AndyJones Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I thought I would illustrate Gareth's point with video. The shells being fired are 1" cylinder shells which by a normal pro display standard is tiny, but as this video shows still pretty poky! HTH AndyJones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvenprince Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I thought this year's fireworks display was absolutely stunning. I've never been to it in person, but the quality and the design just far outweighed the displays from previous years. I thought the lighting was a bit dull in comparison to the pyrotechnics, and think that they could probably scale it down to save around 30k! There were some beautiful camera angles; I particularly liked the shot with Big Ben, the steeples of the Houses of Parliament and the fireworks in the background, and the really high swooping aerial shots which really showed you the scale of the event. Though the countdown was poorly done; why do I want to see a kissing couple for a few seconds before the bang?! And why on earth do we need close-ups for a huge fireworks display? I know the need for variety, but it just seems at odds to the design we want to see! It's like having a camera filming a single violinist when you want to see the entire orchestra working together in unison. And I was incredibly glad that they set it to music! It took them far too long to realise that the beats and rhythms of popular music works perfectly with the bangs and lights of fireworks! But overall; it was a fantastic display, and I hope the designer continues to design for London (and the Olympics)! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeStoddart Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I loved it. Even my Mum-in-Law thought it was better than last year. I thought the display and coverage was excellent especially the synchronisation with the music. Very good rehearsal for August 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightsource Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Yep, Hootenanny is recorded about a week before NYE.......apparently they do offer booze to the audience to get them in the party spirit! Just shows how good the show is then :P Get them pi55ed and they'll love it! Personally I switched to BBC Scotland for their Hogmany Show, as Emma's Imagination was a featured act. I Flicked back to BBC1 just after midnight, and saw the firework display. I must say I found it stunning, as others have said, but, nice one BBC for putting a drug use related soundtrack to it! (Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds) Does Auntie really believe that Lucy actually saw diamonds in the sky B-) Me thinks she might have 'taken' something for that vision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandersears Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I must say I found it stunning, as others have said, but, nice one BBC for putting a drug use related soundtrack to it! (Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds) Does Auntie really believe that Lucy actually saw diamonds in the sky :P Me thinks she might have 'taken' something for that vision B-)If you're to believe Lennon (and there's reasonable grounds for doing so, it was pure coincidence. Hmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightsource Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 If you're to believe Lennon (and there's reasonable grounds for doing so, it was pure coincidence. Hmm I won't agree or disagree here, as there is no proof, only speculation, however public perception has to be accounted for, and it is a (rightly or wrongly) held belief by a lot of people that that this song was drug related. Even if it wasn't, a lot of drug users used it as their 'tune'. And that fuels a fire. Writing a song with meaning is one thing, but how the public percieve it is another. Xandersears, that was a good link - Never really delved to far into the song so good to see what others have said. Edit to add, Thank you so much Andy S..... for posting the show costs. Well appreciated B-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Lewis Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Thank you so much Andy S..... for posting the show costs. Well appreciated Indeed - a very useful breakdown! TV reports were citing Friday night's fireworks as costing £1.8m. There might be a few disgruntled people if they saw that the fireworks themselves were a relatively small part of the overall cost... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds is apparently not drug-related - it got its name after Julian Lennon brought home a drawing from school when he was very young, and told his dad that it was of his classmate Lucy, in the sky with diamonds ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Robinson Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I was at the fireworks in London this year. From the ground it was excellent. What you didn't see, however, was that the count-down was a second early. Quick thinking on behalf of the vision mixer. OT, but can anyone shine any light (pun intended) on where the lights were placed for projecting onto the building? I was pretty sure that they were moving heads. Before the count-down clock appeared, there were circles of light projected onto the building. They couldn't have been on the ground directly in front of the building as they wouldn't have given a circle of light, but they didn't seem to be anywhere on the other side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 