Posts Tagged ‘lighting’

WestWave Dance Festival – Pictures

Monday, March 7th, 2011

Last November I lit a showing of the WestWave Dance Festival in San Francisco. The evening consisted of a selection of shorter works, averaging 15-20 minutes in length, by five different choreographers.

Festivals like this are a ton of fun to light. Not only do you get to work with a range of amazing people, but the styles of choreography are so different that they each demand a very different approach to color, intensity, movement, and atmosphere of the light.

Below are several images from the different works shown that evening.





Et choreographed by Andrew Skeels



Me No You choreographed by Robert Dekkers



Full Moon Syndrome choreographed by Erika Tsimbrovsky


Colombia Chasing choreographed by Brittany Brown Ceres



So You See… choreographed by Lisa Townsend

All images courtesy David DeSilva

Moving Problems

Monday, January 24th, 2011

I just had a phone call from my ME for an upcoming show. Good News and Bad News. Good News: The theater has a larger inventory than we initially thought. So we can return most of the rental. Bad News: He spent a huge amount of time shopping the rental around to various houses to make it under budget. More Bad News: a lighting position needs to be moved because the venue will not allow it to be where we had previously got clearance to place it.

The two biggest constraints when designing are what lights do you have access to and where can you put them. In fact that is design, placing lights in useful positions, pointing them in useful directions, and turning them on at useful moments. Without the proper information it becomes near to impossible for us to do our job. If a designer can not do their job effectively it means more work for everyone and no one ends up happy.

On the question of inventory, being off by one or two lights is no big deal. In fact, I know of plenty of venues which hold back 2% or so of their inventory such that when the designer inevitably uses every light available to them and then needs to add a special, they can do so easily. But 60% practically is your inventory. Two dozen lights is another full stage system of crosslight, or backlight, or two systems of frontlight. It is the difference between “oh, well this will work well enough” and “Fantastic, this will work perfectly.”

We are always overcoming handicaps. There is never enough money or time or crew. It is always a tight squeeze to make it to opening. There is no reason at all to make it more difficult by not updating paperwork.

The issue of position placement in this case was not a paperwork concern. It was a venue guidelines concern. At one point a scenic wall was located such that I had access to place one boom. And that was fine. After a few discussions we decided that opening up the wall to allow a mirrored boom on the other side would be advantageous to the look of the show. And so we did.

The operators of the venue decided that, because the scenery was no longer obstructing the main curtain, they would rent out the space to corporate clients on dark days and tell them they had access to the main. Which they wanted. This, of course, was discovered after the drawings were submitted and the design complete.

A few days later I am told the booms need to move. In the rush to figure out a solution they end up placed in an inelegant location. On top of that, the larger inventory includes a larger house rep plot which impacts several other lighting ideas I had placed in other locations. So the quick fix move of a boom to a box boom, doubly impacts some other lights which can’t be hung as drawn due to rep plot concerns.

For me, the impact, until focus this afternoon when I actually survey the carnage, is a few quick drawing revisions and a couple of phone calls. For the ME it is hours of work and labor, along with the other electricians who also have to move these lights twice.

Further, because several lights are essentially moving to where there is room rather than where they want to be, there is a fine chance they will need to move again at focus or during notes sessions. This is unfortunate.

Had all of these factors been known clearly in advance the design would have been quite different. Had the use of sidelight truly been impossible, as it is proving, I would have used diagonals. Had I known about the additional rep units, I would have made different choices with regards to systems versus specials in the plot. With different angles, my color choices would have been different.

In short, I would have submitted a different design.

While the result we end up with will, I am sure, be perfectly serviceable for the show, it is a less than optimal situation. Making theater is hard work. There is no need to make it harder through unclear communication and out of date paperwork.

Dancers are people too

Monday, November 15th, 2010

There is an assumption that a lot of people make with dance lighting that somehow, because it is dance, we can ignore standards of beauty for lighting people. The range of colors which look good on human skin are actually quite narrow. Pale lavender, pale amber, clear incandescent light, and daylight. Anything much more saturated than this and skin tones start to look, well, inhuman.

I have seen more than one person, when seeing a color like L126, say something like “ooh there’s a dance color,” as though the medium itself somehow justifies making humans look like glowing neon space aliens.

