Welcome to Electronic Theatre Controls Sign in | Join | Help

2 Scene or not 2 Scene

I've been hesitating to blog on this - but I think it is time. There are a couple of threads on this in the ETC forums.

In the near future ETC will have to cease making the Express consoles. These desks have been a mainstay of our console sales for over 10 years with over 14,000 units in the field. We have multiple problems with obsolete parts that we have been sourcing from unsavory characters for years. We are simply coming down the line toward extinction of the species.

When we developed the Ion desk as a derivative of Eos, and specifically with replacing the Express in mind also, we specifically determined that we were not going to support 2 scene operation. Why? Why would we abandon something as reliable as 2 scene which has been a mainstay of our product line? We decided it was time to move on. I'm not going to argue whether the decision is right or wrong - I'll let others do that and welcome them to do so. But I will tell you why we made the choice.

Why?

There are many reasons. We decided that we had an opportunity and an obligation to help move the entire market forward. The very nature of the Move-fade and LTP operation of the Eos system made 2 scene difficult to wedge in. These two things just don't go together well. When you wedge things together you make compromises.

We determined that 2 scene was in fact far less reliable than a memory desk, especially when the number of faders exceed a 'reasonable amount" and when students were doing the presetting. We know from our own experience that some educators like to teach 2 scene operation to lighting students - but that most acknowledged it was only for teaching purposes - primarily historical. We provide 2 scene operation on the Smartfade console - so students can still see what it was like when "we had to work during shows."

A very typical High school system has 96 or more dimmers these days and managing that size system on 2 scene is not really recommended practice. One broadway lighting designer we know well insists that two-scene teaches nothing but bad lighting practice and begs us to please proliferate a proper movefade-LTP-tracking philosophy to everyone we can reach.

We had learned that while lots of faders made teachers comfortable at the high school level and beyond - that the students instantly moved on to programming sequences and that generally speaking they were ready for even more. We looked at where other industries were going - audio for instance - and clearly they had moved beyond manual control as their primary offerings. With digital memory systems becoming standard fare in audio we felt that it was also time for a lighting company to move forward.

We decided that we were that company. Now I am interested in your views on this - I just want to say our piece. You may have to put up with some of my pontification on the subject!

The fact is that we feel that moving the lighting art forward is one of our duties, goals and joys. We have observed all the signs that the user base (even the high schools) are prepared to move forward and we also know that we as a company are prepared to deliver the solutions that make that movement happen. One of the primary things holding them back is fear. Fear by teachers - fear by resellers that the teachers can't handle it - fear by manufacturers that they won't buy it.

When I look at the history of lighting control I can see the clear movements that make this progression natural and logical. That doesn't make it easy. We knew that the decision was risky. We knew that some people would disagree and that we might lose some business as a result of the decision. But we also looked back at companies that chose to cling to the "established tools" and ultimately suffered. 

What does this have to do with drill bits?

Companies that sell drill bits don't actually sell drill bits. They sell holes. If people need large holes - they need new ways to provide them. If people need really accurate holes or lots of holes - they might find a bit less attractive. If a company introduces a laser hole maker - the market might flock to it. If the capability to solve real problems is at hand and the company does not deploy it - they risk the fact that someone else will. At the same time - they can choose to deploy the technology and help move the entire "hole" market to a new place. People will someday say - "remember when we used bits for every hole? Man, that was weird. I sure am glad Black and Decker invented these laser drills." Could this happen in lighting? It clearly has before. There are no more 5 scene presets, there are no more patch panels - dimmer per circuit is standard, even FOH patches are disappearing. So why is 2 scene a protected species?

This syndrome of "the technology is available but not being deployed" is apparent in Automobile gas efficiency. This was story with typewriters. Animation arts migrated to countries willing to deploy newer technology and Korea is now the home of animation.

And what about things that cannot be presetted?

I can't stand on a trade show floor without someone asking me "What about ETC and LED's?" We recognize that this is a technology that will eventually change the industry and our business model. Many strategic meetings at ETC involve a drawing that looks something like this on a whiteboard. It graphs the reduction of tungsten and the increase in "other." Along the tungsten line also falls dimming, Source Fours and other ETC mainstay products. Along the "other" line falls LED's, Automated lighting, video and things we haven't even thought of yet. Imagine the role of preset desks in this world!  Presetting is a very dimmer centric philosophy. I'm not under-cutting the primary role of dimmers mind you. We sell lots and would like to keep doing it.

There are many other examples of technology leaps that were brought mainstream and benefitted the whole of people using them. High school students that learn tracking and LTP operation will be that much more ready for college. The large productions high schools are now doing will benefit from accurate cues and repeatable transitions. The deployment of products that handle movers and LED's will create larger markets for those products and proliferate them down into the high schools.

But enough from me. I think ETC's position is clear, whether it is right or wrong, I want to hear from you.

2 scene or not 2 scene? That is the question.

David Lincecum

Published Monday, June 16, 2008 7:47 AM by dlincecum
Filed under:

Comments

# re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene

When I started working part-time as the TD at the Stoughton Opera House and doing a lot of lighting on their Express 24/48 I anticipated that I'd use the 2-scene mode quite a bit - it's a small house with not too many instruments and the kind of small rental shows that cycle through there seemed to me to be a good match for 2-scene operation, even though I hadn't used 2 scenes since a lab show or two during grad school.  

As it turned out, I don't think I ever ran a show there in 2-scene mode in the whole 2 years I was their TD. For show with a repeatable outcome, memory was much better (of course), and 1-time shows were much easier to run on all 48 faders configured as submasters, especially when I was running sound at the same time.

