Lighting Terminology

J

Josh Bass

Veteran
So I was on a shoot talking, during my downtime, with another crew member who had DP'd a locally made independent feature film. He talked about how it was a tough production, one reason being the grip and electric department was staffed by local college students in a film program. He mentioned something as elementary as him asking for a "baby baby," and them having to find out WHAT that was before being able to procure it from the grip truck.

I wondered if this was a little unfair. I am familiar with SOME of those terms (baby baby is a Mole 1k fresel. Or something), but I thought they were kind of a holdover from older times (I've seen them mentioned in older lighting books, cinematography books, etc.). I work profressionally on video production (corporate video and similar) and commercial sets, never worked on a feature, only shorts I've worked on were ones I was directing myself or DPing for a friend. On my video production/commercial sets, I can say I rarely if ever hear these terms. Someone wants a 1K, they simply call it a 1K.

I guess I'm just curious if those of you in the feature world (or anywhere else) still use terms like baby baby, tweenie, inky, midget, junior, senior, etc. or if that has mostly been abandoned. Seems like something as simple as electrics being used to lights being called by their wattage, and then ending up on a feature set with a DP who uses the "older" terminology would be screwed (at least for a few days).

Or is it a regional thing?
 
Josh Bass said:
So I was on a shoot talking, during my downtime, with another crew member who had DP'd a locally made independent feature film. He talked about how it was a tough production, one reason being the grip and electric department was staffed by local college students in a film program. He mentioned something as elementary as him asking for a "baby baby," and them having to find out WHAT that was before being able to procure it from the grip truck.

I wondered if this was a little unfair. I am familiar with SOME of those terms (baby baby is a Mole 1k fresel. Or something), but I thought they were kind of a holdover from older times (I've seen them mentioned in older lighting books, cinematography books, etc.). I work profressionally on video production (corporate video and similar) and commercial sets, never worked on a feature, only shorts I've worked on were ones I was directing myself or DPing for a friend. On my video production/commercial sets, I can say I rarely if ever hear these terms. Someone wants a 1K, they simply call it a 1K.

I guess I'm just curious if those of you in the feature world (or anywhere else) still use terms like baby baby, tweenie, inky, midget, junior, senior, etc. or if that has mostly been abandoned. Seems like something as simple as electrics being used to lights being called by their wattage, and then ending up on a feature set with a DP who uses the "older" terminology would be screwed (at least for a few days).

Or is it a regional thing?
Click to expand...

Well he was calling for lighting instruments by name so he would get exactly what he wanted rather than not.

Hey get me a 1K, and someone could come back with a number of lighting instruments. Even if you said get me a 1K Fresnel, well there are different lens sizes depending on the light selected. But in the above case with the film students, I really don't think it makes that much difference. If somebody doesn't know what a Teenie-Weenie is, they are not going to be able to tell the difference when asked for a 600w open face when they get to the truck.
 
Last edited:
Jargon is part of life - and often used to differentiate between people who know and those that don't. We've got different terminology in the UK, so somebody coming here from the States could get in trouble because our old TV terms wouldn't mean much. However I must admit I too have used older jargon automatically and been a bit shocked when the wrong item turned up!

Students get taught by people who may or may not be old industry people - so lack of jargon is fairly common - plus I have given up on the number of people who call a Fresnel a "frez-nel", and have no idea it's a proper name of a Frenchman, so has a capital letter (like Foley) and is pronounced "fee-nel".
 
paulears said:
plus I have given up on the number of people who call a Fresnel a "frez-nel", and have no idea it's a proper name of a Frenchman, so has a capital letter (like Foley) and is pronounced "fee-nel".
Click to expand...

Hmm. Either my ears are playing tricks on me, or I hang out with the wrong crowd (or it's different in the US), but I always heard it as "FRenel" with emphasis on the last syllable "nel".
 
OldCorpse said:
Hmm. Either my ears are playing tricks on me, or I hang out with the wrong crowd (or it's different in the US), but I always heard it as "FRenel" with emphasis on the last syllable "nel".
Click to expand...
Same here. And I think a couple times I've seen people spell it "furnell" or something along those lines due to said pronunciation.

