Evaluation

 

Rigging
I believe that the rigging session went very well. We managed to complete this over just 2 nights with relatively little stress or inconvenience.  I feel that the team of first year riggers listened to me and followed instructions clearly which sped up the process.
The speed of the session was also quick due to the organisation and layout I had planned. I split the riggers into 3 teams. One team of three that would put up lights and help guide the tallescope. A team of 3 to cut and select relevant gels, and another team that would line the lanterns up in relevant piles according to which row/bar of the rig they were hung on.
This was a system that I had come up with to ensure that as soon as one light was hung, a second could be hung immediately after and we wouldn’t have to search for and organise them.
The only thing that I feel could improve was the amount of riggers in a team. Although three are required for operating and manoeuvring, it didn’t take this many to select and gut gels however. So it was often the case that certain members of the rigging team were left with nothing to do and often distracted other members that could be doing something constructive.

Focussing

Focussing also went well as the team of first year riggers listened to me and followed instructions clearly which sped up the process. The lights were focussed over one night and was completed on time for tech and dress runs to begin.
Similar to rigging, there were too many people. As only 3 riggers are required for manoeuvring the tallescope and actually fitting the lights, many people were left with little to do and this again lead to distraction among the group.

Plotting and Tech Runs

I feel this went well as the first year operators listened carefully and followed instructions, allowing each piece to be plotted quickly and effectively. With regards to the actors/directors of each piece, they knew what they wanted and seemed pleased with how the design applied to their piece and I believe that each play/scene was lit appropriately. For example, party scenes were lit like a party scene and scenes set at night were lit to create the illusion of moonlight.

The only thing that could have been improved were the listening abilities of certain members of the group as it was often the case that once a lighting state had been plotted, they were not programming it into the Jester lighting desk before plotting the next state. Therefore we would often miss out a few cues and needed to go back and re-programme these. However once realising the mistake, the team did fix the problem quickly so little time was lost during these sessions.

The Performances

I feel as though the performances went very well, and were lit appropriately. Each group got what they wanted from the lighting and all actors could be seen on stage when necessary. The lighting was made relevant to each piece and either created the desired naturalistic effect (for example Night time or day time or A small cosy lounge) And also the use of semiotics worked (for example  a red wash crept in when an actor discussed her hatred for another character.

I do feel however that the 4 spot lights that were used could have been focussed better. As the profile lights were rigged further away from the space, the spot was very large and not very crisp, therefore the front and back spots began to blend. If I were to do this again I would have the profiles hung just above where the actor would have been stood to make a crisper and more defined spot for the actor to stand in.