Field Notes: An Interview with Media Designer / Director Jared Mezzocchi

During the early days of the COVID 19 pandemic, I was at home writing my new book The Projection Designer’s Toolkit . One of the few perks of the complete shutdown of our industry was that we all had a lot of time on our hands, and it allowed me the opportunity to engage in a series of interviews with some of the top names in our projection / media design field. I was lucky enough to interview dozens of different designers, programmers, engineers, and assistant designers as part of my research. Many of these interviews found their way into the book as a collection of field notes, giving the rare opportunity to see a snapshot of the state of our industry in this moment of time. As is often the case in publishing, some of this work had to be omitted due to boring things like layout, page constraints, and deadlines. This week, I am happy to share with you one of these wonderful interviews that unfortunately could not be included in the printed text. This interview, with Jared Mezzocchi, covers a wide range of information from his background, to his work with students at the University of Maryland, Jared’s ground-breaking work of creating live theatre presented on virtual platforms, the connection between directing and design, and much more!

Jared Mezzocchi is an Obie award winning director and multimedia designer, playwright, and actor. Mezzocchi’s work has spanned all throughout the United States at notable theaters such as: The Kennedy Center, National Sawdust, Arena Stage, Woolly Mammoth (company member), Cornerstone Theater, Portland Centerstage, South Coast Rep, HERE Arts, and 3-Legged Dog. In 2016, he received The Lucille Lortel and Henry Hewes Award for his work in Qui Nguyen’s Vietgone at the Manhattan Theatre Club. In December of 2020, The New York Times highlighted his multimedia work on a list of the top 5 national artists making an impact during the pandemic. His work was also celebrated as a New York Times Critic Pick on Sarah Gancher’s Russian Troll Farm (Co-Director & Multimedia Designer) where it was praised for being one of the first digitally native successes for virtual theater. Currently, Jared is creating a new work through his mini- commission at The Vineyard Theatre in New York City entitled On the Beauty of Loss. In addition to this, he is writing a new book, A Multimedia Designer’s Method to Theatrical Storytelling, which will be released through Routledge. He is a two-time Macdowell Artist Fellow, a 2012 Princess Grace Award winner, and spends his summers as Producing Artistic Director of Andy’s Summer Playhouse. Outside of his artmaking, Jared is an Associate Professor at The University of Maryland and the CEO of his production company, Virtual Design Collective (ViDCo).

As a theatre artist, your work stretches across a number of disciplines from projection design, to directing, and playwriting. Tell us a bit about your background and how you came to have such a multifaceted career?

I started as an actor when I was very young and continued acting well into my time in NYC. It was the end of high school when I picked up a video camera and started to edit short films together for assemblies. When I got to Fairfield University as an undergrad, I double majored in Theater and New Media: Film. As a theater major, I studied acting and directing with a few courses in playwrighting. As a film major, I studied writing, filming, editing, and directing. My sophomore year I started to explore how to incorporate my film work into my theater work and by senior year had written and directed a full-length multimedia production called The One Stoplight in Hollis which was about the loss of my father during the same week my sister had a baby. The production had pre-filmed sections that actors jumped into. The stage was a purgatory while the 3 screens were 3 different cameras angles of a singular memory. Back in 2007, this was operated off of 5 DVD players that were all sync’d up. 

This production got me accepted into the MFA program at Brooklyn College in 2007, for a degree in Performance and Interactive Media Arts (PIMA). There I learned coding and programming for live events as well as a depth of education in performance art of the mid-twentieth century. 

While in school I was hired as a Video Programs Designer with Big Art Group, while simultaneously a Projection Designer at a club in SoHo called Santos Party House, owned by Andrew W.K. In both of these jobs, I was exposed to performance art and live video manipulation for immersive events. I took all of that improvisational and experimental practices back into traditional theater making and have been shapeshifting as a director, writer, and designer whenever I see a great opportunity to explore multimedia in live performance. I am actually about to return to acting with my upcoming new work SOMEONE ELSE’S HOUSE, at the Geffen Playhouse. This is about a haunting story from my family’s past, which I am writing, designing, and performing. 

Over the last decade I have been hired as Artistic Director of Andy’s Summer Playhouse, the children’s theater I grew up performing in. I also am an Associate Professor at the University of Maryland in their MFA Design program. These employment opportunities have shifted my goals as an artist to include making space for other experimenters and disruptors of traditional performance. 

I don’t think I’ve ever enjoyed being within a category. I get bored when I find myself replicating the same process of artmaking, and so flipping my discipline is a way of expanding my muscle as a total artist. By changing my discipline, I constantly interrogate processes of generating work, which informs other disciplines I will ultimately return to. Particularly, though, I love live performance. As a filmmaker I was never satisfied with having anything “in the can” as they say. Placing multimedia into live performance is a commitment to mortality, I believe. It stems back to losing my father while in college. To be able to write, direct, design, and mentor allow me all of the opportunities to explore a form that I love so much.

I know you head up the Projection Design program at the University of Maryland, College Park. What are the important skills that you are drilling into your projection design students and in what way do you find teaching informs your own work as a designer?

To be as fast as a lighting designer and as agile as an actor! By this, I simply mean you have to know how to collaborate in real space and time with your collaborators. To me, being a good designer is knowing what tools are most effective for your artistic vision and mastering the needed techniques for that specific design to be flexible in the space so that a collaborator can be inspired by what you are delivering and simultaneously be invited to shape the event with you in real time. It’s like acting, in a way. You have to know how to arrive equipped for the scene and you have to have the technique to listen and respond in real time to the tactics that your scene partners are engaging you with. 

Be as fast as a lighting designer and as agile as an actor!

Jared Mezzocchi

Like acting, technique is an ever-growing muscle. So to have an opportunity to exercise that muscle in a classroom is really exhilarating to me. I also hold my classroom like I would a collaboration lab, where everyone in the room has equal footing and we are all investigating unknowns. 

Secondarily, like acting, I have my students think of their design like a scene partner. Like any actor would prepare, the choices must have a super-objective (an overall “want” throughout the show), objectives (“wants” within each scene that help you get closer to achieving your super-objective), and tactics (actions within each beat of a scene that actively pursues your objectives and super-objectives). When you start to create desire and intention for your design, that breathes life and response through the actions onstage, you will inevitably find theatricality and dramaturgy within your design. 

Since the COVID pandemic put everything on hold for so many theatres and theatre artists, many projection and media designers shifted towards creating online performances. I know you did a lot of experimentation and research around media tools for creating live online performances. Your production of Russian Troll Farm, which you co-directed and designed,was particularly well-received as an exciting new foray into this realm. Can you tell us a bit about your work in this area and how it might affect your future work?

With all of the work since the COVID Pandemic, I have committed myself to exploring what it means to be creating live on a virtual platform. With my first few projects, like Russian Troll Farm in October 2020, and my very first project She Kills Monsters in May 2020, we generated all of the work live and performed it live to a viewing audience. With She Kills Monsters, we performed it once and had nearly 5,000 viewers tune in. In that performance, we livestreamed the zoom meeting in gallery view and coordinated the actors to turn on and off their cameras, as well as use custom built snap camera filters that supplied masks, foreground overlays, and backgrounds. This show is about Dungeons and Dragons and served the zoom aesthetic really well. 