More on fresnels though, a baby-baby refers just to one type of 1k fresnel, the Mole Richardson compact one with the 4.5" lens. The larger ones with a 6" lens are commonly referred to as a 750, since that light was at one time actually rated for 750 and not 1k. That was probably 20+ years ago, but the term still sticks around.

Here's another one - the original Inky I believe was made by B&M. Mole doesn't call the 200w 3" fresnel instrument that they make an Inky in any capacity, they call it a Mini Mole. But it's close enough, so people usually call them inkies.

One term that can generate a really stupid amount of confusion is the term "single", since it can mean two completely different things depending on which department you're in. If someone asks for one on the radio and you're not next to them to actually see what they're talking about doing, if you're an electrician like me, you might come back with an extension cord when they needed a net.

There really are just too many things to list, and I'm sure that there are plenty I don't know of not having worked on any major features. But it didn't take long for me to figure out the words that I do know, since there typically is a logical reason for why something is called what it is.
 
I was a PA on a decently budgeted (45k) short last year, and the gaffer (rather than the DP who didn't know anything) would constantly ask us to grab things by their industry names (tweenie, mini, mighty, etc etc) and then get frustrated when we (the several young people helping him out for experience) would have to ask him exactly what he wanted. I completely understand the reasoning behind needing terms like this - it's efficient and saves a lot of time (typically) - but when we're on set trying to learn (as every single one of us in this industry has at some point or another), getting frustrated with us on day 1 and then continuing to refer to everything by its industry name didn't help at all. Rather, it set a sour tone for the rest of the shoot and really marginalized the crew. Instead of taking that time to teach us things, since we were all eager to learn, it made a lot of us really upset with that structure and approach to the production. That was the first and only time I've helped out on any set that used jargon to describe things - every other production has used pretty standard everyday terms in describing lights and equipment, which has probably saved more time than using the slang terms associated with them. If everyone is on the same page it can definitely be a very efficient way to operate, if not, then it simply isn't the most efficient way to keep doing it at that time.
 
I really hate the auto correct - typical isn't it when you need it to be right, its wrong - it is of course French, so Fre-nell is it! (that took 3 attempts!!!)
 
The shi*t always flows down. So it's the higher up who set-up the rules with understanding that there can be repercussion - here the fact that the lower crew members don't know what the higher-up is talking bout thus slowing down what the higher-up can accomplish.
 
i wonder if its an age thing? i wonder if its more likely that if your dp is 35 he'll call it a "mole 1k fresnel" and if he's 50+ a "baby baby." i suppose in the end its all relative to where you trained/who you worked with previously and how they taught you and what youre used to. as long as everyones on the same page, that seems like the important thing.
 
If I'm not mistaken (and it's been a long time since I've bothered to read them), the nameplates on the Mole instruments list them by their "nicknames". So even an inexperienced person can simply read the names off the back and learn what the gaffer is asking for.

On many low budget jobs i've asked for a specific amount of personnel and had production provide me with "bodies" who are admittedly green. I generally make the point that they actually only count as fractional crew, so three bodies equal one experienced person etc. and it's just not the same thing. "Bodies" are useful when you need to move things from one place to another, or carry a PeeWee up stairs, but when you can't rely on them to set a double on a c-stand without it crashing to the ground mid-take because they set it in the knuckle the wrong way, or coiled the stingers over their arm so the next person has to spend precious time getting the knots out etc....it's almost more of a liability than a help.

It is important for people who are relatively inexperienced to not present themselves otherwise, or they pretty much deserve having the hammer come down on them when they can't deliver.

Finally--jargon is ever-evolving. Even relatively new units can earn nicknames. We like to call the Litepanels Mini a "hand grenade", for instance.
 
I don't want to go into the specifics of how and why that department was staffed the way it was. There were reasons, all involved knew it was not ideal. And yes, in the instance I mentioned in the initial post they did read the back to finally find the right light.
 
