Relative 'Gel Colors' for Various Selador Fixtures

Actually, I'm not sure that a *color gamut* for each color mix would be helpful, nor would a list of "possible" gel colors. I'll explain why, using the most extreme example.

The Fire mix contains some indigo LEDs in addition to all the warm colors. Ice contains red along with the cool colors. And both mixes contain green emitters. This means that both of these specialized fixtures actually have quite a large gamut of "possible" colors. The thing that matters is how bright they are across their gamuts.

You are correct that Fire is best suited for bright reds, oranges, yellows, straws, etc., and even pinks and magentas. What may not be obvious is that it can also do lavenders, purples, greens, aquas, and deep blues -- just at a MUCH lower brightness level. 

Ice is the opposite. It's amazingly bright in all blue, turquoise, purple, steel-blue, and lavender colors, but it can also do reds, oranges, and greens. Again, though, those non-Ice-like colors are significantly less bright than what the fixture was made to do best.

With Vivid / Vivid-R and Lustr / Lustr+, the distinction is a little less intuitive. Vivid and Lustr have basically identical color gamuts. However, they are different in an important way. Vivid was made to do best in saturated colors. It contains more red, red-orange, blue, and indigo LEDs and fewer greens. This gives it a lot of punch in the saturated colors that are most commonly used. With all emitters on at full, the resulting color mix is quite pink.

Lustr is balanced more toward white when all LEDs are at full. It has fewer reds and blues in the LED array and more green and cyan to help it perform better in pastels or white mixes. Lustr can do all the same saturated colors as Vivid, but it is not as punchy in the red-magenta-blue range of deep colors.

If you want very bright reds and blues, use Vivid. If you want a broad-range of color options but plan to use the fixtures primarily for less-saturated tints and whites, use Lustr.

In a nutshell:

-- Vivid is what you want for a cyc.

-- Lustr is better for lighting most or all of the downstage areas.

-- Use Fire and Ice when you know that the fixtures will be used in only a very constrained way (more commonly seen in architectural installations than in theatre work).

Some users like to put a combination of both Fire and Ice as downlight on acting areas. That works well for deeply colored toplight / backlight. Vivid would also be a good option for this, but most often users like the flexibility of Lustr overhead for its supremacy in light tones.

Does this help?

Actually, I'm not sure that a *color gamut* for each color mix would be helpful, nor would a list of "possible" gel colors. I'll explain why, using the most extreme example.

The Fire mix contains some indigo LEDs in addition to all the warm colors. Ice contains red along with the cool colors. And both mixes contain green emitters. This means that both of these specialized fixtures actually have quite a large gamut of "possible" colors. The thing that matters is how bright they are across their gamuts.

You are correct that Fire is best suited for bright reds, oranges, yellows, straws, etc., and even pinks and magentas. What may not be obvious is that it can also do lavenders, purples, greens, aquas, and deep blues -- just at a MUCH lower brightness level. 

Ice is the opposite. It's amazingly bright in all blue, turquoise, purple, steel-blue, and lavender colors, but it can also do reds, oranges, and greens. Again, though, those non-Ice-like colors are significantly less bright than what the fixture was made to do best.

With Vivid / Vivid-R and Lustr / Lustr+, the distinction is a little less intuitive. Vivid and Lustr have basically identical color gamuts. However, they are different in an important way. Vivid was made to do best in saturated colors. It contains more red, red-orange, blue, and indigo LEDs and fewer greens. This gives it a lot of punch in the saturated colors that are most commonly used. With all emitters on at full, the resulting color mix is quite pink.

Lustr is balanced more toward white when all LEDs are at full. It has fewer reds and blues in the LED array and more green and cyan to help it perform better in pastels or white mixes. Lustr can do all the same saturated colors as Vivid, but it is not as punchy in the red-magenta-blue range of deep colors.

If you want very bright reds and blues, use Vivid. If you want a broad-range of color options but plan to use the fixtures primarily for less-saturated tints and whites, use Lustr.

In a nutshell:

-- Vivid is what you want for a cyc.

-- Lustr is better for lighting most or all of the downstage areas.

-- Use Fire and Ice when you know that the fixtures will be used in only a very constrained way (more commonly seen in architectural installations than in theatre work).

Some users like to put a combination of both Fire and Ice as downlight on acting areas. That works well for deeply colored toplight / backlight. Vivid would also be a good option for this, but most often users like the flexibility of Lustr overhead for its supremacy in light tones.

Does this help?

Forgot to explain Paletta.

It works very much like Lustr in its color-mix capabilities. The fixture is smaller. It contains less heat-dissipating surface area, which reduces the cost by quite a bit. It is just not as bright as Lustr. It's a great option for smaller-scale spaces or when budget is a more limiting constraint.