# Who Gets Credit For What?



## MrsFooter (Dec 19, 2011)

Let's say, for theoretical discussion, that you're the Lighting Director at a roadhouse. You're loading in a dance company, and the road LD walks an hour before house open, taking all the paperwork with him. So that show disk you're holding is now completely useless. With the SM by your side, you manage to sit down and program the entire show in an hour. The SM can give you a general direction towards what each look should be as designed by a designer, (such as whether it's warm or cool, dark or bright, realistic looking or dream-like, and a few of the dominate colors,) but it's your plot that you're using and you're the one who actually puts together each cue and decide what it looks like.

So, were you to decide, theoretically, to use this show on your website or portfolio, who's design is it, and what can and cannot you take credit for? The designer came up with the concept, but you're the one who actually put it together. So who can take credit for what?

*For the record, I'm not putting any of this on my website, partially because it was an awkward situation and partially because I didn't have a camera with me so I have no pictures of any of my looks from this show. But I think it's an interesting point of discussion.


----------



## chausman (Dec 19, 2011)

I personally think that since you actually "designed" the lighting, you created the looks on what you wanted them to ultimately look like, you are the designer. Whether it should go on a portfolio or website is a little different though. If that designer were to see "their" design on your website, they would probably be more then a little pissed off about it.


----------



## Tex (Dec 19, 2011)

You designed it; you get the credit. If the LD wanted credit, he wouldn't have walked. LD's that walk an hour before the house opens don't stay LD's very long anyway. You're not taking credit for anyone's work but your own.
I was handed a mock up of one of our programs not long ago. My assistant, who was in charge of costumes and the program had placed her head shot and bio next to mine under the heading "Directors".


----------



## shiben (Dec 19, 2011)

Tex said:


> You designed it; you get the credit. If the LD wanted credit, he wouldn't have walked. LD's that walk an hour before the house opens don't stay LD's very long anyway. You're not taking credit for anyone's work but your own.
> I was handed a mock up of one of our programs not long ago. My assistant, who was in charge of costumes and the program had placed her head shot and bio next to mine under the heading "Directors".


 
I think its a costumes thing. Similar thing happened the last place I worked... Although, I tend to request to have my headshot removed from the program or wall if its on there... Ill write a quick bio for you and get "Lighting Design by..." but other than that, not really. I dont like any pictures of me. As to the original question, Its your design, you get credit. Go ahead and pop it on the website. Personally, if the original guy complained I would put the circumstances right next to the show description but thats just me...


----------



## MrsFooter (Dec 19, 2011)

chausman said:


> If that designer were to see "their" design on your website, they would probably be more then a little pissed off about it.



I should have mentioned originally that in this exercise the guy who walked and the guy who designed the show that the SM helped you through are not the same people. 

(I'm not really sure what the situation was, but the feeling I was getting was that after many years of the same design this new LD came in and tried to reinvent the wheel. I got the feeling that the show the SM was helping me through was closer to the original design by the first LD. But again, I'm not 100% sure.)

Resume discussion.


----------



## jglodeklights (Dec 19, 2011)

Well, that is a sticky situation. My take is that you really need to put your ego aside and let the credit go to the original designer (not the road LD that walked). Even though you put together the cues, you were attempting to maintain the original composition and design of the work as best you could. If I were to put it on my site, I would credit the designer, and then credit myself as "Recreated at _______ by *My Name Here*"


----------



## derekleffew (Dec 19, 2011)

Interesting conundrum. Let me offer another thought...
In a touring situation, if you are working for the HOUSE, and not the COMPANY or PRODUCTION, you are *never* the designer. Where's your Lighting Concept/Lighting Statement ? How many production meetings did you attend with the director and rest of the design team? Conversely, one who comes into a venue and focuses and cues may well be the designer, or may better be termed a Lighting Director. It doesn't matter who drew symbols on a light plot (and there may not even be a light plot). Many house repertory plots evolve over time with each person making minor changes. Whose plot is it anyway? Who cares? 

I wouldn't list a credit as "Lighting Designer for East Spider Breath Ballet Company's production of _The Nutcracker_" if I were the house electrician where it played, even if they didn't bring lighting people.