When I was teaching,I had one year a rather eccentric girls student who gave everything her own new nicknames and refused to use the established ones, and before very long everyone was asking for beasts,eggs and bananas! - Which actually did describe things quite well. She now works in the media industry and it certainly did her no harm at all!
 
Jargon comes around for a good reason, as it is usually descriptive in nature. A Baby-Baby is a very specific fixture. It is a Mole fresnel which is physically smaller than a standard Baby fixture but with a larger lens. The unit was originally designed to hold a 750w bulb but everyone sticks a 1000w one in it. The point of askng for the Baby-Baby instead of a standard Baby is that it will spread the light differently because of the different sized lens.

When I ask for a specific tool it is because I want that specific tool. Don't bring me a hammer when I need a screwdriver. Learning the jargon is a very important part of the job, because it means you're in sync with the rest of the crew. It also means that you begin to understand both the how and the why of the tools you use.

Now go get me a Gary Coleman for a chopper on that basher that's mounted on a pancake with a butt-plug. And pull me that stinger for the PeeWee -- I want to do a Mickey Rooney for this shot.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Jargon comes around for a good reason, as it is usually descriptive in nature. A Baby-Baby is a very specific fixture. It is a Mole fresnel which is physically smaller than a standard Baby fixture but with a larger lens. The unit was originally designed to hold a 750w bulb but everyone sticks a 1000w one in it. The point of askng for the Baby-Baby instead of a standard Baby is that it will spread the light differently because of the different sized lens.

When I ask for a specific tool it is because I want that specific tool. Don't bring me a hammer when I need a screwdriver. Learning the jargon is a very important part of the job, because it means you're in sync with the rest of the crew. It also means that you begin to understand both the how and the why of the tools you use.

Now go get me a Gary Coleman for a chopper on that basher that's mounted on a pancake with a butt-plug. And pull me that stinger for the PeeWee -- I want to do a Mickey Rooney for this shot.
Click to expand...

Yes, learning the jargon is important, but I have to say to the DP cited in the OP that as a DP the actions of the crew are his responsibility and he should have made an effort, before the shoot, to assess the level of experience and competence of the crew that he was tasked to work with and made what ever adjustments were necessary to see that the shoot went off as expeditiously as possible. I have worked with very green crews on several occasions and have come up with my own jargon; describing the set up as a "Film Camp". On one long form project set up with a film camp crew, we took an afternoon and did a hands on class where we went through everything from set etiquette and work flow to how to lay out and tear down cables and stingers to how to use a C-stands. We also went through and described the lights and other gear we would be using. While I agree that if a person is serious about learning to be a professional film technician they should learn the jargon and the equipment, but when I have agreed to work with a film camp crew I made it my responsibility to make sure the crew works as well as possible and if that means that I have to dispense with jargon, or take an extra couple of seconds to explain what exactly is needed then so be it.
 
As stated earlier a baby baby is different and smaller than a baby 1k. Instead of complaining about jargon try spending some time learning the name and uses of instruments. It is really simple and easy. Just get a free Mole catalog. They set the standard for naming standards years ago. If you plan on getting into this business as a pro or staying in you are only going to be taken seriously if you can speak the language. Sorry, but the pros are not going to come down to your level.
 
Continuing on with Paul's perspective, I see from Adam's post that the students felt lost with the professional confusing them with terms. Yet the students made no effort to look up gaffer jargon right then or that evening for the next day's shoot. Being resourceful is part of the job. A simple web search would have provided all the answers. If you were an intern or a potential future employee and you made no effort to learn the terms after the first day, you would have lost all of my respect and would have not been considered for future work. I might consider what the gaffer did to be a test to see how resourceful the candidates were. Standing around with no initiative doesn't impress.
 
I've been on the the other end of this, shouting to the film school g&e kids all the nicknames and lingo. Had a few of them come up to me at the end of the day and thank me for treating him like a real crew and they said they learned real fast what the gear was and used for.
 