These colors can be quite striking and bold. They can be beautiful and the right choice in the right moment. But to assume they are somehow “dance colors” is to unnecessarily limit one’s thinking when approaching dance.

Strong color can be a powerful tool in dance. Especially in modern dance, where there is little to no scenery, color becomes a primary element in the visual storytelling of the piece. Yet when we are lighting the human form, such colors are, more often than not, ugly.

The skin of a dancer is no different than the skin of an actor, or an opera singer, or a CEO. It looks alive and vibrant in the same range of colors and looks sick and dead in similar ways. Magenta, green, yellow, and even dark blue, all have their place, but are in no way inherent to dance.

I remember reading a letter to the arts editor of the San Francisco Chronicle years ago criticizing an SF Ballet piece. The critique said something to the effect of “with all these new lights available like LEDs I am at a loss as to why Ms. Tipton lit the entire piece in white light.” The implication being that because one could use color, one should use color. There was no thought that perhaps one of the greatest living lighting designers in the world had something else in mind.

Dance is not about color. Dance is about the emotional expression of the human experience through movement. It is movement that defines dance. Perhaps it is the, often, non-literal nature of dance which leads people to assume that wild colors are the best and only solution. But that line of thinking does a disservice to the dance itself. It takes one’s inability, or more likely unwillingness, to engage with the work on its own terms and uses that as justification for a bold lighting scheme.

A green dancer, unless they are supposed to be an alien, or perhaps the embodiment of jealousy (and even then I would be wary and probably let the costume tell that story), is not beautiful. It might look neat but it does not do the dancer justice. We must approach our use of color in dance from the point of view of making the most beautiful work possible. If we just want beautiful and colorful light we can go do installations. In a collaborative art form we are responsible for making all our collaborators work, and this includes the performers, look as beautiful as possible.

Angle, far more than color, brings a dance to light. Sculpting the form in space, engaging with the kinesthetic being on stage, is what truly makes a dance. Sidelights are typically used, not because they are “dance lighting,” but because they treat the human figure with a sculptural focus that is unparalleled by other lighting angles.

Shins and Mids, typically with bottom cuts off the floor, allow us to light a dancer without lighting any of the surrounding environment, wings, cyc, or floor. Head-His, while grazing the floor still keep most of the light on the dancer and off the rest of the space. As we move vertically we get a stronger lighting hit on the floor, and consequently bounce on legs, cyc, borders, and other elements that are not dancers.

When using color, one would do well to consider these facts of how different lighting angles light different things. One could light the dancer in flattering colors for skin tones and still make strong, bold, color choices in the backlight or cyc lighting. This way one creates a whole world of color in which the dancer floats effortlessly. The colors on the dancer can then be very flattering to their particular skin tone without negatively impacting the designer’s impulse towards a strong and bold use of color.

Powerful and vibrant colors have their place in dance lighting. They can be an amazing way of communicating strong emotions to the audience. The use of color must come from within the dance. It must not be an arbitrary imposition from the outside. Discovering, and then revealing, the inner truth of the movement, is the job of the lighting designer in dance.

Lighting Dance in the Digital Age

Monday, November 1st, 2010

Most everyone I know would agree that the ideal way to light a work for live performance is to see at least one run through prior to hitting the stage. Even under very short schedules and tense conditions this one rule of thumb is typically met. Every so often you encounter a situation where, despite everyone’s best intentions, it is not possible for the lighting designer to see a live run prior to tech.

I am now in the midst of just such a situation.

Next week, I am lighting a dance festival. Due to a combination of scheduling issues I will be unable to see the pieces live before tech. Ten, even five, years ago this would have been a bit of a problem. I’ve done it, so I know it’s not impossible, but it sure is not easy. Fortunately, there have been a handful of technology advances which make this current situation, while less than optimal, not even approaching a disaster.

Let’s look at the old model first to see how this would have been done just a few years ago.

The pieces average around 10 or 15 minutes each with 45 minutes of tech per dance. This gives time to run each piece twice with notes in between runs. Prior to the run, I would have written a handful of placeholder cues ahead of the rehearsal. Then, when time came for the tech of a particular piece, we would have run it while I modify the placeholder cues as the dance happens. During the notes we would discuss my lighting approach and I would make any desired changes, give cue placements to the stage manager and run the piece a second time, further refining the cues.

Cueing of this model is unfortunately common in the dance world. While it is far from perfect, it works.

These days we have all manner of technology at our disposal to bring us closer to an ideal situation. In this case, each of the six companies will video a rehearsal of their piece, upload those videos to Youtube, and send me the URL. I will see the pieces, though small and digital, before we hit the stage.

While I will not be able to see the pieces live before the show, there are some discrete advantages to this model. By having the piece on video I can pause, rewind, and restart the piece. Thus instead of trusting my notes from a single pass, I can get more detailed information about the choreography.

This in no way should be a default substitute for seeing a piece live. While a good addition, and a fantastic solution to my current conundrum, there is nothing like seeing a live body move through space. Video, certainly rehearsal video, is incapable of capturing the nuance of relationship between dancers or the connection of a performer to their audience. What video is very good at is capturing the shape of a choreography.

It would be a shame if video became the default means of lighting dance or other live performances. Video, however, is an invaluable tool when schedules collide and disallow a lighting designer from seeing the work he is soon to light.

I once heard the line “Anybody can light a dance they’ve seen. The real trick is to light one you’ve never seen.” attributed to lighting designer Sara Linnie Slocum. It is with all thanks due to modern technology that I will not be putting that line to the test next week.

Design Software – Fall Preview

Monday, September 13th, 2010

As designers in the 21st century it is hard to imagine anything more fundamental to our work than the computer. The software we use to turn our ideas into designs is central to the work we do. Having played recently with Maya I have been thinking a lot about software and its role in design. While anyone with any degree of creativity is not bounded in that creativity by the tools they use, when you have the right tool for the job, the work becomes a lot easier and imagination is given freedom to roam unfettered.

There are some really exciting developments happening in the world of CAD this fall. The two of most interest to me are Vectorworks 2011 and AutoCAD for Mac. Vectorworks has long been a cross platform tool and the default drafting tool for theatrical lighting designers. AutoCAD has only ever played a minimal role with lighting designers and has been absent from the Mac since 1992.

Let’s start with Vectorworks. Information is a bit slim coming out of the company. What is known comes from a series of vague videos posted to their YouTube channel (Clip1, Clip2, Clip3). While the full range of of features remains unknown to the public, the direction they are moving in is very exciting.

The 3D environment looks to be vastly improved. The previously laborious 3D interface now appears to be a state of the art intuitive UI. Earlier versions of Vectorworks treated 3D space as an extension of 2D space. From their videos it appears that VW2011 3D space has been wholly redesigned as a native 3D environment. This is very good news.

Not only has the 3D working environment seen a massive upgrade, but the rendering engine is new as well. Renderworks is now based on Cinema 4D by Maxon Computers. This brings Vectorworks up to the cutting edge of 3D rendering technology. With the drafting precision we all love about Vectorworks and increasingly intuitive user interface combined with this massive upgrade to its rendering engine, Vectorworks is firmly taking a step towards being a competitive player in the 3D software world well beyond its conventional arenas of live entertainment, engineering, and architecture. I don’t know how popular the software is with game developers now, but I would imagine a substantial increase in that market with this release.

The next exciting development comes from Autodesk with their announcement of AutoCAD for Mac.

I have not used AutoCAD since it’s 2001 release when I was at San Francisco Opera. Having come from a Vectorworks background I found the logic behind the software a bit difficult to wrap my head around. Still firmly rooted in its early 1980′s command line mentality, AutoCAD 2001 was a very foreign language to me. The new software looks to be quite different. Being a new build of the program based on OSX from coverflow to a Mac style UI, the advances look to be very promising.

Not only does the visual layout of the UI look good (as a designer I want my working environment to reflect good aesthetic principals) but the 3D rendering engine looks beautiful.

I would honestly be surprised if AutoCAD made the developments necessary to really gain a foothold in the world of theatrical lighting. I will certainly keep my mind open to the possibility, but last I knew AutoCAD the difference between an AutoCAD block and a Vectorworks symbol were so far apart as to make them an ultimately useless comparison. Unless and until AutoCAD has an object type comparable in scope and functionality to the VW symbol it will never be a goto program for lighting designers.

