Return to main Advice page

EXTRActs

In conjunction with A&C Black, The Stage is please to present a chapter from the publication 'The Stage Lighting Handbook (6th edition)' by Francis Reid.

Permission to reproduce the material from the following title is kindly granted from A&C Black publishers

The title listed below can be purchased from the A&C Black website.

---

The Stage Lighting Handbook (6th edition),

by Francis Reid
© 2001, 1996, 1992, 1987, 1982, 1976 Francis Reid

Chapter 6: Direction and Focus

The real crunch in lighting is where we place the lights, what we point them at and how we adjust their beams. If we have not positioned, pointed and focused correctly, the most virtuoso performance on the most elaborate control board will not make the whole greater than the sum of its parts. It is the placing and pointing decisions that are the creative part of realising a lighting concept. The actual focusing - the adjusting of beams - is more a matter of technique.

Lighting the actor

Because they have to stand out from their background, actors are normally lit to a brighter level than scenery. In an ideal world, actors and scenery would be lit completely independently. No actor light would hit the scenery and no scenery light would hit the actors. Except in very occasional circumstances on the largest of stages, such a completely controlled situation is just not practical. The nearest we can get to this ideal is to keep any actor light falling on the scenery to a minimum. The setting is then mainly lit by the reflected light bouncing off the floor and furnishings, plus some instruments used to stress the sculptural quality of the scenic pieces and highlight appropriate features.

Let us consider the effect on the actor of light from various directions. There are three variables:

• the effect on the actor
• the area of stage lit
• the shadow cast.

Front light

Consider an actor standing still and facing the audience (A), with light from above, absolutely vertically downwards. The eyes will be dark sockets, the nose aglow and causing the mouth to lie in shadow. There will be virtually no shadow on the floor and only a very small area of the stage will be lit: an area that need be no larger than the circumference of the actor's widest part - chest, waist, or hips depending on physique. This is a light that is very selective, dramatic in its modelling, but doing nothing to let the audience see the actor's principal means of character projection: eyes and teeth.

Now move that light a little forward of the actor (B). It will start to reach the eyes and mouth (provided that she keeps her chin up and is not defeated by a hat brim!). The area lit and the shadow cast will start to extend upstage behind the actor.

As the light comes lower from the front (C), the actor's eyes and teeth become more visible. But the lit area extends further upstage, reducing selectivity and increasing the likelihood of the actor's shadow hitting the scenery. This shadow will climb increasingly up the scenery as the direction of the light is lowered. When the light reaches horizontal (D), eyes and teeth will be fully lit and the shadow will be the same height as the actor. The area selected by the light will be a corridor which is as narrow as the actor's width but extends the full depth of the acting area because the light will go on and on until it hits either a piece of scenery or the back wall of the stage. This is all, of course, for an actor standing still: moving to the left or right will require the corridor width to increase to accommodate the extent of these movements. Furthermore, although facial visibility has improved, its quality has decreased; whereas the vertical light was sculptural, the horizontal light is flattening. Therefore the nose seems not to protrude and the eyes not to recede.

So there seems to be an identifiable compromise: low enough for eyes and teeth, yet high enough to avoid excessive flattening and to restrict the area of lit floor and the extent of the shadows. Perhaps somewhere around 30°-60°? Degrees from the horizontal or vertical? Doesn't matter since 30° and 60° are interchangeable. Just where we position the spot within this arc will depend upon just how tight an an area we need to select. The compromise will involve choices between relative visibility, sculptural modelling, shadows and selectivity. Whatever we choose, the light inevitably will tend to be flattening rather than flattering.

Side light

Having discussed light in the frontal plane, let us now consider side light - light in a plane at 90° to the front light. What happens when we move our vertical downlight to the side of the actor rather than to the front (E)? As the angle moves down, the actor's face and body become increasingly sculpted. A little light gets under the eyebrows and into the eyes, while rather more gets under the nose and into the mouth. Also, as the lighting angle becomes lower, the area lit and the actor's shadow lengthens across the stage. If the actor is facing out front, lights will be required from both sides (F) in order to illuminate both sides of the face - although there will tend to be a central dark line where the beams meet down the centre of the face. The two lights automatically produce two shadows.

