tech rehearsal nomenclature

Dear people who do theatre, 

I’ve noticed lately some misuse of certain words and phrases for technical rehearsals. So, here’s a public service announcement. It’s going to be long, but if you do theatre (especially community theatre), you should at least skim through this, and share it with your friends. You may be using these phrases incorrectly.  

A “tech rehearsal” is a rehearsal WITH THE ACTORS in which the focus is the technical elements of the production: lighting, sound, sets, props, costumes. This is generally the rehearsal where these elements are added for the first time, though there may be some props or costume pieces, etc., that have been used already in rehearsals. Typically, cast and crew work through the entire show, often stopping, going back and re-doing some light cue or sound cue or scene change or quick costume change. You may go back and do a particular cue several times until it works. 

This can be a long, taxing rehearsal. In the professional (equity) productions I’ve done, tech is a “10 out of 12” day, meaning it’s a 12-hour rehearsal in which the cast gets a 2-hour lunch or dinner break. In community theatre it’s often more like a rehearsal on Sunday from sometime mid-afternoon “until we finish.” I’ve done shows where the tech rehearsal was broken up into two days, either purposely scheduled that way, or decided in the moment because it was getting late and we were nowhere close to being done with tech. 

Some people (and theatres) seem to want to skip this kind of tech rehearsal, and instead they end up stretching it out over the entire tech week, adding a few more tech elements every night – even to the point of adding a few last minutes things on opening night. Perhaps calling that entire week before the show opens “tech week” contributes to this misunderstanding. It shouldn’t be that you add the tech elements throughout this entire week, but rather that this is the week in which you work with all the tech elements. You should plan to have all the tech elements in place not by opening night but by the tech rehearsal, which then gives a production several rehearsals between tech and opening for the actors and the crew to work with and get used to all the tech elements. It also provides a buffer of several days to discover if something isn’t working and needs to be changed. 

If you’re doing a musical, do not call the band for a tech rehearsal. It is a waste of their time and your money. (You are paying them, right? Please, tell me you’re paying them.) 

You may run through all of a show during a tech rehearsal, OR it may be a “cue-to-cue.” This means you work one technical cue – lighting, scene change, etc. – repeating as needed, then you skip ahead to the next technical cue. So you skip over bits of scenes in which there is no technical cue. This is still a tech rehearsal, so THE ACTORS ARE THERE ON STAGE. 

A tech rehearsal without the actors is called a “dry tech.” This is a rehearsal with the stage manager, the tech crew, likely the designers and director (but not necessarily). In a dry tech, you may run or work or fix many of the technical elements of the show. 

I don’t know if there’s a specific term for when the director and lighting &/or sound designer(s) sit in the theatre talking about and building various cues without other tech crew and such. I’d probably call it something like “setting the light cues,” though it may fall under the category of dry tech. And, of course, there will be times when the lighting designer and some other tech crew or other folks are in the theatre physically adjusting the lights, adding gels or gobos or whatever. I don’t know what that’s called. Perhaps that’s also within this dry tech category. 

A meeting in which the director, light and sound and costume designers, and perhaps others, discuss the technical elements, possibly even talking through scene changes, lighting cues, etc., is called a “paper tech.” No one is actually moving things around or setting light cues and such – you may not even be in the theatre – but probably people are writing things down. 

A paper tech is a bit like a production meeting, but it’s specifically about the tech elements for a production. You’re talking through scene changes and costume changes, lighting and sound, etc. A producer (or artistic director or board member?) may not necessarily be there, as you would expect in a production meeting. You won’t be discussing ticket sales, nor PR, nor casting – none of that stuff. 

There. Those are different types of tech rehearsals. Please start using these phrases correctly. If I’ve missed or gotten something completely wrong, do let me know. I'll update this. 

Okay. Rant over. 

(For now.) 

interesting idea?

I got  response from my recent craigslist ad (https://greensboro.craigslist.org) from a guy who wanted some “artistic dick pics”. My first thought was, “Eh...I don’t know.” But I’ve thought a little about it, and it might be an interesting idea for a series. I could do a series with women as well, but I’m not aware of a catchy name that rhymes, or even just a clever-sounding, concise name. (Suggestions?)

I have trouble finding people to model for me, even clothed. So, I’m not sure if I could find several guys to do such a shoot.

What do you folks think? Is this an interesting idea? Feel free to comment here, or write me on facebook (if you know me) or email me: blacksheepphotog@gmail.com

our future first lady

As a photographer and as someone who has modeled a little (and taken a lot of self-portraits), AND as someone who has lost work and friends (in the arts!) because of the nature of some of my photography, I take it personally when people get “nude-shamed”. (Yes, I just made up that term.)

I haven't gone to any effort to view Melania Trump’s nude photos. This topic surfaced a while back, but apparently it’s having a post-election revival. I’ve seen two posts about it on facebook tonight. What I did see of her photos from past posts (and perhaps places like The Daily Show? – I don’t know, wherever), appeared to be a type of nude &/or implied nude photos that I'm not especially interested in: the stereotypically “sexy” young woman - “hot chick” - don’t you wish you could bang her - light porn sort of thing. There’s way too much of that in the world these days, and mostly, I’m not that interested.

Anyway...

If you think the act of posing nude is bad or shameful or necessarily naughty, something that no one ought to do, or at least no one respectable, here's what I say:
You desperately need to get over your Puritanical nonsense about the human body, and probably about sex. I hope you don't have children, because I can only assume you are passing on your damaging attitudes about perfectly normal, healthy, natural, human functions, and about the fact that we human beings have physical bodies. We do! We have bodies. Wonderful, horrible, fascinating, boring bodies. There's nothing wrong with having a body, nor with letting other people see it, if that’s what you want to do with it.