All that said, it looks like a beautiful program for all other manner of draftsmen. In fact, I am waiting excitedly to get my hands on a copy of the software and see what they have done with it. AutoCAD for Mac looks to be very exciting indeed.

Providing a Mac platform for its software was not enough for Autodesk however. AutoCAD has also developed a line of mobile applications for devices like the iPad. This move will be wonderful for architects and other designers to share drawings and renderings with clients. Allowing the client an interactive experience rather than the static experience of a JPEG or PDF will be a boon to designers, engineers, and architects around the world.

It is an exciting time for software in the entertainment industry. Not only is the basic drafting technology improving at a rapid pace, but the 3D environments are becoming both common and easy to use. That ease of use will allow 3D to move from a nice to have to a need to have as both rendering and modeling time drops substantially.

All these new developments have me excited. What software are you looking forwards to?

Lighting in Maya – Naturalism

Monday, September 6th, 2010

30 days is just enough time to get a basic familiarity with a computer program. Certainly when exploring it in one’s spare time between other projects. I began by working my way through the getting started guide to Maya 2011 and then moved on to my own projects. I knew I wanted to try my hand at some naturalistic lighting but did not have the modeling skills to get the level of detail and control that I would like with a project.

I contacted my friend Deb who used to work with Maya professionally and she offered to build and texture a scene for me. I drew a rough 2D layout in Vectorworks showing the groundplan of the scene I wanted. A street that Ts into another street, brick buildings, windows on the right hand side and a warehouse with steel rollup doors on the left. I wanted streetlights as I knew I would light the scene at night. Basically everything was there to show off different lighting ideas from streetlights to bare bulbs to fluorescent tubes to the headlights of a car.

Below is the opening frame of the animation.

A few seconds in a 1963 Jaguar rounds the corner and drives down the street. The light from the car scrapes against the various walls and textures creating a lovely effect.

It was an interesting experience to manage all the various ways in which light can exist in a 3D world. Obviously there are the rays of light emanating from a source. But it can be decided by the designer if those rays cast shadows or even if they stop when they hit an object. The headlights, streetlights, and lit windows all had an added feature of glow. Just because a light emanates from a source does not inherently mean that source glows, even though it would in the real world.

One of the most interesting aspects of this project for me was dealing with the rate of decay of a light. At one end of the spectrum a light can have no decay meaning its intensity continues unabated over space. Obviously we know from the inverse square law that this is not the case in reality. But in a 3D environment we need to trick the software in order to look real. The light from the sun, for all practical purposes, should have no decay in a digital environment. A fluorescent on the other hand should have a very rapid rate of decay. The sodium vapor of a streetlight, or an incandescent bulb, would land in between these two.

I often find myself, when working on a theatrical production, trying to fake naturalistic lighting conditions. Yet no matter how much it is faked I am still using real lights. As such they behave like real light should behave. In a digital environment like this, one has control over every aspect of physics. As such you can explore what parameters will make the illusion most accurate.

My license with Maya 2011 is up just in time for the new release of Vectorworks 2011 on September 14th. From what I have seen, VW2011 has added some amazing new features to its 3D environment. I look forward to exploring these new features with the 3D knowledge I gained in Maya.

Lighting in Maya – Skies and Clouds

Monday, August 23rd, 2010

I have been working with a trial version of Maya over the last few weeks teaching myself basic animation and 3D lighting techniques. In my first week I reconstructed an image from a show I lit several years ago. This past week I tried my hand at animating a little scene. Even simple animation is a wholly new skillset and takes a lot of concentration to make even moderate gains.

This past weekend I shifted to somewhat more familiar terrain, skies and clouds. While the 3D medium is new, I have been lighting sky drops for years. The basic set up included a white translucent rectangle for the sky and some clouds made of nParticles (Maya’s objects that recreate realistic clouds, smoke, and water). Once I got a cloud formation I liked, I stopped the animation at that frame and began lighting. What follows is the same exact cloud formation altered only by changes in the intensity, direction, and color of the light used. The big revelation for me was that because this is a 3D environment I did not need to leave the sky drop as a passive object but rather could have it glow as well as be lit from the front and through from behind. I must admit, I felt a little bit like Neo from The Matrix realizing that the laws of physics are provisional at best.

