[Konvas] lighting pars vs. fresnels (off topic)

[t byrne]

Not an odd question at all, but a good one.

The answer is that there are tungsten PARs. The key phrase here is "of 
the same design".  The PAR was originally designed for stage use, 
specifically for concert lighting, where the weight of heavily loaded 
portable trusses was a huge factor.  The tungsten  incandescent PAR 
lamps were borrowed from the aircraft industry, and the problem was that 
the lens was molded into the lamp (bulb, to you non-lighting people) 
itself and therefore was not interchangeable. (I.e., to change beam 
parameters you had to re-lamp.)  And very wasteful, although I guess 
glass could be recycled.  I put this all in the past tense, but they're 
still available, though they've been supplanted in the pop music 
industry by moving lights, which save even more weight by doing multiple 
duty.  Ronnie Altman is still making them: http://www.altmanltg.com/

Terry

> Odd lighting question.  What is the advantages/disadvantages of HMI 
> pars vs. HMI fresnels and why isn’t there a line of Tungsten pars like 
> HMI pars (with switchable lenses).  I’m assuming the major difference 
> is the bulb moving vs. the lens changing for focus.  I like using HMI 
> pars a lot they are very manageable and slick, kinda seems like 
> Tungsten pars of the same design would be useful considering that I’m 
> never that detailed with the focus knob on fresnels.  Also seems like 
> they would be less subject to breaking because they don’t have any 
> moving parts.  Thoughts?
>
>  
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Bradley
>
>