----------



## rochem (Dec 19, 2011)

jglodeklights said:


> Well, that is a sticky situation. My take is that you really need to put your ego aside and let the credit go to the original designer (not the road LD that walked). Even though you put together the cues, you were attempting to maintain the original composition and design of the work as best you could. If I were to put it on my site, I would credit the designer, and then credit myself as "Recreated at _______ by *My Name Here*"


 
The only comparison to this that I can think of would be the bway revival of Chorus Line back in 2006. Even though there wasn't a single lighting instrument or gel color that was the same as the original production, Tharon Musser got the credit for the lighting design, and Natasha got a "Lighting adapted by" credit. While Natasha created the plot and every cue, the concepts behind the design were Tharon's, so she got the credit. That said, there's a very fine line between making a new design and recreating someone else's design, so it's really a decision that only you can make after looking at all the facts surrounding the event.


----------



## SteveB (Dec 19, 2011)

I would ask yourself are you proud of the design ?, or of the fact that you pulled their bacon out of the fire ?.

As well, is there anything about the design that you are particularly proud of ?, and do you need it in your portfolio. 

Since the original design was by an LD that had nothing to do with this production, that person is in actuality the designer. In my opinion, everybody else that recreated the original should be/can be listed as Lighting Director, yourself included.


----------



## MPowers (Dec 19, 2011)

SteveB said:


> .....Since the original design was by an LD that had nothing to do with this production, that person is in actuality the designer. In my opinion, everybody else that recreated the original should be/can be listed as Lighting Director, yourself included.




> Tharon Musser got the credit for the lighting design, and Natasha got a "Lighting adapted by" credit. While Natasha created the plot and every cue, the concepts behind the design were Tharon's, so she got the credit....



I have to agree here. Personally, I would not allow myself to be listed as the designer in a situation such as you describe. Neither would I allow the peripatetic designer to be listed if there was any way to prevent it or make the correction with a program insert. If I read you post correctly, you recreated the original design concept from the memory of the stage manager, using your rep plot. If a listing is needed, I would go the "Lighting adapted by" route. All the above is just IMHO.


----------



## MrsFooter (Dec 19, 2011)

SteveB said:


> I would ask yourself are you proud of the design ?, or of the fact that you pulled their bacon out of the fire ?.


 
That right there is the only reason that I would even _consider_ including this show on my website. No, it wasn't my best work; we weren't exactly making high art, here. But it was an unusual situation that I believe showcased an ability to rise to the occasion and put up a show no matter the obstacles. 

As for what goes in the program, in this particular situation it's a moot point. I'm given the blanket credit of Lighting Director in every program, regardless of the show, because it's in our standard program. (Including shows I'm not even a part of, so there you go.) Then each program gets an insert with the specifics of the show. I don't know whether theirs included lighting design credits, (many don't,) but even if it did he walked an hour before house open, so those inserts were long printed and stuffed. Luckily, I'm pretty sure no one reads the tech credits in our programs anyway!

Love the discussion that's going on!


----------



## Sony (Dec 20, 2011)

He walked with the disks and paperwork...wow, how immature...quitting is one thing...but walking out with intellectual property that isn't even yours...that's unacceptable.

He's gonna be giving those disks and papers back soon, once he gets served with a lawsuit from the company. I know when I have designed lights for outside companies/events that I have been paid for, the rights to USE the design were signed over in my contract with the company. Walking off with all copies of the cues and call sheets would have ended up with my butt being sued into the ground. After the design is finished, it is owned by the company and I can't just up and take it away from them, and that is me the designer...not some pissant road LD who never designed the thing in the first place and was basically just handed the disks and design and told to recreate it at each stop. He'll never work as a road LD ever again...if he ever works in the industry again.


----------



## zmb (Dec 20, 2011)

rochem said:


> That said, there's a very fine line between making a new design and recreating someone else's design, so it's really a decision that only you can make after looking at all the facts surrounding the event.


Let's say I'm a student and I design a show in the school district's performing arts center using the rep plot designed by their lighting staff. I changed most of the gel colors and added a couple specials and gobos to existing instruments. The show was a musical revue with no set to work around, so having come up a new design to provide light on the whole stage would have been like reinventing the wheel, but can I still say that I designed it?