With Russian Troll Farm, I wanted to take it a step further and implement the software Isadora into the performance. For this, I didn’t want the viewer to feel like they were on zoom or that the actors were using zoom as their stage. This required a lot of cinematic and television research and development within Isadora. In time, we created a live cinema event that utilized thousands of video cues, many of which were operated like a TV studio. We held the actors in a gallery view on zoom and used Isadora to screen grab each of their zoom boxes and mixed them together into one cinematic composition in Isadora. This allowed us to place actors in the same space, cut between several shots, as well as create montages with overlays of pre-filmed video alongside live performers in real time. Because of its complexities, I ended up operating the show’s video design during all 5 live performances. It felt more like a conductor with their orchestra because I would cut the scenes differently every night, following the actors’ energies. If I saw one of the actors exploring a response to something differently, I may choose to cut to their reaction a few more times to track the humor of it. It was exhilarating and live and totally responsive to the performers telling the story.

Since then, I’ve also explored filming sequences in real-time, adding effects to the performance in post-production. In these circumstances, I would commit myself to a one-take with the actors, so that the edit wasn’t augmenting the actors’ singular performance, but instead adding a little extra style to the stream of it. I might not have thought of this as live back in May, but I definitely feel the liveness when watching and intuiting that the actors are performing that scene without stopping. The term “Liveness” has sort of re-invented itself to me during this time. 

It may come across as stubborn, but I believe myself to be a theater researcher, first and foremost, and I believe that a defining factor of theater (as opposed to film or tv) is that our storytellers tell their tale without stopping. By committing to that fact, it forces the entire creative team to strategize very differently than making a film. All solutions must be in real time. And I’ll tell you, the fear in most producing organizations is PALPABLE. It seems like everyone is afraid of doing anything live online. They fear the seemingly insurmountable number of variables that could fail the endeavor. Then comes along a few organizations that believe in it, and those are the organizations I want to celebrate right now. This is not the time to be a low-budget film studio. This is the time to scream to the masses that being alive is a challenging thing, and yet here we are and we are proud of that mortal fact. I think the fear of failure is completely valid, but – to me – that makes me want to double down and still leap into the theatrical abyss to see our techniques come alive. Theater has survived so much for so long, it seems only natural to challenge the form at its core right now. So many unexpected outcomes could occur in this experimental moment. In every project I’ve worked on I’ve learned something new about theater and community building and liveness. 

I’ve even worked to design a memorial with 700+ visitors who joined a Zoom to celebrate the life of their friend and colleague. We built several breakout rooms with slideshows and guest books and film screenings. We had a live eulogy with the family in the main zoom room, which used Isadora to live design their service. We had family visitations for friends to catch up. We had private breakout rooms for long lost friends to bump into each other and have private space to catch up. The theatricality of such a digital space was SO enlightening to me and taught me so many essentials to caretaking for an audience. I will never take ushers and front of house staffers for granted EVER AGAIN! 

All of this is to say that this time period has greatly impacted me as an artist. When in a theater space, there is no negotiating. It must happen without stopping. Here in the virtual space, you have a choice, and so it really makes you interrogate the form of theater and what makes it essential to the human condition. Again, at its essence, theatre is a celebration of mortality, not a fear of it. Film, TV, and other digitally made forms, are more of an immortal identity. They get created and can be distributed in that exact form, forever. Those forms have an art object that is distributable. Theater does not, it is temporal and is created and consumed at the same time. This, to me, amplifies the impossible dream of theater making. It’s so challenging, and yet we do it. It tells us that we, humans in constant decay, can still create something powerfully composed, intentionally live, and eternally memorable. That’s legacy making, at its best. Coming out of the pandemic, I am more certain than I’ve ever been that theater is my native form as an artist. I couldn’t be more committed to it than right now. 

What are some tools or processes that you use to get from the idea stage to communicating your design?

Live tests. I’ve struggled for years to pre-visualize through storyboarding. This has been a real challenge for me in collaborations. It’s not that I didn’t prepare them, but instead I would become frustrated that the idea is not conveyed correctly in a still image on a computer screen or printed page. Through this struggle, I have been able to name that what I think I offer most is not in the content, but in the form and function of the design. 

This goes back to what I teach: Super-objectives, Objectives, Tactics. If a scene isn’t working with the actor, you don’t cut the scene. You dig deeper into the character analysis and conflict and tactics being used between the scene partners. Similarly, with design, I don’t want to get to the tech rehearsal and see that a piece of content doesn’t work and therefore gets cut. Instead, I want to acknowledge the content isn’t fulfilling the objectives and tactics agreed upon during the pre-production process. In exploring these concepts, it’s less of a binary conversation about the cue. It’s no longer a cut/keep dialogue, but instead a re-commitment to the objectives and character development of the media so that the team can sculpt new content to increase the efficacy of the media’s presence and intent onstage at that moment.

Therefore, my most effective moments are doing live tests prior to the tech rehearsal. Just like actors in a rehearsal room trying out different ideas and observing how their actions rev the engine of the story or stall it, I want to experience that with design too. This also is the language of your director and collaborators. I find when I start speaking in media terminology, it becomes a foreign language with the team. It is our duty as multimedia creators to learn the language of the form. Sit in on rehearsals and learn how your director and actors are speaking to each other about the conflicts and characters of the play, and start to craft your own language in the same way when speaking of media. 

Yes, I still pre-visualize my work and send samples to my collaborators, but I have grown to put significantly more currency in the objectives and intentions of my media-as-character. Why does media enter? What does media want when it is on stage? Does it get what it wants? How is it responsive to the actions on stage? Why does it exit? Sure, tactics will involve media-centric ideas like saturation, speed, blur, scale, angle, composition, etc., but these are the tools of the media, just like costumes and props are the tools of the actors. Everything must have a reason to be on the stage and exist in the manner it exists. Using this language will only solidify its reasons, and therefore clarify its impact to the total work of art as a member of the ensemble. 

You have a background in directing and playwriting, as well as design. In what way do you find that these experiences shape your collaboration and workflow?

Each of these roles has a different proximity to and control of the live event. I love how playwrighting is an exploration of the interior of a play’s design, written months and years before it plays out in real time. I love how directing is an exploration of delegating and inspiring visual design to others from a seat in the house, observing its life in repetition over the weeks of development leading up to its emergence. I love how design is a singular journey in the trenches of storytelling that has significant impact on the stage picture being consumed by the audience. Each of these disciplines offer me a vastly different perspective of the live event as a temporal art object. Not one role can see all of its parts, so to have the opportunity to constantly shape-shift my role as a multimedia creator, it has helped me remain agile. As the community of theater-makers continue to evolve ideas around how to incorporate multimedia into the theater, sitting in each of these chairs helps me evolve my collaborative vocabulary and tactics in real-time as well.