So, with side lighting we note that modelling and visibility increase, while selectivity decreases, as the angle comes down from the vertical (G). When the angle becomes horizontal (H), there will be a complete light corridor across the stage. It will be actor high but its depth, up and downstage, will be dependent on the requirements of actor movement. Compromise is again likely to lead us somewhere into a zone of 30°-60°, but the precise range will depend on several factors arising from the production's requirements. How tightly selected need the areas be? Is there a lot of movement to be sculpted? (Dancers, almost by definition, tend to project more with their bodies than do actors.) How will the scene design accept shadows? (If there are on/off flats, their angles can be cheated imperceptibly so that they do not catch shadows but lose them in the bays between the wings. If there are walls running up and downstage, actor-high shadows are likely to prove unacceptable, although scenic colour and texture might permit a more acceptable level of tolerance.)

Backlight

A light from behind the actor (J) will not illuminate the face, but it helps to enhance stage depth: the light separates actor from scenery by creating a haze between them. The highlights on the head and shoulders also help to sculpt the actor. The shadow is cast forward and this helps with area selection on the stage floor and, since lighting does not fall on the face, strongly atmospheric colours may be used.

Light from below

Light from below horizontal (K) projects an actor shadow that looms above the actor as she moves forwards and away from the light source. When this is the only direction, or the predominant direction, from which the light comes, the effect on the face is not at all natural. But a little light from below, often just reflected light, can help to soften the inevitable harshness of light from above. Such reflected light, however, will be very unselective.

The compromise

This exploration of possible lighting angles suggests that there is no ideal position for a single light. Front angles are strong on visibility, side angles on sculptural modelling. High angles are more selective than lower ones which open up the area of stage lit and lengthen the actor shadows. So we must seek a compromise which will allow the actor to be lit for maximum visibility and maximum modelling, yet with minimum shadow, plus, for many productions, the selection of as tight an area as possible.

The standard method is to use a pair of lights (L) from directions which compromise between the front and side extremes: light coming from the front of the actor (for visibility) but offset to the side (to help modelling). Mounted high enough to keep the shadows short enough for the actor to dominate them, yet low enough for the light to get into the eye sockets (if the eyebrows are not too bushy or the hat brim too wide) and into the mouth with its all important teeth (if the nose be reasonably restrained in its projection).

A crossed pair of lights used in this way has been the standard approach for at least sixty years - it was first described by Stanley McCandless in his 1932 A Method of Lighting the Stage. The main addition since then has been backlight to emphasise the depth of the scene and generally enhance the 'look' of the actor. During earlier phases in the development of lighting, the first priority had to be to get enough plain illumination followed by modelling and area control. On considerations of cost-effectiveness, backlight had to come well down the list. However if light is to be the actor's environment on the stage as it is in nature, that light must come from all around. Accordingly we now give a high priority to backlight (M), even when equipment is short.

The vertical angle of the backlight is not critical: it need only be 20° or so beyond the vertical and indeed, in many tightly hung rigs, the backlight is virtually a downlight. Whether it is offset to the side is largely dependent on whether it is necessary and desirable to introduce a directional key as part of the motivational concept of a particular lighting picture.

Therefore the standard method has become to light each acting area with spots from three primary angles: a pair from forward and to the side plus one from behind. We may mix in a little from other spots at front and sides, but these are secondary angles often used as washes to include several areas within their focus settings - and added only into the wider, more open, scenes.

An alternative

The problem with the three-angle system is threefold. Firstly, diagonal shad-ows are thrown in two contrasting directions away from the the actor, making it difficult to control the light on the set. Secondly, the three angles light an area of stage floor considerably in excess of the acting area provided with good face lighting - and that area of lit floor does not correspond with the area above it where faces are lit. Thirdly, and probably most important, once the angles have been chosen, the compromise between visibility and modelling is fixed. The balance between visibility and modelling is one of the most important features of designed lighting. Indeed it is such a fundamental part of the lighting designer's 'palette' that perhaps we ought to aim to have separate angles (from separate instruments on separate dimmers) for frontal visibility and side modelling.

