theatre And Lighting
How do I connect my laptop to a theater lighting board?
I am using a innovator 24 48 lighting board, and I have bought a ethernet cable to connect to it. I plugged in the cables today and got nothing.
What are you trying to achieve by plugging your laptop in? Do you want to control the lighting desk from your laptop? If so, then you'll need the lighting desk software installed on your laptop - the desk you mention isn't one I'm familiar with (and Google isn't helping me) but I assume that you can get the software and install it on your laptop. You may also need to alter some settings on the desk so that it knows there's going to be signal coming in from the ethernet port. Also, while the desk may have an ethernet port, that doesn't necessarily mean that it has the ethernet card inside it - sometimes that kind of thing is an extra which the board is ready for but hasn't been installed unless it was specified when the desk was bought.
 |
No items matching your keywords were found.
|
No items matching your keywords were found.
| Account limit of 2098 requests per hour exceeded. |
Hanging Theatrical Lighting Instruments
Princess Theatre, one of Australia’s most beloved theatre venues
Regarded as one of Australia’s most beloved landmarks, Princess Theatre hosts world class stage dramas and musical productions like Les Miserables, The Phantom of the Opera, Cats, Mama Mia!, The Sound of Music and The Producers. This theatre is the second building in the same site that was used for entertainment for a period of 135 years. The first building was Astley’s Amphitheatre that was opened in 1954 and the present theatre was opened in 1886 with the name christened as Princess Theatre. The theatre has been refurbished several times after this period and today it boasts as one of the theatres with world’s first sliding roof and ceiling with state of the art electric stage lighting.
It is also said that the theatre is haunted by a friendly ghost named as Federici who died after a performance of the opera, ‘Faust’. As an honour a seat in the third row dress circle is kept empty since it is regarded as a sign of good luck to see him in the theatre. His appearance has been witnessed by many staff in the theatre. This theatre’s grand Victorian style elegant foyer and stairway is compared to that of the Paris Opera. The theatre has a seating capacity of nearly 1500 with other modern facilities for the visitors as well. This placed is also used as the venue for Melbourne International Comedy Festival.
Visitors also have the luxury of dinning in the Melba or Marriner rooms before they visit to see a musical production that takes place in the theatre. While Princess Theatre is the ideal place for a perfect evening of entertainment, visitors also have the luxury of entering into a perfect mood of relaxation at a Spa in Melbourne. One of the best spas would be Chuan Spa Melbourne.
About the Author
Pushpitha Wijesinghe is an experienced independent freelance writer. He specializes in providing a wide variety of content and articles related to the travel hospitality industry.
Hi Lindsay,
Before I begin, a pre-mini-rant: please categorize your posts!
As for your post, I think you raise a lot of interesting questions, but I'm not sure if there is a single overriding question here or a handful of related ones. But let me take a stab at a few things.
First, although I certainly do not believe that the distinction between the linearity of film versus interaction is nonsense (clearly it is not!), I do believe that it is overrated (this issue comes up a lot of game theory, usually to justify dissing narrative in favor of rules–the position known as “ludology”). But I believe the emphasis on linearity is exaggerated, because linearity only inheres in the film itself. Yet the viewing of a film, and the meaning and experience derived from (i.e., the phenomenological dimension of the film) is not as pristinely linear.
Certainly linearity remains an important component (assuming, as one should not, that the film is viewed theatre-style, from beginning to end, in one uninterrupted viewing). Of course, we often re-watch films, experience them transmedially (Henry Jenkins has an essay about the dissemination of the Matrix across media and the fact that the films were not self-sufficient or hermetically enclosed; obviously the Harry Potter and LOTR films were aided by legions of fans of the novels), view their sequels and prequels, view them after we've seen their trailers and/or because a certain actor is in them, skip around by chapter and alternate endings/scenes on DVD, and so on. Regardless of how or where we experience films, we also interpret them, and we use our own embeddedness in culture to help us do that (prior knowledge of genres, actors, story types, settings, visual styles, topics, directors, and so on).
In short, it is not hard to show that the phenomenological experience of a film is quite non-linear, unless we bracket out everything but a single, “pure” viewing that to my mind just never seems to happen and can't be the right unit of analysis.
Second, you ask whether we establish the meaning of an interaction from the ground up (by studying tasks) or from the top-down (by somehow establishing the meaning of the interaction first and then looking at how that meaning came to be). Why choose? Both approaches give you something the other does not. And in a way it's practically impossible to purely do one or the other anyway. (Any ground-up approach would be informed by your interpretative interests or predispositions about the meaning, which is top-down; any top-down approach would be informed and changed by careful study of the details.)
I hope it is clear that I am not trying to argue with you. Your questions are very challenging, and a serious response to them requires a lot of thought, which is very productive! So thanks!
He's an "individual" just like all the other hipsters.