Many of the works in your résumé are world premieres.  Can you talk a little about the process of working on a new script? In what ways does it differ from designing a previously produced script? How does the playwright factor into your process?

I love working with playwrights because I think the total-process-of-theater-making involves the development of the script. It’s the forming of a band, and I just am super inspired when the songwriter is within the group. It’s also just so invigorating to be in a room where literally no one knows if the thing we are creating will work. That’s a type of risk that teaches me how to be a better human. Making previously produced scripts also can produce that type of risk too, especially when the team is completely re-inventing the form in which that script is being produced. This isn’t intending to be a comparison at all.  But making new work with a playwright in the room gives an added thrill of re-arranging scenes, writing an entirely new act during previews, or even completely changing the ending. I love being a part of that type of process because you also get to examine really great ideas that just don’t work dramaturgically for that particular show. That sort of experimentation deepens my toolkit exponentially. 

One of your projects, How to Catch a Star, was an adaptation of the Oliver Jeffers book that you wrote and directed for the Kennedy Center. This production featured projection design as a heavy component, designed by Olivia Sebesky. Do you find the collaborative process to be different when you aren’t designing (especially on a media-heavy production)? To what degree do you find yourself involved with the projections (or do you purposefully try to distance yourself a bit)?

Well I think it’s important to name that The Kennedy Center provided us several workshops leading up to auditions and rehearsal. These workshops were for whatever I needed as a writer/director. So I asked to bring in my choreographers, Matt Reeves and Colette Krogol, my composer, Zak Engel, and my projection designer, Olivia Sebesky into a room to devise our sandbox of play. This was before the script was even written. In these initial workshops, we collaborated as co-creators trying to understand the architecture of how we would tell this story. As writer/director, I led with a series of goals and personal impulses that were imperative to the creation of this work. Of course, we also had the book as a skeletal outline but a part of my imperatives was to incorporate characters from several Oliver Jeffers’ books too. So we were blending a bunch of narratives together within a mostly non-verbal journey of body, image, and sound. 

To use the band analogy again, those workshops felt like jam sessions. We each had our instruments and were finding our rhythms and crescendos and naming who was leader/follower within every section of the piece. In those sessions, I found myself more as a writer than a director so that there wasn’t as much of a hierarchical power dynamic and instead I was writer-as-scribe, collecting all of the most inspired impulses to embrace when going away to write the actual script. As I fleshed out the scenes, the DNA of everyone’s impulses were inevitably a part of the architecture.           

This type of rehearsal room is my dream as a director. It allows for collaboration to be less sequential (I have the idea, and you produce the idea) and more conversational (I have a goal, and let’s all establish collective strategies for achieving this goal together). So in a way, it wasn’t just that I was involved with the brainstorming of projection design with Olivia, but instead all of these collaborators, Olivia included, were invested in establishing the story together. This allowed Olivia to not only bring images to the table inspired by the story I was writing, but also allow me to embrace her discoveries within her own process that could evolve the story in unexpected ways.  

I want to build a room that helps leverage designers like Olivia to lead with her own impulses as well and let that inspire the total work of art. By using those initial workshops to establish the architecture of our storytelling, we essentially built a sandbox that had specific boundaries to where we were most compelled to tell our story visually. Then Olivia’s virtuosic talents could improvise within the form and find her own sense of play. Because of the boundaries set at the beginning, the band was able to sustain a jam session throughout the entire process without feeling like we were in our own silos of creativity.

I don’t think I can ever turn off my impulses as a projection designer, and I would be foolish to tell my collaborators that I would do so. I also think our shared understanding of what is possible within multimedia design served as a major strength to the collaboration. That was true in not only the successful moments, but also collaborating together to overcome moments that weren’t quite landing yet. We both were able to see the visual hurdle and come to a solution together. Therefore, everything on that stage was a collective effort that utilized the best of each collaborator’s skills. Olivia Sebesky created some of the most stunning images that I only began to imagine were possible when writing it on the page. I firmly believe that the story held those images so effectively simply because we all collectively nurtured the entire journey together, from its first word on a page through to the final bow. 


Professional Theatre Structures in the U.S. (Part 3 – On the Road & Professional Theatre in an Educational Environment)

On the Road

Obviously, not all theatre takes place in New York City or regional theatres. Another major market for theatre is touring and “out of town” productions. The following section breaks down some of the ways in which theatre is presented on the road, both through presenting new works and touring of pre-established shows. Unlike the theatres we have looked at to this point, most theatres in this section are not producing houses (theatres that produce their own shows), but rather what is known as a road house. A road house (sometimes referred to as a receiving house) is a theatre does not produce its own repertoire, but instead presents touring productions.

The Tryout

New York and London theatre audiences and critics are incredibly savvy and have demanding expectations of theatrical performances. As such, it is often in the producers’ best interest to “work out the kinks” outside of the city before presenting the show on Broadway or the West End, especially with millions of dollars of the investors’ backing to consider. This is the purpose of the Tryout (sometimes called the out-of-town tryout), a staging of a play or musical in a venue outside of the New York or London market in order to identify and work through potential problem spots in the production before bringing it to Broadway or the West End. This assures the producers that the production will be in a better position to receive favorable reviews once it reaches its primary market, without having to present it before local press. It also gives a chance for the show to begin to develop a following and the widely sought after “buzz factor” that is so important in today’s social media-driven society. The Shubert Theatre in New Haven, Connecticut is an excellent example of a theatre that regularly presents tryouts. Historically, U.S. tryouts have been presented in major metropolitan areas such as Philadelphia, Boston, Los Angeles, or Seattle, though this is becoming less of a hard-and-fast rule of late. UK out of town tryouts often happen in Manchester.

Touring: The Broadway National Tour

These days, it is fairly common for a large percentage of Broadway productions to present a national tour following the close of the show, or even during the Broadway run if the show is particularly successful. The Broadway National Tour is a remounting of the original production featuring revised versions of the original Broadway designs and direction in order to fit into touring spaces. This tour travels to major cities across the country. If a production is particularly popular, there might be several different touring companies on the road, presenting in different parts of the country simultaneously. Typically, the tour follows a fast-paced schedule and presents for a short window in one city before heading onto the next. For popular shows, it is also common to see the company have a sit down, a longer or open-ended residency for an extended period of time. It is most often the case that the original creative team for a Broadway production are contractually granted a “right of first refusal” for any tours or subsequent productions of the show using the director or any of the original producers, so it is commonly the case that the designers for the Broadway National Tour are the original designers for the Broadway production. This leads to an interesting possibility of re-designing certain elements of the production to work for a tour while keeping the experience similar for touring audiences. 