----------



## rochem (Dec 20, 2011)

zmb said:


> Let's say I'm a student and I design a show in the school district's performing arts center using the rep plot designed by their lighting staff. I changed most of the gel colors and added a couple specials and gobos to existing instruments. The show was a musical revue with no set to work around, so having come up a new design to provide light on the whole stage would have been like reinventing the wheel, but can I still say that I designed it?


 
I would certainly say so! Just because you didn't necessarily say how far off center you wanted that pipe end hung, doesn't mean you didn't still design the show. Every dance lighting designer in the world puts lights on booms, but that doesn't mean they need to write "Lighting Design by Jean Rosenthal, Adapted by Me" in the program. Rep plots are a fact of life in lots of theatres, and for good reason. I'd say that even if you walked in and didn't change any of the color or templates in the rep plot, you'd still be designing the show - after all, there are literally millions of ways you can use your instruments to create new compositions within the confines of whatever plot happens to be in the air. In the end, design is about deciding what you want the stage to look like at what times - not whether you chose to use 26s or 36s in the high sides.


----------



## gcpsoundlight (Dec 20, 2011)

my view is that the designer is the creative person who decides what look will be.


----------



## chausman (Dec 20, 2011)

gcpsoundlight said:


> my view is that the designer is the creative person who decides what look will be.


 
So, what it looks like, not how it got that way?


----------



## SteveB (Dec 20, 2011)

derekleffew said:


> Interesting conundrum. Let me offer another thought...
> In a touring situation, if you are working for the HOUSE, and not the COMPANY or PRODUCTION, you are *never* the designer. Where's your Lighting Concept/Lighting Statement ? How many production meetings did you attend with the director and rest of the design team? .



Big grey area here though, especially for house LD's. Certainly Steph (and I) have designed, in every sense of the word, for acts that have no LD, no advance paperwork, and no real communication up to the point that you are sitting at the console during sound check. It's at that point that you hear the music, sometimes for the first time and start to make artistic decisions as to what's appropriate for certain songs, getting a sense of the timings, possibly making adjustments to some focus if possible. Then you run the show and are the designer. Period. It's your color palette and possibly you chose it, as well as the basic focus, based on prior experience with similar acts. Thus you've made design decisions and are doing so in the cuing process that happens to coincide with the performance.

It's something I do every week and I know Stephanie does as well. Do I get credit for it ?, usually no as I'm already credited in the house program. But I would have no issues with stating in my portfolio that I designed lighting for Peter, Paul and Mary at BC in '92. Or many, many similar acts. 

Would I then call myself the designer for the situation Steph. lay'ed out for us ?. No. I'm the ad-hoc Director, but the basic color choices as well as instrument choices (angle) as well as the essential "look" of the assorted cues, were all done prior for this company. As house Lighting Director, you are assisting the SM in re-creating those looks and cues, but that does not make you the designer.


----------



## calkew5 (Dec 20, 2011)

rochem said:


> "Lighting Design by Jean Rosenthal, Adapted by Me"



I'm totally doing this on the next dance show I design.


----------



## MrsFooter (Dec 20, 2011)

derekleffew said:


> In a touring situation, if you are working for the HOUSE, and not the COMPANY or PRODUCTION, you are *never* the designer. Where's your Lighting Concept/Lighting Statement ? How many production meetings did you attend with the director and rest of the design team? Conversely, one who comes into a venue and focuses and cues may well be the designer, or may better be termed a Lighting Director. It doesn't matter who drew symbols on a light plot (and there may not even be a light plot). Many house repertory plots evolve over time with each person making minor changes. Whose plot is it anyway? Who cares?



Derek brings up a good point, here. What, exactly, makes one a designer? If the show has no formal conceptual production process, does that mean that there is no designer? And what does that mean for shows that are busked live? What constitutes a design?

Discuss.


----------



## Dillon (Dec 20, 2011)

"The show must go on." It's what we do. Be honest when you tell the story and use anything that'll help you get the next gig.


----------



## SteveB (Dec 20, 2011)

MrsFooter said:


> Derek brings up a good point, here. What, exactly, makes one a designer? If the show has no formal conceptual production process, does that mean that there is no designer? And what does that mean for shows that are busked live? What constitutes a design?
> 
> Discuss.



If you choose the equipment, color, angle, intensity, rate of change, channeling, etc.... you are the lighting designer. It matters not if you've been to rehearsals, done paperwork, discussed with anyone. You do not have to have collaborated with other designers or a director/choreographer to have still created a lighting design. Everytime I see one of those hokey high-school YouTube video's of some kid using all the schools moving lights to make a cool light show to a Led Zeppelin song, I think, "well, they're learning lighting design".


----------



## derekleffew (Dec 20, 2011)

SteveB said:


> ... I think, "well, they're learning lighting design".


I'll vociferously disagree! (No offense to soundlight, or any other devotees of that particular genre.) Learning/knowing how to flash lights in time to music IS NOT lighting design. Particularly when done in a vacuum with little or no supervision/collaboration. It may be a desirable skill for a club DJ, but it ain't gonna help one bit when lighting a production of _The Cherry Orchard_.


Intensity
Color
Distribution
Movement

Selective Visibility
Revelation of Form
Illusion of Nature
Mood
Composition


----------



## chausman (Dec 20, 2011)

derekleffew said:


> I'll vociferously disagree! (No offense to soundlight, or any other devotees of that particular genre.) Learning/knowing how to flash lights in time to music IS NOT lighting design. Particularly when done in a vacuum with little or no supervision/collaboration. It may be a desirable skill for a club DJ, but it ain't gonna help one bit when lighting a production of _The Cherry Orchard_.
> 
> 
> Intensity
> ...


 
Well, no its not going to help you with some things, but don't you think at least a little thought went in to what was lighting where in what color, and how that affects the rest of the stage?


----------



## SteveB (Dec 20, 2011)

derekleffew said:


> I'll vociferously disagree! (No offense to soundlight, or any other devotees of that particular genre.) Learning/knowing how to flash lights in time to music IS NOT lighting design. Particularly when done in a vacuum with little or no supervision/collaboration. It may be a desirable skill for a club DJ, but it ain't gonna help one bit when lighting a production of _The Cherry Orchard_.
> 
> 
> Intensity
> ...


 
I would think that one of the goals is to sometimes not be an Illusion of Nature and is not what I was taught, where as the other tools and goals were.

And I'm thinking you are asking for a very narrow and selective definition of Lighting Design. Certainly one of the flash and trash YouTube designers are not creating a theatrical piece, but if they use the tools and achieve the goals, does the end result disqualify them from being a designer ?.

Hardly. 

Nowhere in the USA 829 Lighting Design exam (as far as I'm aware) is it written that acceptable designs need to have been collaborative pieces. Indeed, many practicing 829 members design restaurants and other architectural systems. They never talk to a costume designer or director and really only deal with an architect, who are generally not known for being collaborators. Yet they use all the tools and attempt to achieve all the goals listed above. And they certainly think of it as a Lighting Design and list it on their portfolio as such.

This whole issue came up decades ago when the concert LD's started to get creative with the big R&R tours going out, when many so-called Broadway and theatrical designers would poo-poo the "designs", but eventually came to realize that folks like Jeff Ravitch, Jim Moody, Patrick Woodroffe among others, were indeed designers and the lighting they created was every bit a Lighting Design, flash and trash and all.


----------



## LXPlot (Dec 20, 2011)

derekleffew said:


> It may be a desirable skill for a club DJ, but it ain't gonna help one bit when lighting a production of _The Cherry Orchard_.


 
That requires all the traditional skills of lighting design, plus the ability to focus on something even at points where it's exceedingly boring...

And worst case scenario, it falls very slightly into the category of "this should feel like this and be this color," with may help a bit with the Chekov's and Ibsen's of the world.


----------



## ruinexplorer (Dec 20, 2011)

MrsFooter said:


> Derek brings up a good point, here. What, exactly, makes one a designer? If the show has no formal conceptual production process, does that mean that there is no designer? And what does that mean for shows that are busked live? What constitutes a design?


 
I think the terminology that you are using is more definitive of the type of "design" you speak of in the first post. If you consider a quality jam session, single musician or an entire band. While those of us who enjoy this type of music (you Dead-heads and Phish fans, especially), I wouldn't consider anyone a composer/song-writer at that moment. They are simply using their talent as a musician, based off previous experience, to provide a great sound. Even if there is a leader to the group guiding the jam session, that person is still not the song-writer. 