Interestingly enough, even given that experience I still had a knee-jerk negative reaction when I started reading your post, but I think the decision is an important and correct one - thanks for laying it out like this.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008 5:17 AM by cori

# Control/Dimming To scene, or not too scene; alas poor Express... - ControlBooth

# re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene

In 1991, in the "star policy" room of the Golden Nugget Las Vegas, we used our Kliegl Entertainer almost as often as the PerformerIII.  "Top row=channels, bottom row=submasters (looks, presets)" works great until one needs

a) more than 48 channels, or

b) "other than dimmer" attributes.

Back then I proposed an Expression and LP-2000 with an HTP merge box, which luckily never happened.  Today the room is running a grandMA.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008 7:46 AM by derekleffew

# re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene

Hey David,

To be honest, I always thought of 2-scene boards as light switches.  They were used at Penn State for Stage Managers and actors to bring up a preset of lights.  Which you now can do with the enhancements of the architectural systems.

In my life, I have never run a show in 2 scene mode.  I've always programmed in cues and ran the show off the "Go" button.  If you made a mistake, you handled it on the fly.

We did a practicum at Penn State, running a 128ch 2 scene wall, in the "old" road house to see how unpractical it was to run a show with many dimmers.

I'd also like to point out that when I first joined ETC, I always wondered why the BLOCKED EXPRESSION had so many faders.  My first ETC style console that I loved was the MicrovisionFX.

In Wisconsin, they say "Move Forward".  

T.Ro

Thursday, June 19, 2008 9:19 AM by tromain

# re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene

The only time I ever put the Express into 2-scene mode is to train people on it's operation.   Everyone in my experience that uses the faders at all uses them to make their look onstage before recording them into subs or a cue.  

As much as I love the Express/Expression/Impression/MicroVision, it's a shame that because of it's popularity so many young designers were not exposed to an Obsession syle tracking command line desk early on in their careers.   It's a difficult transition to make, and people who can't or won't make it limit their career path in my opinion, and possibilities of their art.  

A budget version of a command line desk from ETC was a long time coming.   Ion is a fantastic offering and the response from customers has been universally:  WOW!   And hey,  if you still want 2-scene preset there's Smartfade.  

Friday, June 20, 2008 3:21 PM by lynn

# re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene

I’m very much in the camp of die-hard Expression user who loved the ‘good’ Idea board and the Express. I never made the full transition into command line with the exception of how to train new users on an OBSN.

I have generally been of the option that ETC should maintain a 2-scene board but over my last 3 years in Germany I’ve learned that technology moves forward and one needs to be open to new ways of doing things….So I learnt the basics of Congo as well as doing a show on ION. Getting this under my belt, as well as working with some young apprentices, it became clear that the younger generation and new users take to the new boards like fish to water. If you’re an usher in a church and you get a new ION…you learn how to program it while being blissfully unaware of what you are missing in a 2-scene board. The only problem seems to be us old timers (is that really me?) who think that new, up and coming users need a 2-scene mode.

~ Mike  

Saturday, June 21, 2008 7:58 AM by mmeskill

# re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene

"The only problem seems to be us old timers (is that really me?) who think that new, up and coming users need a 2-scene mode."  True old timers learned on resistance dimmers and ATDs, and are comfortable with tracking consoles.

Sunday, June 22, 2008 11:37 AM by derekleffew

# Lighting Control Education - re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene.

Perhaps it's time to move on from the 2-scene (or 2 Preset in the UK) as one of the basics of stage lighting education.

The concept of individual channel control can be easily grasped by using a memory console, command line or fader-driven.  Crossfades too.

There is more information for beginners to take in and not all the "old stuff" will be that relevant to future lighting.  But some concepts are still fundamental to understand.

In the heady days of cheap moving lights, LED's and media servers, I hope that us "old timers" focus on the important basics that have seemed to slip from the agenda of the new generation.  Things like understanding angles, reflection and being able to focus a decent general cover.  The actual business of using a 2-scene is less important when compared to these.

Best Wishes

Thursday, June 26, 2008 5:46 AM by OnStageLighting

# re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene

David:

In 1971 Ampex Audio Products in Redwood City were looking for a product manager to head up a project to develop a 48+ track tape recorder for the Beatles.   Seems that one didn't exist and Ampex had been approached to solve the problem.  I was involved in developing a computerized lighting control console at Colortran, had decided to leave for greener pastures, and a head hunter sent me to interview at Ampex.  

For some reason Ampex had not thought of computerizing audio controls.  It was always done manually by console operators. When I suggested computerizing the process during the  interview, they were fascinated.  Suffice it to say I wasn't hired, and about 5 years later the Audio products group closed.  So much for the tooth fairy.

Best regards,

Tom Pincu

Tuesday, July 08, 2008 3:22 PM by Tom Pincu

# re: 2 Scene or not 2 Scene

I feel that educators want to believe that their star pupil(s) will someday work for a prolific production company, regional theatre, or even on Broadway.  The reality is, there are enumerable venues that only have a 2 scene preset control board.  I hired a student of a colleague for a small show when I was overbooked and got the phone call with the question:   “Where are the record and cue buttons?”  These venues will hopefully one day upgrade to some type of memory console.  It’s more likely they will stop producing before they upgrade anything, but I digress.

I support these two thoughts.  Yes 2 scene preset should be taught (even if it’s not on an ETC console), and as the technology moves foreword so should we.

Brian Carter

Thursday, October 16, 2008 9:36 PM by SBC
Anonymous comments are disabled