There is an increasing tendency to light with four primary angles with a separation of 90° between them. With this method, visibility comes from the front while a backlight helps to remove the flatness (N). If we need to select a tightly controlled upstage/downstage corridor without side spillage, this provides an acceptable light. However, side lights are normally added for modelling (O) and, although they will spread the lit area, they can be at quite steep angles since they do not need to make a major contribution to visibility. By balancing the side against the front, we can vary the relative stress placed on visibility and modelling during the progress of the play. We may also add a bit from side-front angles but these are secondary angles used only when we can afford to widen out the selected area for big scenes. By using tertiary angels for backlight, we have the possibility of giving the lighting a directional motivation.

Simplicity

It is becoming obvious from this discussion that having a completely controlled situation will require a large series of lights on the actor from various angles. This is why some professional productions have very large lighting rigs. And so a timely word of warning. A large palette of lights becomes frighteningly difficult to use - and takes a frightening amount of time to balance. The cleanest lighting is often the simplest, and so we need to set out with positive aims and try to achieve these aims with the minimum of equipment.

Some very exciting lighting may be achieved by using only two or three very powerful sources from very carefully selected positions. Perhaps a discharge-lamped film-studio light through a window, or parlamp light curtains bouncing off a white glazed floor. For this to succeed some action may have to be rather carefully choreographed to position the actors in the most advantageous positions. A few discreet cheat sources may be added to boost the natural reflections of the major sources. But this should be done with the greatest care in order to avoid escalation into a big rig in which the positive advantage of a few major intense sources will be lost.

Practicalities of positioning

We shall be returning to these matters of design in later chapters but meanwhile, on the basis of that old cliche 'one lamp in the right place is worth untold lamps in the wrong place', let us consider the practicalities of placing our lighting instruments in the positions that seem theoretically ideal. This problem divides itself into two situations: the auditorium and the stage. In the auditorium, architecture is the major influence on availability of positions which therefore tend to remain the same from one production to the next. On stage there is a conflict of interests between positions for scenery and lighting: therefore a new compromise usually needs to be sought for each production.

Auditorium positions

Auditoria fall into two categories: those built before the development of modern stage lighting and those built since. In theory, those built in, say, the last thirty to fifty years should include adequate provision for mounting spotlights in good, if not always totally ideal, positions. Alas, this is not always so. It is only since perhaps the early 1970s that we have been able to take this for granted in new professional theatres. And for new community and school halls, decent lighting positions still may not be assumed.

Modern theatre architecture is at great pains not to stress the proscenium arch. To avoid a framing effect, the proscenium is formed by the natural termination of the ceiling and side walls. In such a structure it is relatively easy to form unobtrusive horizontal lighting positions within the ceiling and vertical ones in the side walls. Ceiling positions should run the entire width of the auditorium, with the lights mounted on access bridges where electricians can stand comfortably to focus with a clear view of the stage. Side slots should, as far as possible, extend the full height of the wall. They normally need to terminate above audience head height. This is not a problem since, as we have noted, the majority of lighting angles should be considerably above the horizontal. The boom in a wall slot should have a permanent access ladder and/or a series of platforms. If there is an apron stage thrusting through the proscenium, or if the orchestra pit is likely to be adapted to such use, a third bridge (certainly) and third pair of slots (desirable) will be required. In the pursuit of intimacy, current theatre architecture tends to favour a return to the older practice of hanging audience on the side walls in what has become known as courtyard format. This requires considerable ingenuity in providing side foh lighting positions.

