WYSIWYG

[adamtrb]

Hello all!

 

I have been looking into WYSIWYG and its relevancy to design in entertainment as a dissertation subject for my degree.

How do designers and programmers feel it aids their process or conveys their ideas?

Obviously there is a much bigger CAD world out there than WYG, including sophisticated photorealistic 3D software so please share your feelings!

 

Whatever your opinion, feel free to get up on your soap box…

 

Many thanks,

adamtrb

 

adamtrb@yahoo.co.uk

[Neil Frazer]

Cats opend 3 months ago with a very tight production schedual. Due to this we used Wysiwyg to preplot the show. Basically this involved using the CAD functions to produce a 3D plan and then connecting up a Hog II to plot effects and a basic cue structure. Without this we would not have got the show plotted in the time allowed. This is definatly not a toy and Cats is not the first show to do this, Forbidden planet and Saturday night fever to name but two.

 

However I would use Autocad over Wysiwyg if I was just producing a plan and much prefer Lightwright for Paperwork.

 

Flying Pig are currently integrating Wysiwyg and Hog III to give visualisation and Patching functions and ETC have, for some time, had the Emphasis control system that gives visual feedback on a plan of faulty dimmers and movers and patching/visualisation functions.

 

Once again. NOT A TOY!

 

For more info see www.flyingpig.com and www.etcconnect.com

[adamtrb]

Hey take it easy! It was just a tag line!

 

I totally agree with the brilliance of pre programming and I use WYG for all its paperwork and photometric capabilities.

 

What I’m trying to discover is whether it has any design worth. Can it assist a designer in making the right choices? Is it useful in a design meeting? Does it help information flow between designers? Is it being used by individuals as a stalwart of their process or is it still the reserve of Production Companies with investment capital?

 

Please keep responses coming

 

adamtrb

[Neil Frazer]

My apollogies. I didn't mean to go off on one.

 

I don't know of any designers thet use Wyg for anything other than preplotting or system paperwork.

 

Most designers that I have worked with just try things live and change them if they dont work. but then most of the designers I work with are old school.

It would be nice to see the technology embraced by designers but (not wanting to open a can of worms) don't you think that it takes away some of the personal touch of design?

 

Neil

[adamtrb]

!POP!

 

There it goes, I personally couldn’t imagine designing a show in a dark room with only WYG and my MP3s for company, but I would imagine there is a point where old and new methods meet and the technology begins to advance practice. I’m not sure if involving CAD in the early stages of design will ever be beneficial but I’m interested in hearing people’s perspectives especially when it comes to this technology gelling various designers’ concepts together.

 

adamtrb

[Piers Shepperd]

I've worked with Autocad for many years now, and I've noticed a fundamental shift in how its used for design.

 

When I first started using it (1993) it was used for creating lighting plans with very little use in set design. To my knowledge the two main advocates in my industry were Mark Fisher and Jonathon Park.

 

Over the years Autocad has changed from being a presentation device into being the basis on which all large shows are designed and built. The design process has had to become more streamlined to allow a design to go from concept to reality in the shortest possible time.

 

This pressure on time for many reasons (venue hire, crew, equipment hire, catering etc etc), means that the time a production spends in rehearsals has been greatly compressed. This is because during rehearsals there is no profit being made from audience etc.

 

Products like Autocad and Wysiwig and especially email, have allowed the production team to communicate ideas and concepts at a far higher level of detail than was achieved historically.

 

Upsides

1) Design speed. A a complete production is often modelled in 3d, before any scenery is built and then these models can be sent to each discipline (sound, lighting etc), so that they can check / design their worlds around it.

2) Cost. I find that most production managers are keen to try and get as many problems resolved first in cad world before they commit a concept to the real world (because its relatively so much cheaper).

3) Tiime. Cad and Wysiwig allow productions a huge security blanket in terms of planning, and I firmly believe that the time it takes to create a production from concept to reality has been greatly reduced.

4) Accuracy. Things should fit and the use of angle grinders should diminish!

5) Presentation. Many people struggle to understand how a plan and section view of a production will look in reality. A good 3d view can explain a complicated concept very quickly.

 

Downsides

1) Changes. Due to the speed that changes can be made to a concept, some designs change so often that it becomes difficult for members of the team to keep current. i.e. the freedom that cad gives allows productions to become embroiled in hundreds of changes as each member chips in their little piece of advice - this takes time.

2) Over ambitious. Because cad allows you to draw things at speed, its very easy to generate designs that are way too ambitous for reality. I've seen some very large sums of money wasted, because although the cad plan worked, in reality it became too difficult for the crew to handle.

3) Technology divide. If you can do email then you're ok, but I regularly work with people who don't really do email, and struggle with receiving attachments etc. This is difficult but I believe that creative people should be employed on a production for their creative skills. If they can't get to grips with the technology, that is my problem not theirs.

4) File compatability. I still see a huge range of people running different cad versions on PC's and Macs, and Wysiwig. I spend far too much time converting drawings from 2d to 3d and vice versa, and then into each individuals particular file version.

5) Skills shortage. There are many people who can happily create rough drawings using a cad package, and many people who can use Autocad (from other industries). There are a very small number of people who can use Cad / Wysiwig productively and also have experience of the technical production industry.

6) Cad driven rather then concept driven. This is a hard one, but in my experience cad / rendering can be used to create any design that can be drawn conventionally on paper.

There is always a great temptation to design something that is easy to draw in cad, rather then design something that satifies the design brief.

 

 

As for the future, cad / wysiwig is here to stay, but there will be more emphasis on video / animation.

Over the last few years many productions would simply not have been possible given the time constraints and budgets, without the use of cad.

 

 

Anyway that was maybe far too much information,

 

Ho hum,

[Paul J Need]

I love WYG. Been using it for about a year now, and frankly it is a great toy AND a great tool!. It speeds up ( once you get into gear with the functions) the entire design process. It also allows one to spend time playing with "what if" scenarios in a 3D textured world. One of the things I would hate preparing a plan in the "old fashion" way was the rest of the paper work required to accompany the groundplan, it of course produces all the paper (floods of it if required) for you.

 

What it can't do however is:

-1- Choose the right angle, colour, position, lantern, gobo, "look" of the show and tell you how to use focus the rig when the crew would rather be in the pub!!!!

 

-2- Replace the design process.

 

I see it a little like other software such as Steinway, it is a great tool for a composer or musical arranger........ but one still has to know where to put the notes?!

[Grum]

I use WYG at an installation company, I find the ability to take architects plans and build the venue in 3D then put in the sort of rig I'd want if I were working in the venue. From this I then have kit lists to complie quotes with, and all the other report information. I also have plots and renders (that I turn into animations) to show the client. I have found that WYSWYG helps me work quicker and while some people may find this method of working a little unusual it does work and when I eventually leave said installation company I intend to purchase a copy for myself.

 

Grum.

 

P.S.

 

While I'm on the subject, the only thing I wish WYG would do is help me to produce system schematics. (just in case anyone from CAST is reading)