Talk:Parabolic aluminized reflector light

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general): Filmmaking task force

	This article is part of Wikipedia's Stagecraft coverage, and has come to the attention of WikiProject Stagecraft, an attempt to create a comprehensive and detailed resource on the art of stagecraft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (just like any other article!), or visit WikiProject Stagecraft, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Can whoever write the following please name their source?:

"The oval pool characteristic of traditional PARs are falling into disuse with modern PARs favoring a PC based lens. This can be attributed to their popularity in Rock and Roll shows where a pool of light is preferred to an oval of light, which is more useful in stage lighting to create areas. A second reason for this change is that the style of car headlamps that PARs were originally based on are no longer mass produced, so most companies making PARs have more control over the lens than previously and are deferring to their largest customer."

Because as far as I know (lighting engineer of 10 years experience and actively working) it's entirely untrue. Is this some kind of US/UK thing? Anyway, for now, I've removed it. Bryson430 19:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Name changes 2 PAR38 etc 3 Suggestion 4 New image

[edit] Name changes

Ok, some IP user just came through and changed a lot of "lights" to "luminaires". As I don't call them that, I am grossly opposed. However, some of you probably call it that, Should I switch it back?KeepOnTruckin 19:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Luminaire is more technically correct than "light" so it could stay. Or, preferably, maybe we should make it Lighting Fixture in keeping with the rest of the Wikipedia articles. Bryson430 10:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Meanwhile, the IP user also added a section that included a factually incorrect description of how a Source 4 works. I changed it back. Bryson430 11:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

What is somthing about a source 4 doing in the PAR article? Speaking of pars and S4's though, I will be able to get a picture of a PARnel very soon. Do ya think it needs it own subsection in SLI article or here or Fresnel? KeepOnTruckin 21:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PAR38 etc

I was looking for info on domestic PAR lamps, and see no mention of them here. In UK at least, PAR38s with hardened glass are one of the (more expensive) standard domestic & small business lamps. Tabby 21:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe this term applies also to standard household flood lights (e.g. PAR16) and others. I don't know enough about this to amend the article, though. 76.180.104.145 (talk) 13:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion

A picture that shows the kind of lighting a single PAR shined on an empty stage provides, or something that similarly unambiguously shows what it looks like when in use, would be very...illuminating. -Toptomcat 18:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I like that idea- I think I will make it a project to take photos of the effect of not only PAR cans, but other instruemnt types as well. -JWGreen 03:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I think there needs to be an image with labeling showing what the different lenses/lamps look like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.157.242.185 (talk) 18:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I think photos or diagrams of PAR 64 lamps for each of the main distinctions of beam spread would be a good idea, but I only have WFL lamps and one extra narrow (I only have two cans...), so I can't make it. I know the extra narrow is not all that common, so I could get a photo of that, but if anyone has the rest of them, and could take a photo of them on white paper or another white surface, I think that would be a great addition to the article. -JWGreen (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

See related discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stagecraft/General_discussion#Photo_idea KeepOnTruckin ^{Complain to me | my work here} 21:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New image

What do you think of this picture? In my opinion it looks nicer than the recent one (Image:PAR_64.jpg). --ChrisHH (talk) 22:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)