In older theatres with a formal proscenium arch, the ceiling is normally unsuitable for lighting positions, being both too high and too much of a decorative feature. However the fronts of circles make possible hanging positions with the highest gallery normally providing a good face angle. This is rarely good in cinematic theatres built between the wars and having only one low circle. Side positions are difficult in old theatres; boxes can be used but their view of the stage is usually quite restricted. In recent years it has become customary to erect booms almost on the proscenium arch itself and to hang a bar, known as an 'advance bar', from the auditorium ceiling close to the top of the proscenium - usually over the orchestra pit or the first row of stalls seating. While such positions are excellent for lighting, they hardly enhance a beautiful old auditorium. Some years ago, when only a few foh spots were normal, it was usual to conceal them in fibrous plaster boxes matching the auditorium decor. However, growth in size of lighting rigs now results in old theatres being festooned with lighting. This solution is generally accepted, supported by a sizeable school of thought that likes the technology to be exposed. (My own position is that while I acknowledge that there are production styles which require all to be revealed, there are certainly many others which benefit from the means of magic being masked.)

Ceiling bridges and wall slots incorporated into the architecture of a modern auditorium provide accessible lighting positions. (Theatr Clwyd, Mold).

In multi-purpose halls, provision for foh lighting should be made by fixing scaffolding (not brackets) from the ceiling and on the side walls. Ladders of correct type and height should always be available for access.

Backstage positions

Apart from the 'No. 1 Spot Bar' position always required immediately behind the proscenium arch, lighting designers like to be able to keep an open mind about where the other lighting bars should be hung. However, theatres with fast changeovers between productions require some sort of permanent rig and so spot bars tend to be positioned approximately every 8 feet (2.5 metres). This enables reasonably constant angles to be maintained on actors throughout the depth of the stage. Each spot bar has the possibility of fulfilling two basic functions: providing a sculpting light for actors standing underneath it and a face light for those upstage of it. This is discussed in later chapters. In Central European theatres presenting a repertoire with extensive daily change-overs between daytime rehearsals and different productions each evening, there is a bridge (or vertical stack of three bridges) and a pair of lighting towers immediately behind the proscenium: these give immediate access to all lights which can even be refocused during quick scene changes in the performance.

Side lighting positions are almost totally variable, being dependent upon the structure of the scenery, particularly gaps in the side masking. The only feasible position for permanent booms is immediately adjacent to the proscenium. Booms and ladders upstage of this are positioned as required for each production, although some theatres have ladders mounted in heavy duty sliding tracks under the fly galleries, allowing their positions to be moved easily. Low level lights, particularly for dance, may be mounted on stands or castored trucks.

Focusing

When the lighting instruments have been placed in the selected positions, they have to be adjusted. This process of angling the spotlights and adjusting their beams is sometimes called setting or more usually focusing.

When we focus a light on an actor position, our prime concern is to check that the light covers all the area in which we expect the actor to be lit by that particular instrument. I find that the only practical way to do this is to move around personally in the beam and check that the light does hit me. And, to save my eyes, I turn my back to the light and watch my shadow. If there is a full shadow of me plus hand (to allow for the fact that all actors in my shows seem to be 7 feet tall), I am lit. This method allows me to check the secondary point of concern in focusing a light: the mess that the beam is making after it has hit the actor.

The trouble with beams of light is that you cannot control their length. You can cut bits out of their sides with shutters, and you can cut bits out of their middles with gobos, but you cannot cut a bit off the end of the beam. Most of our lighting is focused on the actors and it would be marvellous if we could chop off the beams after they have passed the actors and before they hit the scenery. But the light beam passes resolutely on until it hits the scenery with a nasty splodge, often drawing audience attention away from the very actor whom it has been designed to illuminate.

What can we do about this problem? It is not much good focusing another light onto the scenery to smooth out the splodge, for the scenery will then become so bright that the actor in front of it will darken into silhouette. Up a point on the actor and the shadow again becomes predominant. Compensating with a point more on the scenery and the actor is back into silhouette, escalating in no time at all, into the brightest dark-spot on the stage.

Much of the putting and pointing of lights is concerned with finding ways of lighting the actor so that the end of the beam falls where it will do little damage: off-stage or on the floor, rather than on a prominent bit of scenery. But this can breed a very large rig which often introduces more lighting prob lems than it solves - apart from requiring an excess of money, time and space.

