[SML] box booms

[Steven Haworth]

I agree - don't give up Bill!
Those box boom positions are crucial to so many decent designs, IMO.

Perhaps you could attempt an argument that if you don't build them - and
properly - then some student production down the road is going to try jerry
rigging something which would be unsafe to rig, and unsafe for the audience?

On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 12:39 PM Ford Sellers via Stagecraft <
stagecraft at theatrical.net> wrote:

> Don’t give up.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Stagecraft <stagecraft-bounces at theatrical.net> *On Behalf Of *Bill
> Conner via Stagecraft
> *Sent:* Monday, February 19, 2024 10:12 AM
> *To:* Stagecraft <stagecraft at theatrical.net>
> *Cc:* Bill Conner <billconnerastc at gmail.com>
> *Subject:* [SML] box booms
>
>
>
> I'm working with an architect who is resisting having a lighting position
> on the cheek walls of a new 700 seat theatre with 15' of forestage. I
> showed horizontal rails, vertical rails, and coves with and without access
> behind. He showed on picture of a HS theate without.  And the school does
> pride themselves on the their performing arts program.
>
>
>
> First, a lesson. Once you retire, don't un-retire no matter what, even for
> just one gig.
>
>
>
> So, group, should I keep insisting on a box boom lighting position or give
> up?
>
>
>
> I have a rail on the rear wall also, a "balcony rail" position, which I'm
> guessing will get attacked also.  I just keep remembering Tom Skelton
> saying repeatedly "rail is best".
>
>
>
> Thanks!
> ____________________________________________________________
> For list information see <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
> Stagecraft mailing list
> Stagecraft at theatrical.net
> http://theatrical.net/mailman/listinfo/stagecraft_theatrical.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://theatrical.net/pipermail/stagecraft_theatrical.net/attachments/20240219/c1d2841b/attachment.html>