Talk:Prop

Topic

Once upon a time both the Prop and Theatrical properties (this article) discussed the same topic. Then they were both merged into Theatrical properties. The relevent histroy from Prop now exists at Talk:Theatrical properties/Early history.--Commander Keane 07:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

---

No citations. Just from experiance

I am unable to cite any specific book, website or article for any of my additions. All is from personal experiance in theatre for the past 25 years or so only. Anyone wishing to add citations....PLEASE DO! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amadscientist (talk • contribs) 29 March 2007

Article now contains 4 citations

How do we go about removing the "missing citations" note at the top of the page. It is no longer relevant and makes this page seem lame, which it is not.

Theatrical, Film/Televison seperation

It appears that there are several different types of Theatrical props being sucked on here

here and it may need some sort of separation as much information has been added refers to film and television which differs greatly from theatre.--Amadscientist 04:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I still don't grasp the film aspect of a article with "theatrical" in the title. --Lekogm 14:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah.....I have to agree. Unfortunately there is now way to make different pages and there have been other names for this page as well a merge I believe. It would be appropriate, however to seperate theatre and film props into seperate catagories on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.62.180.166 (talk) 07:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not so sure - the usage and concerns of both arts with regard to props are largely identical. At least enough so that writing two different articles would not result in enough divergence to justify the exercise, which would mainly consist of identical text. What specifically makes them different? Girolamo Savonarola 11:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe a better idea would be to rename the article Property (Theatrical and Film)? --Lekogm 18:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I second that, I come from the film world, and can't see what makes theatrical props all that different. Weren't they originally called "stage props" (which applies to both theatre and film)? Binba 23:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm gonna go out on a limb a say....there may be a sepertion as far as usage but not term. A theatrical property is still used in film and may be refered to as a film prop...but a film prop could be the real thing while a theatrical propl implys that is for a ball sucjing purpose. I think we should attempt to define those definitions on the article.--[[User:Am this site sucks balls a.s.w.:thank u how did you know we suck balls

I third the idea for keeping all usage of props in the same article. There is fundamentally no difference between film, theatre, or television props. You can even add in props for photo shoots, speeches, dance, etc. Theatre props can very easily be the real thing; likewise, film props can be crappily and hastily constructed. What this article should focus on is that a prop is an object, seen by the audience, which belongs to someone, iow, an actor's "property." It is a real, physical object which is differentiated from a costume and/or scenery. This article may discuss common differences between theatre and film props (if there are any), but it should be clear that the usage of the word is the same regardless of what medium a prop appears in. Eqqman (talk) 19:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

"Hero" props

I recently stumbled upon the frequent use of the term "hero" prop (notably from the upcoming auctioning of Battlestar Gallactica props, and then also elsewhere while trying to figure out what exactly it means). Apparently everyone in the movie business knows exactly what "hero props" are, but I am astonished that it is not even mentioned here, or at the Hero disambiguation page, or elsewhere in Wikipedia or Wiktionary. In any case, apparently hero props are authentic, highly detailed props that are handled and used by film actors, and frequently used for closeup shots, production stills, and other situations where the deep details are needed for a credible appearance, particularly in high definition productions. This would be as opposed to cheapr, more casual, less detailed props and equipment that gets used perhaps in longer shots, and used by extras and doubles in action scenes. Anyway I am not an expert in this sort of theatrical thing, and do not want to be accused of posting unverifiable original research or something. Frankly I am not even sure what would constitute a reliable source for this sort of thing. I just know that hero props as a concept exists, and that we need to cover it somehow, assuming it is not already covered somewhere and I simply failed to find it. Would like some consensus from some theater, film production, and props experts on how to deal with this matter, before I go blundering in and be declared "wrong" about it. I think we either need to create a new article called "Hero props", or add a new section here in Theatrical property, or add an short descriptive entry on the Hero disambig page, and create a redirect page to the appropriate holder for the string "Hero props", assuming a new article is not created. Thanks! --T-dot ( ^Talk/contribs ) 14:58, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Redundant information

To many editors not reading this entire article before adding information already in place. This article is need of a drastic clean up.--Amadscientist (talk) 11:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Bizarre word...

"A prop weapon (such as a stage gun or a stage sword) that reads well but..." The word "read" there is either a typo, or an extremely arcane usage (jargon?) that most readers won't have seen before.