A major Broadway tour might use as many as 20 semi-trucks full of equipment. As each truck adds another level of costs, square footage of production elements becomes an important consideration. Since projection equipment can take up quite a bit less square footage in a truck than traditional scenery, some tours have made the move to replace certain scenic elements of the original design with projection, in order to get the original feel while not using as many trucks. This new approach allows tours going to smaller venues to have a much more authentic “Broadway feel” than older touring models. It also gives designers a chance to revisit their initial choices made on the Broadway show and utilize technology that might not have been available at the time of the original design. For instance, for the Broadway production of Dear Evan Hansen, projection designer Peter Nigrini created a design with a combination of projectors and LCD video monitors to create a world that essentially exists inside of the Internet. For the national tour, Nigrini used a newer variety of LCD displays than those on Broadway. By this point, the old screens had been used on the Broadway production for around two years. When the producer saw the noticeable difference in resolution by the newer gear on tour, she decided to upgrade the gear at the Music Box Theatre to match what was being used on tour. While this is something of a rarity, it is a good example of how the national tour and Broadway shows can be interconnected.

Touring: Bus and Truck

Smaller cities and venues may have touring productions that come to town, but for shorter periods of time than the national tour. These bus and truck tours, so-called because of the fact that actors would travel by bus, rather than by air, and the scenery and equipment arrive on a truck. These tours feature greatly reduced design elements in order to aid in a fast load-in and strike, accommodating smaller venues and tight schedules. In contrast to the national tour, which typically stays at one venue for a longer period of time and might even have a sit-down, the bus and truck tours are commonly in towns for a shorter period of time, like a weekend or two. In some instances, there might be a week split between two cities or even a “one night only” performance. 

Professional Theatre in an Educational Environment 

While we have covered many different aspects of professional theatre, there are also many theatre artists who regularly work in educational theatre, as well. When hearing the term educational theatre, many might assume that those involved are either students or educators, but there are actually a large number of designers and stagehands who work in academic environments. Many university theatre programs have or can gain access to gear like computers, software, and projectors, making university theatre programs some of the early adopters of projection design, outside of commercial theatre or larger regional theatres. When looking at the theatres attached to academic programs, there are a number of different models. Some theatre programs have a professional theatre on campus that serves as a training laboratory for students to work alongside professional theatre artists. Currently, there are 13 U.S. universities operating professional theatres associated with LORT. Often, these programs have a professional company in which the faculty are dual appointments with the university and the professional company. Students have the opportunity to work on LORT productions during their time at the university, and possibly work towards gaining their union membership along the way, as is often the case with acting students becoming Actors Equity Membership Candidates (EMC). Still other university programs have not-for-profit, professional theatres connected in some way to their theatre programs without operating under a LORT contract.  Finally, a large number of theatre programs produce their own seasons in theatre spaces on campus as a co-curricular extension of their theoretical training. In all of these different models, faculty members serve in artistic roles themselves, as well as possibly mentoring students through the creative process. In addition to faculty and students, guest artists are frequently hired in to fill out the production roles needed for the season.

Thanks for checking out this short series on professional theatre structures in the U.S. I hope it’s been informative and useful! Make sure to like and follow for more posts like this one on entertainment design and technology.

Professional Theatre Structures in the U.S. (Part 2 – Regional Theatre)

Even though the average person likely thinks of Broadway when talking about the theatre, in truth, Broadway makes up a very small percentage of the professional theatre being produced in the US every year (for our purposes, professional theatre refers to a theatre in which everyone is paid for their work, typically employing actors who are members of the Actors Equity Association). Regional Theatre is the term used to describe professional theatre produced in cities across the country, particularly those outside of New York City. Most regional theatres are not-for-profit, and can be either full union, or a hybrid (using Equity actors and non-union designers, for instance). The term regional theatre can mean different things, depending on the particular organization. There are a number of larger organizations that operate under a not-for-profit model, employing a large staff of local artists, as well as guest-artists from out of town. This level of regional theatre is often referred to as a Resident Theatre.These theatres run a season of shows and own their own theatres or, in some case, campuses. Many such theatres may have more than one theatre space associated with their company. The programming at these theatres varies wildly, based on the mission of the theatre and its organizational leadership. 

What is a LORT Theatre?

The regional theatre movement began in the 1940s and continued on well into the 1960s. At its core, the movement was a response of theatre artists to the Broadway establishment. These visionaries wanted to create professional homes for theatre in communities across the country, bringing high quality professional theatre to local communities, while offering local artists an opportunity to learn, and advance their craft without having to move to New York. In addition, many of the artists of this time period saw the commercial theatre model as antithetical to the ways in which good theatre should be created. They wanted to create local collectives of artists to create new dramatic works, not depend on the commercial Broadway model of theatre that they saw as dividing, rather than uniting artists. The first theatres at the heart of the regional movement were founded from the mid-40s to mid-50s (Alley Theatre in Houston, the Mummer’s Theatre in Oklahoma City, Arena Stage in Washington DC, the Actor’s Workshop in San Francisco, the Milwaukee Repertory Company, the Front Theatre in Memphis, and the Charles Playhouse in Boston). By the mid 1960s, there was a large enough collective of regional theatres that a group was founded to represent these regional theatres, called The League of Resident Theatres (LORT). There were 26 member theatres at its founding, and today there are around 75 theatres that make up the membership. The primary benefit of LORT was to create a collective bargaining group for negotiating with Actor’s Equity Association, the union representing professional actors and stage managers. Over the years, the objectives of the organization have expanded, but labor relations and collective bargaining remains one of its primary purposes. Today, LORT theatres are divided into stage categories (A+, A, B+, B, C, and D). These tiers are determined by box office sales number from the previous four fiscal years before contract negotiation. For some unions, LORT C stages are divided into two categories based on seating size. “A+” stages are LORT stages that are Tony-eligible. 

LORT Theatres typically employ a production staff including positions like scenic carpenters, painters, electricians, sound engineers, costume shop staff, and stagehands. At this point, it is still quite rare to see a professional theatre with a dedicated projections department. Typically, we see projection as a subset of the electrics or sound departments, particularly at the lower tier LORT houses.

FYI: LORT Theatres on Broadway

Even though regional theatres were originally created as an alternative to Broadway theatres, over time a small number of Broadway houses have joined LORT. Lincoln Center Theater, and Manhattan Theatre Club, Roundabout Theatre Company, and, most recently, Second Stage Theater are the LORT member theatres who operate on Broadway under a LORT A+ contract. This puts the theatres in the unique position of having one foot in Broadway and the other in regional theatre. Due to the LORT collective bargaining agreements with theatrical unions, these theatres adhere to a different set of rules than other Broadway and LORT houses, particularly as it relates to wages and personnel. For instance, if one receives billing as a designer for a production, they are required to be a member of United Scenic Artists. This is not the case for a typical LORT production (though, once a designer has worked three LORT contracts, they are expected to join the union before taking a fourth contract). The A+ contract includes rules for hiring assistant and associate designers, including the required rates. In addition, all crew working on a Broadway show must be IATSE stagehands. These various union structures necessitate understanding the rules for what can and cannot be done, as a designer. For instance, while it may be totally acceptable in some regional theatres for the designer to program on a lighting console or media server, it would be a serious infraction to do this in a Broadway house, as this responsibility is relegated to the IATSE stagehands.