The above image was lit as close to a true recreation of natural light as possible. The sky had a light blue glow to it and a single light shone and refracted through the clouds to illuminate them. One thing I found particularly interesting was that by simply shifting the colors, angles, and intensity I could invert the image above into the one below. Thus the Cumulus clouds of the above image are transformed into Cirrus clouds below.

Some of my early attempts used a lot of lights since I began from my background in stage lighting. As I worked with the scene I kept taking away more and more lights and found that far from diminishing the image, the quality and dynamism would improve with fewer lights. Some ideas required the use of numerous lights. The image below has a set of lights for the lavender horizon to give it some slight color variation and several lights at the top to light the higher sky in green tones. The clouds too had a variety of lights pointed at them to give a nice range of color and tone.

More directional sunset effects like the one below obviously required multiple lights in order to get the desired effect. But I found multiple lights to be difficult to work with as they quite easily blew out and over exposed the clouds themselves.

The ease of moving and refocusing the lights in a virtual environment makes experimentation fun and easy. In a real world setting it can take a lot of time, effort, and manpower to move and refocus a single light. In virtual environments like this is takes a couple of seconds. Be the interest naturalistic effects like the above or moody more abstract looks like below, lighting in virtual environments gives the designer a wide latitude in terms of what is available to them.

Lighting with Video

Monday, August 16th, 2010

The last show I lit had a lot of video. The set, with the exception of a table and two chairs, was comprised entirely of moving video screens. Four in total. The show, having a lot of comedy, wanted to be fairly brightly lit. Solving the technical issues with the lighting was enough work for one show. Then I had to make it look good and follow the emotional currents of the piece. Quite a challenge, but par for the course when it comes to heavy video pieces.

I have worked with video in quite a number of pieces over the years and have learned a lot from it. Successfully navigating heavy video pieces requires a clear and precise craft approach to the design. If video is a major component of the piece, the director, choreographer, producer, and video designer probably want to actually see it. And see it well. As such our first job is keeping light off the video screens.

Avoiding direct light on the video screens is easy. You have the majority of the lights pointed along the axis of the video screens and take upstage cuts off the screens. Typically, and as was the case in my recent video adventure and my working assumption for the rest of this essay, that means a lot of sidelight. However, that is often not enough for a full show, in my case a three hour opera in four acts.

I began with my sidelight systems. Three color Hi-Sides and three color booms (Head-Hi, Hi-Shin, and Lo-Shin). The Hi-Sides, while the ideal angle for the piece, present an interesting problem at a craft level. Because the light hits the floor at such a steep angle it bounces off the floor at a similar angle. The result is a noticeable increase in bounce light on the screens. I needed the Hi-Sides for the piece. Due to the difficulty of avoiding bounce light, I chose to put then at a fairly acute angle as pipe-end fixtures fanning out rather than at a consistent angle across stage. The booms proved very useful as only the Head-His hit the floor. Their angle was such that the bounce light impact on the screens was minimal.

While this solved midstage and upstage, the downstage was quite a curious problem indeed. We had two screens at the proscenium line, one stage left and the other stage right. These were backlit screens, each made of RP and about 15′ across, that singers would perform in front of. There was nowhere to put low booms DS as the only slot available was also an entrance. The ideal Hi-Side position was not available as there was the proscenium overhead. I ended up lighting the DS area with Box Booms cut off the screens US of them and a single Head-Hi raised up to avoid performer collisions. I was able to carry the colors to these front of house positions and the Box Boom angle ended up being midway between the booms and the Hi-Sides. Less than optimal, but a decent compromise.

Backlight with video tends to be deadly. I had a single backlight system in the plot but almost never turned it on due to the severe bounce light effect on the screens. A few backlight specials were needed throughout the piece but other than that I was unable to rely on these.

