Talk:Intelligent lighting

message: I have done some research an I believe that the first computer controled inteligent light was the Vari*Lite VL Zero, a prototype developed by Showco for the band Genisis in December, 1980.  The first marketed moving head would be the Vari*Lite VL1 then.  However I could be wrong.  Can someone back this up or challenge this?
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by JWGreen (talk • contribs) 01:35, 14 August, 2006 (UTC).
:Vari*Lite was second on the scene. The first moving-head lights, Autoscan, were developed and marketed in 1981 by a short-lived company named Cause and Effects, based in Birmingham. Clients who bought or rented Autoscan include Gary Numan, Asia, James Last, and Billy Joel, and several nightclubs including the Hippodrome in London. It's uncertain who first used them. Vari*Lite appeared later, and dominated the market when Cause and Effects folded in 1983.
:Nic Cave-Lynch invented the Autoscan moving lights when he was 21 and established Cause and Effects to build and sell them. When the company approached the major UK production houses and lighting equipment manufacturers to solicit investment in the product, it was apparent that no moving lights were being either used or marketed at the time. It's possible that Showco (which Genesis invested heavily in) had prototypes around then, but Autoscan was definitely on the market before Genesis first used Vari*Lite VL1 on their September 1981 tour.
:Nic Cave-Lynch's part in the industry has been mentioned in an interview with Steve Warren -  co-director of Avolites in London, former employee of Cause and Effects - published in Mondo magazine, Jan/Feb 2002. The article is reproduced online at  (scroll halfway down). Nic is now an electronics engineer in New Zealand.
:Wendy Collings 03:09, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  First computer-controlled fixture 

message: I've always objected to the term "intelligent lighting," because it implies that the rest of what we do is, well, "stupid lighting."
Salzberg 17:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why I tried to use 'moving head' preferentially when I rewrote it.  I agree with you, but that term is not as popular as "intelligent/automated lighting" in popular usage.  Happy-melon 14:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: I would be very inclined to disagree with the statement that the Martin MAC500 is "one of the industry's most advanced moving heads" surely this is extremely out-dated, they don't even have CMY! Any thoughts...... AndyP543 06:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose you're right... a picture of a MAC2000 would be more appropriate.  Does anyone have one available under GDFL?  Happy-melon 14:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It is done......however, although relatively advanced, I think it would be still incorrect to say that it was one of the best moving lights available.....however this is my opinion so didn't want to inflict this onto the wiki. AndyP543 16:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: One of the industry's most advanced moving heads?

message: I am proposing that the page Moving light should be merged with the page Intelligent lighting.  I don't particularly have a preference what to ultimately call the article--I know there has been a big debate about what to call inelligent lighting/moving lights/automated lighting.  However, the content on the page Moving Light seems easily mergable with the content on the Intelligent lighting and it seems a little unecissary to seperate out 'moving lights' from the broader catagory of 'intelligent lights' based on Wikipedia's policy which says "Wikipedia is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe. For example, "Flammable" and "Non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on Flammability."
I don't want to start any editing wars, so if you have a dissenting opinion, by all means tell me, but don't freak out.  This is merely a proposal.  I'm not going to fight anyone tooth and nail to force it on them.  However, If I don't hear any opinions against it from anyone in a month I will merge the page (again, this is according to Wikipolicy).
Thanks y'all, be well.
Benjo 23:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds logical to me.... Charlie Richmond 02:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Merge is done and done.  Hopefully everyone is happy.  Benjo 15:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge 

message: The caption for the image of the Vari Light says it has many advanced sensors. Is it one of the cool lights that follow people wearing a transmitter on stage independently of the light board? If it can, I might classify it as a true intelligent light or robotic light. (As opposed to automated or moving) KeepOnTruckin Complain to me | my work here 20:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not aware of any moving lights that have this facility built in.  That Vari*lite doesn't, for sure.  It requires an additional controller - essentially replacing the desk with multiple sensors, a transmitter and a box of tricks that spits out DMX.  Clever engineering, for sure, but intelligent?  Oh no. Bryson430 22:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  question about the vari-light in the article 

message: :Image:Mac2000profile.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like it was taken out. Not really a problem as we have other pictures. KeepOnTruckin Complain to me | my work here 01:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it could have qualified for fair use anyways since there are free alternatives. -JWGreen (talk) 06:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Mac2000profile.jpg

message: I think this article should have somthing in the diffeences between profile and wash lights, such as differing features (gobo etc lacking from washes but washes have CMY more often) I work with mac 250 krypton and entour (profiles) and 250 washes. and also mac 500 (profile) and 600 (wash). so could get some pictures of equivlant levels of profile and wash being used together.~Wilflet (talk) 19:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Getting 2 comparison shots is an excellent idea. The picture you put on the stage lighting page (:Image:Valve Oct.jpg is a nice one. If you could get some more like that too that would be great. Ive got an intelligent lighting textbook so ill see if i can put in a bit about profiles vs. washes KeepOnTruckin Complain to me | my work here 01:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Profile VS Wash heads

message: I'm not prepared to argue this, not really being a lighting guy (I don't actually think 'Intelligent' is the proper description anyway....) but I have started seen more and more people in the stagecraft mailing list use the term 'movers' these days....  FWIW.... Charlie Richmond (talk) 18:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted mainly because 'moving heads' was replaced with 'movers'. -JWGreen (talk) 04:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Movers"

message: This section of the current article seems very much out of place, and doesn't really add that much to the article in my opinion. Maybe someone could merge that content in with the rest of the article, or just get rid of it. --Freedo50 (talk) 21:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Debate?! 

message: I recall that back in the late 90s, Vari-Lite held a near-monopoly on moving head technology due to their strong patent portfolio. This was a big deal at the time, but does it warrant inclusion in this article? Smithderek2000 (talk) 00:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patent Wars 

message: Comparing this article to Stage lighting instrument there is a whole section discussing tungsten, HID, HMI, and LED sources in the latter, but nothing comparable in this article.  Should something be added, espec. since Robe has introduced it's "plasma" series (I know it's technically just a variation on HID but my understanding is it's different enough technology to warrent separation.)  Lightings not my area of expertiese so I can't really flesh it out myself.  Just a thought.  DJSparky     huh? 05:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Lamp Types

message: both of the biggest circuses in norway use such technology. most likely circuses in other countries as well but i havent been on any of them so i cant tell.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  perhaps circuses should be mentioned 

message: The article authoritatively states intelligent lighting is stage lighting. NOT NECESSARILY. The term is also used to describe a related but different system of highly controllable low voltage domestic lighting systems and the beginning of the article should be changed to reflect the multiple meanings of the term intelligent lighting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.228.156.103 (talk) 08:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remit 

message: "Intelligent Lighting" has no scientific basement. All lights were created from evolution, from fire to LEDs.
I do have a fossil incandescent bulb, and museums are full of all the lines of evolutionary illumination artifacts: sticks, torches, whale oil, electric arc lamps, and quantum dots.
Wikipedia is source based, no fashion designer based. Delete this article immediately and ban the authors.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.59.5.187 (talk) 09:40, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a hoax, and should be removed. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Intelligent lighting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130125190606/http://www.mts.net/~william5/history/hol.htm to http://www.mts.net/~william5/history/hol.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified