	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force.

Stagecraft (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Stagecraft, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.StagecraftWikipedia:WikiProject StagecraftTemplate:WikiProject StagecraftStagecraft articles

A corporate perspective (Ellipsoidal): The article on Ellipsoidal theatrical spotlights is quite accurate from a USA perspective, however, it has a slight bias towards the ETC company, which is justifiable, given their innovations. Rather than state that the particular product is the most popular, which might be true, it might be more appropriate to state that theirs was one of, or, the first developed in USA, to use the glass reflector, which allowed much of the infra-red energy (heat) to escape back through the reflector so that mainly visible light was reflected forward, keeping the shutters, iris, gobos, lenses and filter material cooler, with obvious benefits in terms of life. If I remember correctly, there was a European company with glass reflector spotlight years before ETC. My feeling is that product descriptions should be free of corporate promotion, but with a link to the corporation, so that interested persons can find out where to buy same, with a second click. The idea is to be as objective as possible.

Profile

The term 'ellipsoidal' is unknown to me. It appears to be what I know as a profile in the UK.ColinFine 00:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added it to the article -JWGreen 22:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Truthfully ERS'es and profiles are not entirely the same, profiles use condenser lenses while the reflector of the ERS does all that work, and this also leads to ever so slightly different beam characteristics, however due to their great similarity they are still generally used interchangebly in language and also in theatre use.

On a sidenote I am not sure if the Enizoom is an ERS or a profile, but I think it's a profile and not an ERS (I am having a hard time finding schematics and haven't seen their guts in a while.

--Keeper of the Keys (talk) 00:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

POV

I think the Re-invetion section comes off as very POV, but I don't know quite what to do about it. -JWGreen 16:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i dont think that the noted bias toward ETC is to underserved as most theaters (almost all) and many large stores and other business use almost solely ETC Source Four products. they have really come to dominate the market. just saying —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.6.88.225 (talk) 04:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, writing this article without writing about the Source Four would be like writing about soda without writing about Coke or Pepsi. -JWGreen (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cold Mirror

COI warning Full disclosure, I worked (as a subcontractor) on the process I am about to describe for at least two of the companies mentioned in the article.
There is only a passing mention, but one of the "neat" characteristics of these lights is the application of a thin film (through vacuum coating operations) that draws the heat of the lamp through the back of the ~~lens~~reflector, significantly reducing the heat thrown into the performance area, i.e. keeping the stage cooler. Could/should it be added?