Frontlight was necessary, but like backlight, poses serious bounce issues. In this case the basic visibility needs outweighed the effect of slightly washing out the screens. I had to take a very steep angle for the Frontlight and, of course, make all US cuts off the screens. To add a little extra fun to the whole process, the table, midstage center, was covered in clear plexi and up lit. This meant the uplight focus had to be such that it did not catch the US screen and the frontlight focus had to keep the hard bounce off the US screen.

Since bounce light is one of the major concerns it might be obvious, but bears mention, that the lights want to be as sharp as possible. Frost is a wonderful and beautiful thing in many situations. With video it can be horrific. All the sidelights were focused sharp to the shutter (I love that crisp blue edge) and cuts made within less than an inch of the screens. The Frontlights had to be frosted as that lovely blue edge looks a bit out of place crossing a singer’s face. There were several sidelight specials built in to the plot to fill in between openings in the screens where performers crossed from the US systems of light to the DS systems of light.

Not only should the units be focused sharp, but their placement must be very precise. In this case the performers went right up to the screens so the sidelights needed to be as close to the screens as possible. Depending upon the newness of the fixtures it may well be worth your time to clean the lenses of any sidelights as the effect of dust buildup can be as bad as frost.

Color with video is a curious thing. Because the base color of the video is cool I find cooler colors to be more useful. The Hi-Sides were L161, R3202, and CLR. Booms were L161, L201, and CLR. Box Booms were L201 and CLR. Frontlight was L203. The backlight specials were CLR. Big video shows are where the slight difference between CLR and L203 really stands out. The clear incandescent light is very noticeable on the video screens (even during warm cues) while the cooler L203 and beyond, are much less noticeable. This was a bit unfortunate as the tone of the piece called for warmer colors but even CLR proved to be too warm most of the time.

Ultimately working with video is like working with any scenic element. Certain colors and angles look good and certain colors and angles look bad. Obviously the first interest is seeing the performers and the video clearly. As artists we want to move beyond the pure craft aspect and create beautiful works of art. Working with the video and what makes it look good will ultimately serve the needs of the piece as a whole better than ignoring or fighting the video. Not every piece can have that warm amber or soft focused sidelight. But every piece can, within the scenic limitations, be lit beautifully.

Line Lights, Area Lights, and 3D lightboxes

Monday, June 14th, 2010

Last week I was working on a project involving several light boxes. The lightbox design was rather simple; a cube with cutout shapes which would act both as a decorative object and provide some degree of illumination for the event. I wanted to do a 3D lighting rendering in order to both wrap my head around these things as well as have something to show to collaborators. The solution was not as simple as I had hoped.

My first attempt was to construct the 3D versions just like I would construct the actual lightbox. As such I made a 3D black box with the design on the facing cut out. I then added a thin rectangle on each side that I was intending would be the translucent material on the lightbox through which light would shine. Sadly, I discovered that for all of its wonderful work rendering accurate shadows, solid textures, and correct placement of the sun, one thing Renderworks does not do well is translucent materials. This seems like a big gap in an otherwise fantastic program.

Not one to be deterred by technological limitations, I began to explore alternate options for creating the effect that I wanted. While a bit convoluted, I did end up with a reasonable result.

The first potential solution was presented by Kevin Lee Allen. His suggestion was to make the part that in reality would be translucent as a texture with constant reflectivity. Thus, when rendered, the lightbox would have the appearance of a thing that is glowing. While this is a very good solution, and one that would work in most instances, especially for scenic renderings, it did not solve one of my design requirements. I wanted to know both what the boxes would look like as well as what effect their glow would have on the scene. So my search continued.

I started scrolling through all the drop down menus in hopes of something providing me with a clue. Finally something did. A convert option that is new to me, although I admittedly jumped from VW10.5 to VW2010 and this feature may have been in place for years, Area Lights.

Line Lights and Area Lights are intended to provide a look akin to neon or other non-point source lights. They give a somewhat even glow and are fully customizable as per any other light object in Vectorworks. One thing to be aware of with these is they add considerably to rendering time. Even my very simple sketches took noticeably longer to render once I had added an area light. That said, they are a fantastic tool.

Convert to Area Light and its similar option, convert to Line Light, solved my need precisely. Instead of a translucent object that light would shine though, I placed an area light the same shape as the bounce directly in front of the bounce object. I then gave the bounce object an opaque texture. The Area Light then hits the opaque object and bounces off, thus lighting the scene from the lightbox.