Small Professional Theatres

Though there are a good number of LORT theatres, the division of regional theatres with the largest numbers across the country is Small Professional Theatres (sometimes known as SPT, due to their contract name with Actor’s Equity). The SPT contract is a national agreement used in theatres with fewer than 350 seats in areas outside of New York and Chicago. Unlike LORT theatres, many small professional theatres have a small support staff, particularly as it relates to design and technical positions. This means that stagehands, electricians, painters, etc. are often brought in on an “as-needed” basis, and are not full-time employees.

One important distinction between LORT and SPT theatres is the question of union affiliations. While an SPT may be referred to as a “union theatre,” the union in question is Actor’s Equity Association, which is only for actors and stage managers. There is no requirement of union membership for designers, nor typically any collective bargaining between SPTs and United Scenic Artists. If a union designer takes a job at an SPT, it is a “project only” agreement which means the producer agrees to pay into the designer’s USA pension and welfare, but offers no collectively bargained rights or protections. It is common to find that Small Professional Theatres pay designers at a rate considerably lower than that offered at LORT theatres.

LOA and Other Categories

While it is true that LORT and SPT theaters make up the majority of Equity contracts, there are dozens of other categories negotiated through Actor’s Equity, often through different regional affiliations or based on the type of organization (i.e. Chicago Area Theatres, LA Theatres, Disney World, Casino, Outdoor Drama, etc.). Another type of contract, the Letter of Agreement (or LOA) is an agreement which is negotiated between Equity and an independent theater that does not belong to a collective bargaining group. This theatre typically signs an agreement to be bound by the baseline terms of one of Equity’s multi-employer agreements, with some level of modifications that are individually negotiated. As with other Equity contracts, it is important to recognize that the majority of these negotiated guidelines refer to contracts with actors and not with designers or stagehands.

Check back soon for the final installment in this series covering Broadway tryouts, touring, and professional theatre in academic environments!

Professional Theatre Structures in the United States (Part 1)

Every country has its own professional theatre structure and slightly different approaches to the presenting live theatre. Typically speaking, what constitutes professional is being paid for your time, talent, and expertise. Beyond that, though, there are a number of different tiers to what might be considered professional theatre in the U.S. From commercial theatre, to not-for-profit, Broadway, LORT, and beyond, each professional theatre structure operates under a slightly different set of rules and expectations. In this and subsequent posts, we will address many of the distinctions between these different levels of professional theatre and how they compare to one another.

Commercial vs. Not-for-Profit Theatre

One of the most important distinctions between the American theatre scene and that found in other countries is the fact that there is no National Theatre. Unlike many other countries, where theatre is funded to some degree by the state, American professional theatre is largely a private endeavor, separated into different divisions of commercial and not-for-profit theatres.

In the commercial theatre model, shows are produced by a group of investors brought together for the specific purpose of producing a play or musical. Commercial theatre runs are typically open-ended, and can run for decades on end, provided that ticket sales hold up. The producers often rent the performance space for the show, rather than owning it outright. Additionally, stagehands and support personnel are hired in for running the show. Most Broadway shows, touring productions, and legitimate theatre in Las Vegas operate as commercial theatre ventures. 

Not-for-profit theatre, on the other hand, operates quite differently. For starters, most not-for-profit theatres produce a series of plays in a season and present closed runs on productions. Unlike commercial theatre, most not-for-profits own and maintain their own theatre space (or sometimes multiple spaces). As such, they employ a staff of management, technical, and artistic personnel. Since funding may come from a variety of sources, they also do not depend on ticket sales to as great of a degree as commercial ventures.  

While it is true most Broadway shows are commercial ventures, there are some not-for-profits running and operating their own Broadway theatres, such as Lincoln Center Theatre, Roundabout Theatre Company, Manhattan Theatre Club, and Second Stage Theater. These companies operate a regular subscription series and have a different collective bargaining contract negotiation with all of the unions that dictates what rules they must follow, wages, and more. Many of these companies also own or lease Off-Broadway spaces, in addition to their Broadway homes.

New York City Theatre Structure

There is no doubt that New York City is the cultural center of new commercial theatre produced in the US. In many ways, New York theatre operates by a set of rules unique to itself and those who have not worked there may not be familiar with the structure and nomenclature. The following section covers many of the terms connected to the NYC theatre structure and breaks down the different categories of theatres found in NYC professional theatre. 


It is a common misconception that professional theatre happening on the island of Manhattan is Broadway theatre. In truth, Broadway theatre is defined by some fairly rigid parameters based on geographic location and the number of seats in the auditorium. The geographic area, known as “the Broadway Box,” runs from 6th Avenue on the east (Ave. of the Americas) to 9th Avenue on the west, and from 40th Street on the south to 50thstreet on the north. In addition to this area, Lincoln Center Theatre is also included as a Broadway house. In order to qualify as a Broadway theatre, the venue must seat at least 500 people. Numbers of Broadway theatres have fluctuated over the years, due to new spaces being built, remodeled, or repurposed. Currently, there are 41 Broadway theatres, seventeen owned by the Shubert organization, six by Jujamcyn Theatres, and nine by the Nederlander Organization. Other Broadway theatres are either independently owned, owned and operated by not-for-profits, or leased from the City of New York by Disney Theatrical Group. 

Most of these theatres operating inside the Broadway Box are commercially managed, and operate as rental spaces using a “four walls and a curtain” contract. This means that a new production renting the theatre gets the theatre space, itself, and a grand drape included in the rental (though this is often never used). Beyond that, everything else is brought in as a rental – including rigging, scenery, lighting, projection equipment, etc. As these productions are open-ended, the space will be rented for as long as ticket sales remain good, or until other financial or logistical concerns necessitate closing. As mentioned before, commercial theatre is backed by a group of financial investors that funds the costs to get the show up and running. In an ideal world, the production will go on to recoup the funds laid out by the investors, at which point a production is considered profitable. Typically, the theatre owners are not involved with developing new productions, though they might be part of the group of investors for a given production. Most Broadway theatres are members of an organization called The Broadway League, a trade organization who generally promotes Broadway theatre and negotiates contracts with unions and guilds. In addition, the League helps administer the Tony Awards, since only productions mounted in Broadway theatres are eligible to receive the awards.

New York City is known for having a large number of trade unions. This is especially true in Broadway theatres. The union rules for Broadway houses are very different from other venues, even those located in New York City. While there are numerous unions and guilds involved in almost every level of producing a Broadway show, the primary unions involved with theatrical artists and technicians (IATSE, United Scenic Artists, Dramatists Guild of America, Actor’s Equity Association, and Stage Directors and Choreographers Society) all engage in the process of collective bargaining with the Broadway League to create the rules to which all Broadway productions must adhere. These affect a wide range of elements, such as wage scale, work hours, the number of and type of personnel required, royalties, and much more. Except in rare instances, all personnel working on Broadway are members of some type of theatrical union. 


Off-Broadway refers to theatres outside of the Broadway Box on the island of Manhattan, and having more than 100, but less that 499 seats. The Off-Broadway movement began in the 1950s as a response to the cost and commercialism associated with Broadway theatre at the time. The goal was to provide a more affordable venue intended to foster creativity and allow for more experimental productions than those found on Broadway, though in recent years this trend has not remained consistent. Off-Broadway theatres are a blend of commercial and not-for-profit management and are members of the Off-Broadway League, an organization founded in 1959 to “foster theatrical productions produced in Off-Broadway theatres, to assist in the voluntary exchange of information among its members, and to serve as the collective voice of its membership in pursuit of these goals.” Like the Broadway League, the Off-Broadway League negotiates agreements with theatrical unions and guilds, establishing the rules for working in an Off-Broadway house. A number of commercially successful Broadway productions like HairLittle Shop of HorrorsRent, Dear Evan HansonAvenue Q, and Hamilton started their lives Off-Broadway before transferring to Broadway. While not eligible for the Tony Awards, Off-Broadway productions are eligible for a wide range of awards, such as the Obie Awards, the Lucille Lortel Award, the New York Drama Critics’ Circle Award, the Outer Critics Circle Award, the Drama Desk Award, and the Drama League Award. There are roughly 40 Off-Broadway theatres operating in New York right now, though the numbers tend to fluctuate with more regularity than the Broadway houses. 

Off-Off Broadway

If Off-Broadway was a response of the commercialism in Broadway theatre, then Off-Off-Broadway took that notion one step farther as a complete rejection of commercialism and an embrace of experimentation and “art for art’s sake.”  At the time of its creation, many artists believed that Off-Broadway had lost its edge and had made itself into a “Broadway light” model, eliminating experimentation and, instead, simply focusing on productions that were considered unsuitable for commercial theatre. The first of these was The Living Theatre, to be followed by such groups as LaMaMa, Theatre Genesis, and New York Theatre Ensemble. As expected, these productions have much less stringent rule structures and are often non-union structure. If a union designer were to work on these productions, the contract is a “project only” agreement, which guarantees that the producers will pay into their pension and welfare, but offers no collectively bargained rights or protections.

Check back soon for upcoming posts covering regional theatre structures, touring, and professional theatre in academic environments!

QLab as an Accessibility Design Tool

Much Ado About Nothing

Much Ado About Nothing presented at Eastern Michigan University Theatre, 2019.                    Scenic Design: Jeromy Hopgood, Lighting Design: Becca Bedell, Costume Design: Melanie Schuessler Bond, Projection Design: Rachel Tuba, Sound Design: Brian Scruggs, Accessibility Design: Elena Sanchez Flys

It’s no secret that the arts, and live performance in particular, have long struggled with the notion of providing accessibility for patrons with disabilities. Recently, the Eastern Michigan University Theatre program took steps towards providing a more inclusive theatergoing experience with the help of Elena Sanchez Flys, an assistant professor of Arts Administration with a passion for accessibility design.

This season, two of EMU Theatre’s shows (James and the Giant Peach and Much Ado About Nothing) offered accessibility services such as American Sign Language, audio description, captions, tactile tours and programs in both large print and Braille. In addition, both shows offered sensory friendly performances –  special performances designed to create a safe and welcoming experience for patrons with sensory disabilities such as those on the autism spectrum, as well as people with other sensory sensitivities.

Since EMU is the home of the Entertainment Design & Technology (ED&T) major, a number of productions have student designers and/or technicians working on shows. For the recent production of Shakespeare’s Much Ado, the production team featured students in a number of design roles, such as lighting designer, projection designer, assistant sound designer, and assistant accessibility designer.

Becca Bedell, the lighting designer for the production, was tasked with creating a design that addressed the needs for accessible and sensory-friendly performances. One major component was the use of special “warning lights” for sensory friendly performances. In previous shows, accessibility performers had been positioned onstage and used colored glow sticks to indicate various stimuli (red for loud sounds, yellow for bright lighting / strobes, and blue for actions which might create stimulation). For this performances, Ms. Bedell wanted to replace the glow sticks with lights used to splash color on the side walls of the theatre as indicators. Since the warning light system would not be used for every performance, she decided on creating a separate lighting control system that would be independently controlled by a member of the accessibility design team. To pull this off, I worked with Becca to create a QLab lighting control rig, using QLab running on a MacBook Pro, an ENTTEC OpenDMX Ethernet interface, and a small array of Chauvet Freedom PARs provided by TLS Productions Inc.

QLab proved to be the perfect choice for setting up a lighting control system. QLab 4 added Light Cues to its already formidable array of media and show control options, allowing you to control lighting systems over ArtNET ethernet interfaces or certain varieties of USB/DMX controllers. For our system, we connected an ENTTEC OpenDMX Ethernet interface to the MacBook Pro’s Ethernet port and ran a 5-pin DMX out from the interface into the Freedom PAR’s wireless DMX transmitter. With a quick amount of programming, we were able to add four basic Light Cues to send control signals to the Freedom PAR’s – red, amber, blue, and blackout.


The QLab workspace featured four Light Cues, each programmed for a specific function of turning on a specific color of light, or triggering a systemwide blackout.

This lighting system would be operated by a crew member positioned in the theater’s trap room, watching a live audio/video feed of the performance and following along on a marked script (similar to a traditional stage manager). This person had no previous experience in operating a light board, so we decided to create a user-friendly interface custom made for the show that would require minimal training to operate. Once again, QLab offered a great solution to this problem in the form of its Cue Cart function. A Cue Cart allows the user to create a grid-style interface with buttons to trigger cues in the workspace. We programmed three simple color-coded buttons that allowed the operator to click a button and trigger a colored light (red, amber, or blue). The light would stay on until the operator clicked the blackout button, which was programmed to fade out any light in the workspace. Since all of the Freedom PAR’s were addressed to the same control channel, this meant that the operator could easily control all of the lights in the rig at the single touch of a button.


The Cue Cart made for a simple control interface. The fact that each button was labelled and color-coded allowed even a novice operator to quickly feel confident using the system.

We discussed the pros and cons of having a system in which the cue carts would be connected to a MIDI push-button interface that allowed for a pushing a button to turn on the lights and the light turning off when the button was released, but decided on this approach of lights being on until turned off for fear of the operator accidentally creating a strobe effect by bumping the MIDI buttons. The only downside to the method we settled on was a need to turn off the lights by pressing the blackout button each time, but after a quick discussion with the operator we felt this would be the safer approach.

Technology is always changing and giving us new options for problem solving. Luckily, these changes are allowing us to become more creative in the ways that we build inclusive theatergoing experiences. I would love to hear some of the ways that you’ve been able to use tech to bridge these gaps. As always, feel free to share your thoughts!

What’s in a Name? (Projections, Media, and Storytelling)

Skeleton Crew (31 of 31).jpg

Projections for Dominique Morriseau’s Skeleton Crew at the Detroit Public Theatre, 2017. Media Design and Photo: Jeromy Hopgood

For years, I had a collection of stock answers prepared for people asking “what do you do?” I am a professor. “What do you teach?” I teach scenery and lighting for the theatre. That would typically lead to an array of questions that most of us in the arts are used to fielding (yes, people make money doing that). These days, my work has led me more into the field of Media Design. To be honest, I tend not to throw that word around a lot when asked what I do, because the Q & A can become a bit more convoluted. Why is that? Well, to be honest, I don’t think we have really arrived at a catch-all description for what Media Design is and how it fits into the production process.

