm]

I spend a huge amount of my working days and weeks abroad, in UAE, Africa, etc, and most of the venues I work in have specifically out law these shoddy copies from their own past experience, they simply don’t trust them

Same applies here in the UK in my experience. There's a reason these fixtures aren't being used in any wide spread sort of way over here. If they were on par with the major players in the ML fixture market, why aren't the likes of people such as PRG, HSL, Neg Earth, SLX, Whitelight, etc, buying/using them...

 

If their just as good, then why pay £5k for a Mac 500 when you can get an equivalent for half... if not less. The answers simple.. bad past, as well as current experience. Most rental houses continuously test new gear, even if they've had bad experience with that brand before, just worth the effort to see if it's got any better. So the usual line we often hear from people who defend Chinese fixtures when people say well they just had a bad experience once, of 'they had a fixture from that brand but it didn't meet the standard they're never going to try anything from them again' doesn't apply.

 

I'm of the view that if they want to make their knock off products, let them.. the market/users who haven't made up their mind, will judge them accordingly. If it takes a few bad experiences, that's a shame, but I believe it'll lead people to just accepting that products no where near as good as the originals and thus lead people to shelling out for the proper thing.

[Ike]

The companies you listed almost certainly don't pay 5k for a mac500

 

Western brands have got a strangle hold on the market which they're not going to give up without a fight. People are familiar with their products while a few bad apples, difficulty in support and (dare I say it) racism create a strong distrust of eastern ones. Western brands are the ones who can afford to supply large companies at obscenely discounted prices (or even FOC)

 

I know for a fact a client of mine was given a substantial quantity of 500s free of charge, there isn't a hope in hell many eastern companies could afford this.

[karl]

You go out make a console, moving light, anything with your own money.

 

Yes, the original development of a product is expensive but surely if you design a new model a lot of the research and development can be reused from the first one. Also most new companies will be set up by people who already have experience / knowledge from working for other employers.

 

I don't believe companies who claim that their products are expensive because of R&D costs. A far greater proportion of the income goes on advertising, posh offices and paying directors big bonuses. I also have problems with companies who dismiss Chinese 'copies' as inferior based on the place of manufacture and then outsource the production of their own stuff to the same part of the world.

 

Yes, copies made with inferior parts will be less reliable than better made items but just because something is expensive doesn't always mean it's good. There are far too many companies who rely on developing brand name awareness rather than producing innovative and original designs. Meanwhile there are companies who started out making cheap copies and have gone on to produce items better than the original manufacturers.

 

Edited to fix spelling