Now, like the HS student doing their flash and trash design on an empty stage, there is still experience being collected. The band leader may use some of the sounds created in the jam session as inspiration for a future song as well as the student taking looks and using them for actual designs later on. 

I worked in a roadhouse, similar to The Egg, but on a larger scale (we had the biggest Broadway shows down to small regional acts, speakers such as the Dali Lama and final Presidential debates, and everything in between). There were many times that one of the technical directors would turn to me and say, I need such and such for this show. There is not a plot, and only a basic description of the show, make it good. I wasn't ever billed as the lighting designer, lighting director, or anything since that isn't how the operation worked. If I were to do a website for my designs, I might list one of these as an example of my work, but I wouldn't consider it a "design". 

For a design, there is more of a process which has many different elements, which may or may not all be present in the design. As with Derek's list, there are many things to be considered in a design, but they may be applied to many different types of productions/situations. Certainly a rep plot will affect your design, as does the architecture of a specific venue, the locations of a lineset, or many other variables. 

But, for what you did, along with many other similar situations, I would go with your term of "busking". This is what we do for many corporate events, one-off productions, concerts, and for idiot road LDs.


----------



## zmb (Dec 21, 2011)

I handled lighting for one acts this year at the high school I participate at and went off the rep plot however I wouldn't consider myself the designer; there were somethings I would like to change but just couldn't with the time constraints. My role was talking with the directors to get what they wanted in terms of where the stage should be lit and not but also having to take requests like "mystery" or "dark" and translate that into something on stage. I also helped develop ideas like throwing in amber side light and the like.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Dec 21, 2011)

The real question is, if you gain some sort of satisfaction from the work you're doing, does it really matter if some theatre snob considers you a "true" lighting designer or not? If I can get as much creative satisfaction from blinking lights in time with the music, as someone lighting Chekhov, I don't really care what my title is.


----------



## SteveB (Dec 21, 2011)

As far as I'm concerned, if an operator/Lighting Director/Designer is aware of and uses these tools:

Intensity
Color
Distribution
Movement

To achieve these goals, to the best of their ability and given the constraints of the enviroment:

Selective Visibility
Revelation of Form
Mood
Composition

As an ORIGINAL creation, then I'd call them a Lighting Designer.


----------



## LDwiggs30 (Dec 21, 2011)

Get used to being in this situation. I've been in each position (LD, op, programmer, SM, TM) and the LD gets credit for the design most of the time, along with the producer; depending on the type of show. Ops and programmers are the real beasts on these shows, and go completely un-noticed(until a miscue). I've had a number of big name LD's come in and give me their design input, but the person who puts the cuelist together is who makes the show. Unfortunately, that's not usually the person whose name is carried along with the project. Your time will come when you're LD'ing that you get your just due. Everyone has to go through it.


----------



## nquinn2 (Dec 25, 2011)

This is a really interesting discussion, and I have been in similar situations. Half way through one project the designer had to excuse himself for personal reasons and the producers asked me to take over and finish the design. They decided to bill me as the designer and give a program credit to the other designer: “Original design concept by ____.” Other times I am just a lighting tech, but because it’s a tour and the LD isn’t present I end up making creative decisions with the client to get the show done. In that case, if I really felt strongly about it, I might approach the producer/promoter and negotiate the proper billing AND compensation. If you’re doing the work of an LD, you might as well get paid as one. But I don’t think I would ever claim being a designer on any project unless that is what I was hired to do. It should be clear if the producer/promoter is hiring you as a designer/lighting director/electrician/lighting tech/whatever.

As far as what qualifies a lighting designer, I think that may depend on the project. You can be billed as the LD whether you choose to use one light that never changes or 300 lights with 1000 cues. You are the LD if you work in a bubble or if you collaborate with the director and other designers (I find the collaborative projects to be MUCH more rewarding). Theatre, concerts, special events, architecture, etc. all have lighting designers. You are making creative choices to support the show. But like Michael’s Chorus Line example, what you are credited with really depends on what the producer/promoter hires you to do.

If it were me, I would save this situation for an interview as a great example of working under pressure. I think your work ethic and willingness to go above and beyond speaks more than what your title happened to be.


----------