If you’re new to this discussion, let me recap a bit for you. What is Media Design? In general terms, when people are talking about Media Design (particularly for theatre, opera, and dance) they mean the use of original video content, live video feed, and motion graphics displayed in some way as a visual component of the performance (projectors, video walls, displays, etc). Sound suitably vague? The designer who receives credit for this work is not only responsible for content creation, but often also designs the system that displays the content. In this way, the designer has a hand on the content and delivery of the media for a live performance.


The Threepenny Opera at Eastern Michigan University, 2017. Media Design and photo: Jeromy Hopgood. 

While I used the term Media Design for the field, we often find the artists themselves referred to by other titles, such as the Projection Designer, or Video Designer. In fact, The United Scenic Artists Local USA829 represents their designers under the category called Projection Design.  This can become a little confusing, though, if we’re talking about a show that has lots of video and graphic content displayed across video walls. Is it still projection design if there are no projectors involved?

While we are talking about organizations that speak for a wide range of members, this year marks the the creation of the new Digital Media Commission through The United States Institute for Theatre Technology (USITT). The Mission Statement for the Digital Media Commission provides some insight into how USITT views the field:

The Digital Media Commission provides dialog and the exchange of information about innovation and trends in the field of Projection Design and its related technologies and artistic expressions including, but not limited to, video design, digital media, interactive media, and new media as it relates to theatre and the live entertainment industry…

So, here we have the union that represents our designers referring to the field as one thing, the oldest theatre design and technology organization in the U.S. calling it something else, and a number of producers using completely different terminology. Should we, then, be surprised to find that reviewers often don’t know how to talk about the work of a Media Designer (don’t even get me started on the question of the Tony’s).

Through all of this, you might be wondering how much does a name matter? It brings to mind the old adage “you can call me anything you want, so long as you don’t call me late for dinner.” While it is certainly true that the check will still clear whether the memo line reads Video Designer, Projections Designer, or Media Designer, at the end of the day, we all know that names have power.

Is there a perceived difference between Projection Design and Media Design? I would argue that the term Media Design might be perceived as a bit more inclusive of various technologies and methods than Projection Design. For good or ill, the word projection leads to thoughts of that ubiquitous rectangle of light on a projection screen, created by Keynote or PowerPoint. This oversimplification of the job can lead directors and producers to unrealistic expectations for Media Designers, perpetuating the idea of the Media Designer as a “one man band.” While Scenic, Lighting, and Costume Designers most often have support personnel in the form of Technical Directors, Carpenters, Riggers, Stitchers, Electricians, and Scenic Artists, the Media Designer is often expected to run a small video production company, create original graphic content, generate animations, spec out gear and design the display system, integrate a network system…


One Man, Two Guvnors at Eastern Michigan University, 2016. Media Design and Photo: Jeromy Hopgood. Content creation: Christine Franzen.

Some people may like the autonomy of this setup. It does, however, lead to the question what is a design fee paying for? Is the designer expected to create all of the content (with all of the expenses connected with that), licensing fees, program the media server, design and install the system, and everything else that comes up along the way? In all likelihood, it depends on your market and how good you are at educating your employers.

All of this revolves around the point that we are a young industry. Even though projections have been around for more than a century in some form or another, we are only now reaching a point of proliferation where Media Design is not an oddity around the production table. Even so, the mystique that surrounds or field remains commonplace. We have only recently hit the ten-year anniversary of projection design being added as a USA829 category, and we’re still a few years out from that benchmark with the first MFA in Projection Design at Yale School of Drama. That places the impetus on the designers and technicians of the field to engage in these important discussions with our peers and colleagues in the industry. We are our own best advocates. Even though these conversations may, at times, prove frustrating and circuitous, this is a wonderful time to be a Media Designer. I am so excited to be working with this next generation of artists just now making their way into the field and look forward to where we arrive, as a group.

Feel free to share your own thoughts and observations related to this post. I’m always interested in a good conversation.


It’s All in the Timing: Recording A Cue Sequence in QLab 4

One of the more exciting new features in QLab 4 is the Record Cue Sequence tool. This function enables you to play through a cue sequence manually while recording your precise playback timing. This process creates a Group Cue with Start Cues imbedded within to trigger your cue sequence. These Start Cues have pre-waits attached to them that enable an exact playback to match your timing. To use this function, click on “Record Cue Sequence” in your Tools menu. This will open a window that gives you two recording options.


The Record Cue Sequence window, with both recording options shown.

Both settings create a Group Cue populated with Start Cues to trigger cues in your workspace. The first setting enables all of the Start cues to fire simultaneously with the appropriate pre-waits attached to them to match your original timing. The second option creates a Group Cue that triggers the first Start Cue and then goes to the next cue with pre-waits and auto-continues attached in the appropriate locations. Both will result in identical playback, but you may find one method better suits the needs of your programming preferences.


Recording Setting 1: Group with Start Cues and Pre-Waits (all children fire simultaneously)


Recording Setting 1: Group with Start Cues and Pre-Waits (Fire first child, enter into group with Auto-Continues)

It’s important to note that the Group Cue created by this process only contains Start Cues. It does not have the cues necessary for playback of your media or triggering lights. In the interest of keeping an organized workspace, it might be wise to create another Group Cue inside which you place your cues and triggers. Another option is to create a new cue list and drag these files into that list. The important detail here is that your original media cannot be deleted, or the Start Cues will have nothing to trigger. It can take a bit of getting used to, but it certainly opens up a number of options for programming.

Follow this link to watch a screen capture video showing playback of a recorded Audio Cue sequence. Keep checking in for more tips in the coming months and stay tuned for more news about my upcoming QLab 4 book.

QLab 4: Now with Lights*

The last several years have been a period of exciting growth for the rapidly expanding team at Figure 53, the makers of QLab and other show solutions. If you look at the Company statement on their website, this pretty much sums up their business approach: “We work on shows to be together for something special, and we love helping people do that in ways they couldn’t before.” This November, Figure 53 took a huge leap forward in the realm of helping people do shows in a way they couldn’t before with their highly anticipated new release of QLab 4. While there are a lot of features to be excited about in this new release, the biggest new change is the addition of lighting control.

QLab 4 brings along all of the wonderful components that have made it an industry standard in media playback and show control – sound control, video playback and effects, and show control integration through MIDI and OSC networks. The addition of lighting control, though, is a game changer for how designers and technicians approach QLab as a tool. QLab 4 allows for the control of lighting instruments and devices by using the Art-Net protocol over a network. This is either accomplished by directly “talking” to your lighting equipment through Art-Net, or sending the message through a node that translates Art-Net into a DMX signal. For those of you hoping to use a USB to DMX converter, you’re out of luck here. Art-Net nodes are currently the only type of interface recognized by QLab 4.

You should know out of the gate that QLab isn’t going to replace your high end lighting console or work well with a modern rig with hundreds of movers and complex fixtures (at least not yet). Currently, it works best with a rig featuring conventional fixtures, dimmers, and simple RGB-style LED fixtures. I could really see this being an innovative control option for storefront theatres, site specific work, houses of worship, club settings, and industry / trade show installations. The biggest perk in my mind is the fact that it builds on the QLab cue system, so those who are already familiar with creating a workspace should be able to jump right in and experiment with lighting control pretty quickly.

Lighting control is done through the use of a Lighting Cue within your workspace. For those familiar with QLab, this is just another cue type (like Audio Cues, Video Cues, Fade Cues, etc.) that can be combined into your workspace with all of your other cue types. This Lighting Cue contains all of the data for communicating with your equipment. Unlike traditional QLab cue types, however, Lighting Cue parameters are not changed by the use of a Fade Cue. Instead, values will be changed with additional Lighting Cues, or through the use of the new Light Dashboard. The dashboard shows you the live status of all currently running cues in your workspace and allows you to manipulate them in real time. This can be accomplished by using the built in sliders or tiles, or by using a command line that allows you to type in a textual control language.


Like any other lighting console, QLab also has a patch system. In Qlab’s Light Patch, you create the instrument and patch them to their appropriate real-world Art-Net/DMX addresses. In QLab, an instrument represents any light or dimmer in your rig that you want to control. Each instrument that is added to your workspace becomes a part of the Definitions Tab, where you can  assign instrument information and parameters (such as intensity, color, position, etc.). These parameters are then controllable by using the sliders or tiles assigned to it in the Light Cue.


You can also create Groups within the patch for ease in controlling more than one instrument. In the example shown below, Cue 1.7 is controlling Group 1, a group with all front lighting instruments combined. The second image shows how the Light Dashboard would represent this visually.


In addition to adding lighting, there are quite a few changes to workflow and programming that will save you on programming time. One of the big new changes is what they are calling “Fancy Paste” that allows the programmer to copy and paste multiple cue properties from the clipboard onto one or more cues in your workspace. You can also customize your defaults for workspaces by using Cue Templates. My personal favorite is the Record Cue Sequence function, which watches and records a cue sequence as you play through it manually. Once you stop the recording, QLab will automatically create a Group Cue populated with Start Cues that match the playback timing of what you recorded.

There are lots of things to be excited about in this new version of QLab. Like previous versions, I have no doubt that the folks at Figure 53 will continue to tweak their toolset and functions in response to user feedback. It’s possible that, in the right setting, a single computer running QLab could replace thousands of dollars worth of other equipment. This no doubt leads to all sorts of logistical questions (not the least of which being the amount of time and planning that would go into cueing a show if there were multiple designers on the same computer), but it will be interesting to see how this new component develops over the coming years and the ways in which the industry embraces it.

Stay tuned for some future posts on here about QLab 4 functions and my forthcoming QLab 4 Show Control book.

*As always, the fine print still applies. I am not an employee of Figure 53 and my views are exclusively my own. I’m just a guy who appreciates useful software and believes in sharing with others.

Drafty Interview – part 2

Welcome back to the second installation of my interview with Lucas Krech, one of the creators of Drafty, a new online CAD application. If you haven’t read Part One, you can do so by clicking here.


4. I notice that the program is delivered as a web app through your web browser. Why did you take that route?

Ease of deployment.

Our first paid customer was the Technical Design program at Bath-Spa University in the UK. We were still in Beta and had a ton of bugs. Being web-based we could see errors appear on our server logs and analyze the problem in real time. Fix the problem in real time. Deploy a software patch to our servers that the browser picks up automatically in real time. And then watch the errors disappear from the logs as each work station grabbed the new code. All in real time. 20 plus users every Tuesday working hard with Drafty for like two hours. It was amazing.

There are also a ton of ancillary benefits. Imagine your fancy computer crashes the day before you are about to go on tour with a ballet company (happened to me once). Or worse you are on tour and have no time to get to a store. Currently you are out at least a $1000 on hardware and better hope your software works with the current OS or you may be out thousands there too. With Drafty you just grab any old laptop, open an Incognito window in Chrome to keep all your info private, and keep drafting. Also, because it leverages the web you don’t need to pay for those top end graphics cards to support the 3D engine you are never going to use anyhow. So Drafty works as well on a $400 laptop from Best Buy as it does on a fully tricked out MacPro Tower. Just another way we can save our users a few dollars.

Also cloud sharing. All the Google Drive file sharing tools work for Drafty. Make a pre-plot and share with your assistant to finish off the data entry. Share the plot with your electricians and let them enter all the dimming and circuit information. No more “Passing the football.” You just work.


5. Is there a mobile app for Drafty?

It is on our development list but currently you need a laptop or desktop. That computer can work on or off-line and Drafty syncs to the cloud as soon as it has an internet connection again.

6. I know that the program is still quite new. Do you have any ”big names” using it yet?

Richard Pilbrow. I met him at USITT this year. He’s a real advocate for new technology which is wonderful to have in a field so reliant on technological advancements. When we met, he seemed almost more excited to meet me than I was to meet him. “You’re Lucas who made Drafty? Brilliant!” His enthusiasm is so infectious I forgot to be nervous.

He really put us to the test. The largest file I had tested with Drafty before he got on board was in the 400-450 unit range. He was putting out a plot well over 600 units. We added a bunch of symbols for him too. The Robert Juliat 700 Series? You can thank Richard for wanting those.
7. How does the program deal with generating paperwork? I know it creates lighting paperwork, but are there other applications for sound or video?

Our Signal Flow tool is getting a fair bit of attention. Simple drag and drop interface for doing all your signal routing diagrams. We have a rack builder on deck but it may be a couple months yet to really get it right.

We just partnered with Sam Kusnetz of Team Sound NYC, makers of Go Box for QLab, to deliver high-quality real-world accurate speaker symbols available as an in-app purchase in Drafty. Those ought to go live very soon.


A few examples of the Team Sound-generated speaker symbols

We will be deploying a Screen tool for Projector calculations with our next revision at the end of May. Again, simple drag and drop to resize your screen and move the screen and Projector independently with a real time readout of the minimum lens necessary.

We have a one-click Hook-Up generator for lighting that outputs a pre-formatted Channel Hookup and Instrument Schedule. On our development list is a similar set of paperwork for Audio. I hope to see it live some time this summer. We have a long list and a small team.

The application is in very active development. We are on a monthly revision cycle and try to provide a solid combination of performance enhancements and feature additions with each release. Sound and video design paperwork tools in general are not as sophisticated as what lighting designers have available to them. We are actively closing that gap.

8. What is process like to transfer work from another CAD program?
You can import PDF currently. Most CAD programs have some kind of ‘viewer’ tool that will let you format the native file into a proper PDF to draft a plot.
DXF I/O is on the list. But honestly redrawing a plot is probably your best bet because it really is that fast. Chances are you would spend more time on cleanup of an old file than just drafting it new. There’s a learning curve as with any piece of software but it’s a shorter curve with Drafty than most other graphics programs, and once you get the swing of it, making a lightplot is at least 3-6 times as fast as other CAD programs.