I was rather alarmed to read Kevin Harrison's post about lighting symbols. What exactly are "a comprehensive set of base symbols"?

Do these have anything do with the bizarre assortment of objects that currently make up the symbols library?

I cannot state strongly enough that generic symbols of any kind are worse than useless in a scale drawing. What exactly are you planning to provide?

Hi,

I do agree with Simon Mauder. As far as I am concerned, I am starting to use stardraw to spend less time to get nicer and cleaner light plans. But with your solution, It will not fit at all with my needs. it will take ages to draw every "generic symbols" to the exact size.
Moreover, I don't understand why your symbols are so out-to-date(the martin mac2000 performance does not exist, whereas it has more than 2 years) as they seem quite easy to devellop (every moving head has the same design, just have to change parameters such as weight, name, company...). Moreover many useful symbols are missing (generic: protection cable pipe for the floor, truss bases...).
++
Tocsin

I would really have to agree with both of the mails above,if you go to the symbol request section there are several dozen requests which have yet to be implemented,i don't see the point in having a request section if they don't implement them.I asked for some symbols in early 2004 and still nothing,is that fair ?

Would be good if Rob or David from Stardraw could reply to this,

Regards C

^{Thanks CJ}