A second early by whose watch, Matthew? The fireworks were taking their timecode from the atomic clocks in GPS satellites, so I think I'd trust them to be firing at the right time ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvenprince Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 From what I saw of the projection building before the digital countdown, the moving circles just looked like another part of the projection; rather than moving heads. But I was just watching it on TV, not in person. And Gareth; I think he means the projection countdown being triggered early, rather than the fireworks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Robinson Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 A second early by whose watch, Matthew? The fireworks were taking their timecode from the atomic clocks in GPS satellites, so I think I'd trust them to be firing at the right time ... Nothing to do with the fireworks- the crowd started counting down a second early according to the clock projected onto the building. E2A:From what I saw of the projection building before the digital countdown, the moving circles just looked like another part of the projection; rather than moving heads. But I was just watching it on TV, not in person. It's a distinct possibility. To my eyes, the count-down looked like 14 well programmed moving heads. But the problem with the angles still remains, unless there was some serious key-stoning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LXbydesign Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Id like to add the same. The fireworks were amazing this year. Timing was spot on, very well synced to the music and a fabulous show. It was also f***ing loud! ** laughs out loud ** Lighting was a bit of a damp squib though. I know its not meant to be overuling the fireworks and has to take a backseat a bit - but come-on!!, your telling me that nothing visually exciting can be done before and after the show? Why couldnt a few 5kw space flowers and a load of Bad Boys be specced. I think they should just lose the movers in the eye pods. Would save a lot of hasstle and could spend the money on something more visual. Sky Trackers, 5kw moons and some Bad Boys and prehaps a couple of lasers would do the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martinman Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I was at the fireworks in London this year. From the ground it was excellent. What you didn't see, however, was that the count-down was a second early. Quick thinking on behalf of the vision mixer. OT, but can anyone shine any light (pun intended) on where the lights were placed for projecting onto the building? I was pretty sure that they were moving heads. Before the count-down clock appeared, there were circles of light projected onto the building. They couldn't have been on the ground directly in front of the building as they wouldn't have given a circle of light, but they didn't seem to be anywhere on the other side? Hi Matthew, You are correct, the countdown is projected using well programmed Clay Paky Alphabeams. I think the explanation regarding your "circle of light" might be something as simple as a digit shaped gobo in each fixture ? As for the angle of projection, I don't know for sure but I can only assume that due to the fact all projected segments in each digit are the same size, and angle.... the movers where simply positioned directly in front of the biulding, nearer the eye than the building though of course. Hope this has "shed some light" ;) Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_s Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Thank you so much Andy S..... for posting the show costs. Well appreciated Indeed - a very useful breakdown! TV reports were citing Friday night's fireworks as costing £1.8m. There might be a few disgruntled people if they saw that the fireworks themselves were a relatively small part of the overall cost... Glad you liked it, it wasn't too difficult to find, I simply googled "how much do the London NYE fireworks cost?" or words to that effect ... My point was to show that you get what you pay for - we do see the occasional post along the lines of "For our production of WWRY, we have to spend all our budget of £50 on radio mics: how can I do the set and lighting and stage management and costume and front of house and transport and projection and so on for no money?" (To which the real answer is "don't do WWRY", but generally people do try to put it more helpfully ...) anyway, shame we don't all get that kind of money to play with, my budget for kit to fully equip 2 performing spaces in a brand new theatre building with sound, lighting and other technical kit (admittedly 5 years ago) was about the same as went up in smoke in 8 minutes in 2009 (but I'll grant you it did look very good, and even better in 2010) It's not clear whether the figures for sound, lighting and fireworks are complete packages, including design, staffing, transport, etc etc, or for materials only... I would assume the former, but wondered whether they were materials only, with the other costs included in the very large project management fee. Also, no mention of VAT - I guess the figures probably are inc. VAT, but perhaps it's reclaimable?? after I posted these figures, I saw the thread elsewhere to which people have contributed lighting plans: I'd be interested to see a similar thread with examples of budgets, but I won't hold my breath: much more commercially sensitive ... :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.