Paul F said:
Continuing on with Paul's perspective, I see from Adam's post that the students felt lost with the professional confusing them with terms. Yet the students made no effort to look up gaffer jargon right then or that evening for the next day's shoot. Being resourceful is part of the job. A simple web search would have provided all the answers. If you were an intern or a potential future employee and you made no effort to learn the terms after the first day, you would have lost all of my respect and would have not been considered for future work. I might consider what the gaffer did to be a test to see how resourceful the candidates were. Standing around with no initiative doesn't impress.
Click to expand...

We were all very eager to learn, but putting the production on hold to go Google some terms wasn't a possibility. When asked to get whatever piece of equipment we'd inquire as to what it was/why it was called that/etc while we were fetching it or helping set it up, but instead of it leading to a learning opportunity, it turned into a myriad of sighs, frustrated eye-rolling, and very visible annoyance from those who had been on sets before. I can understand those reactions to laziness or just general idiocy, but getting a group of film students to help you out (simply in exchange for experience) and then acting like that, refusing to teach them a damn thing, and barely answering questions when asked is a shame to our industry. It's a stark contrast to things like this site, which is (typically) a testament to the power of sharing knowledge to better our industry. Maybe it was the lack of respect we were shown, maybe it's my background in academia and penchant for teaching, maybe (most likely) I'm just really goddamn needy - but whatever the reason, the experience was ruined for me, and as you can tell I've got a bit of a bitter taste from it still.

I'll end with reiterating that jargon/lingo/terminology is great, and a huge part of any niche in life - it's proof that we've adapted to a more efficient method of working and communicating on sets.

Adam
 
Justin Aguirre said:
I've been on the the other end of this, shouting to the film school g&e kids all the nicknames and lingo. Had a few of them come up to me at the end of the day and thank me for treating him like a real crew and they said they learned real fast what the gear was and used for.
Click to expand...


Exactly this. It does nobody any good if the DP or Gaffer holds your hands and lets you get away with not knowing the terminology of the industry that you claim to want to work in. Yes it can be overwhelming at first, and perhaps even "unfair", but I think it's an important and necessary experience. I know from my experience, once I started to really learn the terms and could understand everything that was going on, I started to truly feel a part of the industry. I would never feel that way if the people I worked for let me get away with laziness and lack of research. Still to this day I learn new terms on just about any shoot I go on. It takes a while, you really have to just accept that and keep working hard. These terms exist for a reason.
 
adamrahn said:
We were all very eager to learn, but putting the production on hold to go Google some terms wasn't a possibility. When asked to get whatever piece of equipment we'd inquire as to what it was/why it was called that/etc while we were fetching it or helping set it up, but instead of it leading to a learning opportunity, it turned into a myriad of sighs, frustrated eye-rolling, and very visible annoyance from those who had been on sets before. I can understand those reactions to laziness or just general idiocy, but getting a group of film students to help you out (simply in exchange for experience) and then acting like that, refusing to teach them a damn thing, and barely answering questions when asked is a shame to our industry. It's a stark contrast to things like this site, which is (typically) a testament to the power of sharing knowledge to better our industry. Maybe it was the lack of respect we were shown, maybe it's my background in academia and penchant for teaching, maybe (most likely) I'm just really goddamn needy - but whatever the reason, the experience was ruined for me, and as you can tell I've got a bit of a bitter taste from it still.

I'll end with reiterating that jargon/lingo/terminology is great, and a huge part of any niche in life - it's proof that we've adapted to a more efficient method of working and communicating on sets.

Adam
Click to expand...

There is disparity of what you want and what the set wants. You want to learn while the set want to accomplish things as quickly and efficiently as possible. In that sense there is no room for learning as there simply is no time. That said if you were brought in as a PA then the higher ups have a strange understanding of what PA knows. However if you were brought in as G&E than higher-ups assume you know what you suppose to know. As a DP there is nothing more frustrating than coming on a shoot and finding out that your "G&Es" don't know what barn boors are.... (happened to me just a few weeks ago)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top