While the solution is not technically identical to the real life solution, it does solve the two parallel issues of rendering the lightbox to look as it would and provides illumination from the lightbox onto the scene. From a few additional experiments it appears as though this solution could work for lighting cycs as well.

The whole world of 3D rendering is fairly new to me. It is exciting to discover these limitations of the software and then find more or less elegant solutions within the possibilities of what the software can do. But I am sure there are other solutions to this same problem. Have you discovered them? Please share.

One thing I would love to see in future releases of Renderworks is more accurate translucent texturing. I imagine architects and scenic designers both would love to have translucent curtains that render properly.

Towards an Understanding of Visual Dramaturgy

Monday, April 19th, 2010

The first step to becoming a visual artist is to develop one’s visual thinking. Once you can think visually you can begin to devise an approach to a particular creation. If you are a designer, there is a bit more than just visual thinking that must go on. You must approach the text (be it the words of a play, the movement of a dance, or the music of an opera) as a kind of translator. A translator from the verbal, kinesthetic, or musical into the visual.

Visual translations, like linguistic translations, can occur on several levels either discretely or simultaneously. One of the biggest issues in verbal translation is with poetry in verse. The translator finds themselves with the conundrum of staying true to the literal translation or to the verse or to the “poetic intent.” Any combination of these may be used and each will result in a different translation.

Chinese Tong poetry for instance works with its particular meter because the language it was developed in is tonal with few to no polysyllabic words. Thus translating a Tong poem will, almost by necessity, compromise either the meter or the meaning. And meaning is tricky on its own. The word “Love” in English is a large word that encompasses many meanings. In Greek they have many smaller words each with their own unique nuance. Agape and Eros mean very different things, yet would both be translated as Love, in English.

These problems arise for the designer just as, if not more, strongly than for the verbal translator. Is it more important to literally set the play in a drawing room or should the emotional tenor of the piece be of primary importance? Do we concern ourselves with an exact replica of 4:30 in the afternoon or was the writer’s intent to have a softening of the light? Are the corsets from the period appropriate or is the idea of a woman constricted by social norms of primary importance and thus the corsets should be exaggerated and extreme?

Any number of questions may arise in the pre-production phase wherein these questions can, should, and I would argue, must be asked. We are asking our audiences to spend a not insignificant amount of money and a good chunk of time. Thus it is incumbent upon us to go as deep with the work as we can go. To ask all the questions necessary of good translators such that we may give our audience the truest, to us, interpretation of the text.

Anyone can memorize lines, but it takes a depth of analysis and rigor to be a Marlon Brando. So too can anyone design scenery, but only a mind wholly committed to the dramaturgical rigors of visual translation can be a John Conklin. As lighting designer Jennifer Tipton once said, “only 10 percent of an audience notices the lighting, but 99 percent are affected by it.”

The issues that designers face are not just “details that only they would notice” but the very foundation of the subconscious experience of the audience. There may only be one guy during an entire run who notices that the uniform is two years out of date, but it will color his experience of the piece. And, as live entertainment is a collective and communal experience, it will affect the experience of those near him and ripple out and through the audience. God, as they say, is in the details.

As lighting designers our job is doubly difficult. Not only do we have to reconcile our visual language with that of the text, but we must also integrate it with the vocabulary of the scenery and the costumes. Since our work in many ways comes last, the set is on stage and the performers are in costume when we begin lighting, it is even more critical that we look deeply into the needs of the text and understand the visual language at play before us. Our visual reading of the production design will give us a direction to approach the larger question of translation.

Of course we would have been involved in the design discussions from an early stage in the process, but it becomes critical that we read the work before us anew and note any shifts and changes our translation will require with the addition of the other visual elements. We must stay fresh and in the present. Then we can alter our translation in response to the shifting performance as we move through the text in rehearsals.

It is a balancing act. A four dimensional puzzle that will be completed, one way or another, when the curtain rises on opening night. The audience wants to be transported. For them to be transported we must become translated.


Creative Commons License

All text on this site, unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. All other rights reserved.