SDI Record and Multi Mode playback

[litemover]

" If you think about all the disappointed people"

Huh? What? Huh? Not the story of the users coming into HES. I appreciate very much what you have done for Catalyst but truly your experience with the DL-1 itself is very limited. We had one job together I believe where DL-1s were an afterthought (not your fault) and they were used shining on some dark oak. Almost every major lighting designer today that has used them has been VERY happy. Just a few includes:
Jim Tetlow
http://www.highend.com/news_events/n...asp?news_id=97
Marc Brickman
http://www.highend.com/news_events/n...asp?news_id=87
Andrew Dunning
http://www.landrudesign.com/

Again whether you use an 18k projector or a 5K projector is based upon screen size. Most designers are opting to use multiple projectors with multiple servers.. such as 4 DL-1 with two Catalyst servers instead of one 18K projector. This gives much more creative flexibility. AND.. YES.. I would not have thought that moving a conventional video image (not graphics) would have been something that special. But I have personally found that moving a conventional video image and ALLOWING it to distort to acute or obtuse angles is very creative. Not all images need to look "video". This is in part the reason for "digital lighting".

I used to think that it was important to keystone correct when moving an image.. not anymore depending on the look you want. I used to think that moving a video image might look cheap.. not anymore.. when a video image is moved from one location to another depending on the programming and the emotion involved it can be very powerful to the audience.

NOW.. as far as the Catalyst being involved with Digital Lighting advertising... I could try to change that.. after all it is a video server.. but then it is controlled by a LIGHTING desk. Maybe HES should advertise with "VidLighting" or something.. water under the bridge.

Christian as you know I really appreciate your creativity and work..(very much) but one day with the right application you will program a show with multiple DL-1s or something similar. You can then choreograph movement, movement crossfade, moveable scrims and screens, fades and video editing all at once. HES will be there for you.

For me the art of digital lighting involves the best of straight and technical video with the creative aspects of lighting. Three pixels.. thousands of pixels.. out of focus.. soft edge.. keystoned.. inverted and inside out.


Richard Belliveau

Bravo Richard,

Huh? What? Who? - That is hilarious, you remind me of Homer! I'm glad to see that there is someone there that is actually making a concerted effort to market the DL-1 intelligently and with passion. Keep up the good work, I hope it is starting to pay off now.

A couple of things though, and I don?t mean this to discourage you only to help you.

A) Whether you realize it or not, you still have a lot of convincing to do, There are many designers you don't know who wouldn't even consider spending a huge part of their budget on DL-1s and who think they really aren't worth it (I'm not going to name names or list websites for the obvious reasons). I'm sure you understand that the reason that designers are able to afford Catalyst and a bunch of 16 or 18k lumen projectors with screens, or huge 10mil video walls is that the projectors, screens, and LEDs are already budgeted into the production, they're already there. The lighting designer's budget is not affected by the addition of projectors. Catalyst is a negligible cost to the designer, especially for the added flexibility you will get by using it. Even the production of content and in some cases, the entire Catalyst budget falls under a separate budget than the lighting does. When you introduce the DL-1's, this falls under the lighting designer's budget because it is considered a fixture. It's a hard sell when the production already has 6 Lightning 28sx projectors and a bunch of huge screens. Why do we need these things the producer asks?

By the way, your statement that most designers are opting to use multiple projectors with multiple servers is true; however, lighting designers don't often have final say on how may projectors they use and in many cases they have no say whatsoever. This is entirely up to either the production designer or director/producer. Your added example of "such as 4 DL-1 with two Catalyst servers instead of one 18K projector" is entirely unfounded and not true. I don't mean to be picking on your words here but you've got to realize that while this may pertain to a few designers you know, this certainly does not encompass the entire lighting designer community, who for the most part is very new at projection, and saying such broad unfounded statements makes you sound like a used car salesmen; doesn't help your cause much and I mean this in the nicest possible way. Go far with your marketing strategy but not that far, those in the know would think you were insulting their intelligence by saying something like that. I myself would absolutely prefer a single 15'x20' screen with an 18k projector over 4 DL-1s. If you watch any TV awards shows or specials at all, look at all the productions that are using 18k projectors with huge screens and Catalyst or EX-1, how many DL-1s do you see on those productions? Though there may be the odd TV production that has tried them, it's still very rare to see them. For one thing, you cannot stack DL-1s to create a brighter image because of their inaccuracy to hit such a precise alignment mark, if you could do this you might see more DL-1s being used over an 18k projector. If you improved the accuracy of the pan and tilt to always hit the exact same mark enough to always re-align the convergence of multiple units, you might have something to that statement, but currently not.

B) You must contain all of the negative reviews that representatives of Highend have to say about the DL-1, which seems to be more than just a few individuals, again of which I won't name names or list websites. I guess people will say what they think and if they think that the fixture is garbage, they aren't going to hold back their opinions and recommend buying or renting a bunch of them. This alone has cause irreparable damage to the product's image and has not helped with the stigma associated with the DL-1.

Richard, lighting designers are going to either going see it or not. My guess is that with the right representation, they might see it, but as you put it, I have very little experience with the DL-1. For all I know Richard Bleasdale could be right in saying it?s as dull as a 200 watt light bulb. For all I know, lighting designers could agree with the programmers that (Yes I personally know them too) question why Highend is peddling such crap.

As far as "digital lighting goes", go ahead and call it what you want, I get better results when I call it a video server, then people have some sort of reference and they don't think I'm trying to call video lighting... Unfortunately, the politics in the TV world are vastly different to that of touring whan it comes to Video.

I wish you the best.
Christian Choi

[richbell]

Hi Christian,

Thanks for the input. I appreciate your thoughts and experience about budgets and today?s separation between video budgets and lighting budgets. However what I can tell you is that in many parts of the world (including USA) the DL-1s are being specified within video budgets quite frequently.

Most Catalyst sales (over 85%) accompany DL-1s. Your style is large screen video on shows.. and it is very wonderful... however as you know there can be more than one way to do things when it comes to design.

Of course I appreciate your opinion very much. You may soon have the opportunity to see a multiimage show programmed with 8 to 12 DL-1s in your area or the invite to come to Austin always stands. As of yet I don't think you have seen the product in use the way I describe.

BTW.. the DL-1 won a staging award at Infocomm and even those stone cold AV guys had there heads turned to a new way of thinking.

Give me a call if you would like to talk. I am not sure if I will have the time to post here often.

Richard