As a matter of fact, we as a “people” would probably be much better off if we became accustomed to seeing normal, non-hyper-sexualized human bodies. We’d end up much healthier. 

Gah!

The Church of Trump

During and after last night’s election debate (which I hesitate to call “presidential”), I’ve seen a lot of fact-checking, particularly of things that Trump said. 

I worry that fact-checking someone like Donald Trump will have little or no effect. Trump himself will just tell another lie and keep telling it until that lie becomes inconvenient. And his supporters seem to exhibit a sort of religious attitude toward him and whatever they think he said or did or didn’t do. 

Actual, verifiable facts don’t really matter when your attitude is “Trump said it, I believe it, that settles it.” The Trump-isms that complement the believers’ attitudes and hopes for ‘Murica, they quote and fetishize, while either ignoring or being ignorant of the inconsistencies and the morally problematic history. And anyone who is not one of the faithful is a tool of evil, trying to replace the Messiah-Trump with Lady-Satan (or, as she’s known in her human form, Hillary Clinton). 

For me, just like with religions, perhaps the saddest part is that not all Trump supporters are ignorant hillbilly-types whose critical thinking skills only extend as far as what to order from the value menu and who to vote for on American Idol. There are reasonably well-educated people who will twist and turn and do all manner of mental gymnastics to defend the idea that Trump can actually do any of the things he talks about doing as president, and making America great again. I think we should start calling these people “Trump apologists”. Just like with religious apologists, I am confused when otherwise intelligent people put so much effort into trying to craft an intellectual defense of something that is inherently anti-intellectual. 

Offended?

The word “offended” is quite popular these days. And it has an interesting dual use. 

So when we feel some hard-to-identify (or scary to identify?) unease about something, we can say we feel offended. This, of course, implies that something outside of ourselves has offended us and this other thing (person, etc.) is therefore offensive. And that’s a bad thing, right? Because people’s words or actions or beliefs aren’t supposed to be offensive. 

But, on the other hand, when another person gets offended by something that we believe or support, we can just call them out as being overly sensitive. “Oo, you’re offended by my horrific social and political beliefs.” We belittle others’ feeling of offense when we don’t share it. But when I feel offended, suddenly my sacred rights are being infringed upon. 

Okay, so here’s what I think people need to do. When you feel “offended” that is the time to stop and give the situation some thought. Ask yourself, “What am I actually feeling? What am I uncomfortable about? And (very importantly) WHY is this thing or person or whatever making me feel uncomfortable?” I know, I know, nobody wants to actually work on themselves. Nobody wants to question their own beliefs or even be aware of their own assumptions about the world. 

But just being offended and then angry because things haven’t changed the way you want them to isn’t making things better for anyone. It’s time we stop assuming we’re offended when we might be afraid or embarrassed or any number of other emotions. And it’s important to remember that nobody has a right to not be offended. 

Wake up, America!

I saw this photo earlier today: 

It got me thinking. And when I start thinking, I sometimes start wanting to rant. So, here we go. 

Maybe it’s time to start asking: who are our police? What is it about this job that attracts some people who seem to want to pull a gun and start shooting the moment they’re uncertain about a situation? 

Obviously there’s more to it than that. We have a very real problem of racism and violence. Comfortable white folk need to wake the fuck up and see what’s really happening here. This is a mixed race country that we live in. And we desperately need to stop hating the “other” part of ourselves. 

But! Maybe we need to NOT give a gun and the protection and “authority” of a badge with the assumption they’ll “do the right thing” to people who appear to have a tendency toward violence, aggression, a lack of self-control. Anybody who wants a job where they take on the responsibility of watching out for, investigating, hunting down, and/or punishing other people really should have ongoing training in de-escalation of potentially violent situations. And they should ABSOLUTELY be required to pass some stringent psychological tests before and during their employment. 

Sure there are plenty of decent cops out there who don’t go around murdering the people they’re supposed to be protecting and serving, but there are clearly way too many who are. These are not isolated incidents when they keep happening all over the country. When you look back at the records of these thugs in blue uniforms who acted in “self-defense” and murdered some person of color, why is it that you’ll often find prior complaints against them of excessive force, etc.? What the fuck is wrong with these people? And all the other assholes who protect and defend them when they murder people? 

Wake up, America! This is not okay.

"Sorry, but..."

Somebody made this comment this morning on a post by a friend of mine.

Now, I don’t really feel like starting a fight with someone I don’t know on my friend’s facebook post, but I feel compelled to comment on this.

So...

Dear stranger,
If you think that the thing you’re about to say (or type) may be a sexist (or racist or whatever) comment, and you feel the need to say “Sorry, but...” maybe you just shouldn’t make that comment? If you recognize that this might be offensive &/or demeaning to a large group of people, how about this: perhaps you might stop and ask yourself why you feel compelled to make the comment. Saying, “Sorry, but...blah-blah-blah...offensive thing,” doesn’t negate the offensive thing, nor absolve you of the offense. It just fools you into thinking you’re somehow a better person for recognizing your sexism (etc.) before indulging it. I’m not so sure that makes you a better person. In fact, it might make a worse person. I just don’t know.

I’m sure that I am similarly guilty of the same, “Sorry, but...” behavior. And perhaps this was just an innocent compliment. But then why the need to preface an innocent compliment with an apology? And while I don’t disagree with your comment, her attractiveness has nothing to do with the original post. If this were a post asking, “Hey, facebook friends, how does this outfit look on me?” then by all means, comment on how she looks. But this was not that post.

So, in review, if you know that you’re about to be offensive, maybe don’t. Instead perhaps spend some time working on yourself.

Okay, rant over. (For now.)