So what can we do about the actor light that just has to fall on the scenery whether we like it or not? The technique is 'clean focusing' and consists principally of paying adequate attention to the edges of the beam. There are two inescapable rules here (how nice to find an occasional rule in such a subjective business as stage lighting!):

1. Soft edges are less noticeable than hard.
2. Any beam edges are less noticeable if they coincide with an architectural edge.

The easy route to soft edges is using a fresnel spot but, in providing a soft edge, the fresnel by its very nature throws out an embarrassing amount of scatter light close to the lens. This scatter light is particularly unwelcome if borders are being used. Light should be kept completely away from neutral borders, while painted borders need a carefully balanced light. Our aim is to make the audience look down onto the action, not up at the masking arrangements. PC lens spots produce much less scatter but there is less margin for error when overlapping their beams in a smooth join. Soft edges with virtually no scatter light can be produced by profile spots but this takes valuable time which is in short supply in the schedules of most productions (but see note on diffusers below). I would therefore advocate, when you are short of time or experience (and particularly when short of both!), the use of PCs or fresnels for actor lighting from the on-stage lighting positions, simply because mistakes don't show - or at least don't show so much.

However, with the exception of the very smallest stages, the scatter and lack of throw from a fresnel makes it unsuitable for use in the auditorium: from this position we normally need a profile spot. It is these foh spots which may cause the worst mess on the scenery as a result of the relatively flat lighting angle which auditorium architecture often makes inevitable. So, like it or not, we just have to find time to focus the foh with soft precision. In a permanent installation, the foh spots usually do a similar job in most productions and so they can be permanently softened. The main problems arise when foh have to be rigged specially for each show.

Diffusers

A possible solution for quick, easy softening is the use of diffusers, which have become more versatile in recent years. 'Frost' filters have always been available but they produce a heavy softening when compared with the range of subtle diffusion filters now manufactured.

Focusing with back to light

Hard focusing of a profile spot is simple and fast - and Rosco 119 and 132, or Gamfusion 10/20 and 10/30, will soften the whole beam, including its edge without creating any significant spill.

Focusing with back to light

Other relatively new diffusers which have rapidly become indispensable are the directional types known as 'silks', such as Rosco 104 and 160. While diffusing the light, silks also stretch it out in one plane: by framing the filter at the appropriate angle we can elongate the light in whichever direction we choose. A directional diffuser is particularly useful when working with a small amount of equipment but it can also be very useful for generally tidying up the lighting 'look'.

Even after careful focusing, however, we are still left with an edge, albeit a soft one. To make this edge seem natural, it is helpful to line it up with an architectural feature of the scenery - door frames, picture frames, etc., are naturals on a realistic set.

Gobos

So much for the edge of the beam. What about the inside of the beam? Textured surfaces tend to be less obtrusive than flat surfaces under light. Scenic surfaces are easy to texture: indeed some scene designers have a habit of rushing at their sets with handfuls of gunge and spatters of Vandyke brown as soon as I start to light. But it is interesting to texture the light itself. The obvious way is to use a gobo with irregular holes to produce the quality of light that falls through trees. I have even used such break-up texturing very, very softly inside a 'Who's for Tennis?' interior setting without anyone muttering about trees. The new glass gobos, suitable only for the new generation profiles with cool gates, offer particularly delicate texturing of the beam.

Remote-controlled spotlights

Automated spotlights do not change the need for precise selection of hanging positions to allow the light to strike actor or scenery at the most appropriate angle. Once the instrument has been hung in its fixed position, focus adjustments need no access and so it is easy to refine beam precision and quality throughout the rehearsal period. But reduction in the number of instruments in a rig can only be achieved by refocusing when the hanging position of the instrument is appropriate. Full flexibility awaits further development of lights which travel along bars.

---

From The Stage Lighting Handbook 6th edition, by Francis Reid,
© 2001, 1996, 1992, 1987, 1982, 1976 Francis Reid

'THE STAGE LIGHTING HANDBOOK 6TH EDITION' is available to purchase now from the A&C Black website.