Unpopular opinion: the new lighting on Spaceship Earth is bad

[Tom Morrow]

When I first saw the Points of Light lighting on Spaceship Earth, I thought it was pretty neat. But, as time goes on, and the longer it sticks around, the more I don't like it and think that my initial reaction to it was more due to seeing something new on Spaceship Earth rather than if it's actually appropriate for Spaceship Earth.

Why? Several reasons:

1. It turns Spaceship Earth into a flashy carnival ride. It's really no different than the lighting display on, for example, the Starflyer at Icon Park on International Drive. Tons of bright LED modules dotting the entire structure doing garish, flashy synchronized displays.

2. The beauty of Spaceship Earth is not that it's a sphere, but the texture of the triangle pattern and how that bends and reflects the light shining on it in different ways. Up close, the lights completely overshadow the beauty of the structure, and from further away, you no longer see the texture at all, only the dotted lights.

Basically, elaborate LED light displays are a dime a dozen, but a 180 foot geodesic sphere isn't. The emphasis should be on the structure.

I have wondered if a happy medium could be reached. Perhaps by reducing the brightness of the lights so that they do not overpower the light reflecting off of the structure.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

It may be unpopular, but I'll absolutely agree with you here.

I wish the physical light modules themselves were a little more sleek (or, better yet, more invisible?), but short of that the quickest and most important way they can improve them is to turn the brightness WAAAY DOWN.

The lights are bright enough to serve as a nightlight for the Space Station, and they should never, ever be that bright save for a rare moment of punctuation. Let them call attention to themselves when doing a show, but most other times a gentle twinkle would be more than ample for general ambiance. Think the calm glow of the old Fiber Optic sidewalks.

As it is right now the lights are blistering and from a distance optically compress the beautiful geometry of the sphere into a flat billboard. It's like they forgot that the lights serve the structure and not the other way around. Have some restraint, people.

 

[castlecake2.0]

When I first saw the Points of Light lighting on Spaceship Earth, I thought it was pretty neat. But, as time goes on, and the longer it sticks around, the more I don't like it.

Why? Several reasons:

1. It turns Spaceship Earth into a flashy carnival ride. It's really no different than the lighting display on, for example, the Starflyer at Icon Park on International Drive.
2. The beauty of Spaceship Earth is not that it's a sphere, but the texture of the triangle pattern and how that bends and reflects the light shining on it in different ways. Up close, the lights completely overshadow the beauty of the structure, and from further away, you no longer see the texture at all, only the dotted lights.

Basically, elaborate LED light displays are a dime a dozen, but a 180 foot geodesic sphere isn't. The emphasis should be on the structure.

I have wondered if a happy medium could be reached. Perhaps by reducing the brightness of the lights so that they do not overpower the light reflecting off of the structure.

Agree 100000%

 

[jaklgreen]

I like it. Pretty colors are never a bad thing.

 

[Tom Morrow]

I like it. Pretty colors are never a bad thing.

They can be when they're blocking out a prettier thing.

 

[James Alucobond]

It may be unpopular, but I'll absolutely agree with you here.

I wish the physical light modules themselves were a little more sleek (or, better yet, more invisible?), but short of that the quickest and most important way they can improve them is to turn the brightness WAAAY DOWN.

The lights are bright enough to serve as a nightlight for the Space Station, and they should never, ever be that bright save for a rare moment of punctuation. Let them call attention to themselves when doing a show, but most other times a gentle twinkle would be more than ample for general ambiance. Think the calm glow of the old Fiber Optic sidewalks.

As it is right now the lights are blistering and from a distance optically compress the beautiful geometry of the sphere into a flat billboard. It's like they forgot that the lights serve the structure and not the other way around. Have some restraint, people.

I like the lights in general, but I definitely agree with this. They should utilize them way more subtly than they currently do. I feel like Rainbow Connection is the best show because it's more subdued for at least 60% of the runtime, but even it gets a bit over-the-top toward the end. The absolute worst is honestly when they turn the white starburst pattern on full blast over the entire thing. It's blinding, it completely flattens the surface, and it calls attention to any malfunctioning puck.

 

[JIMINYCR]

OK I’ll dare to be different. I like the lights and patterns on SSE. It highlights the sphere and after years of just being there and passing it by it now stands out and gives guests a reason to focus on it . At night the triangular patterns are barely recognizable.
Cry when Disney doesn’t do anything and cry when they do.
I agree it looks flashy and stands out but that’s the point. Maybe for those who go weekly, monthly or with great frequency it could grow tiring to look at, but for those of us who do a trip once or twice a year it’s just fine.
For some the Christmas lights ruin the aestetics of the Castle.

 

[Minthorne]

I like the lights. I think they are a good plus.

 

[Tom Morrow]

At night the triangular patterns are barely recognizable.

Literally not true at all. Your comment is disproven by a simple Google image search - "spaceship earth night"

Cry when Disney doesn’t do anything and cry when they do.

*Applaud Disney when they do things correctly and criticize them when they make hasty changes that go against the original spirit and intention of the park.

I even said I'd be okay with them keeping the lights but dimming them so they don't drown out the beauty of SSE itself.

 

[DisneyFanatic12]

I agree that the lights should be turned down (again… remember how bright they were at first? I live near Disney and the light pollution was CRAZY), but overall, I like them. The best effect is the star shaped patterns it does, where the triangles are GREATLY exemplified.

 

[vikescaper]

Overall, I like the lights but I think they look the best when cooler colors are used, like blue and green. I think the lights make SSE look garish when warm colors like red and orange are used.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Yep. No similarities here!

 

[thelookingglass]

Remember everyone - whenever someone posts something you don't agree with on WDWMagic, just pull the "you're adult, why are you caring so much about a theme park??" card even though you're also here, posting and caring about a theme park.

 

[WondersOfLife]

1. It turns Spaceship Earth into a flashy carnival ride.

Uh... There's no such thing as a "wrong opinion," but if there was, yours would be it.

2. The beauty of Spaceship Earth is not that it's a sphere, but the texture of the triangle pattern and how that bends and reflects the light shining on it in different ways.

It still has that.

Up close, the lights completely overshadow the beauty of the structure,

And up close without the lights, you could also see all the drainage stains in those crevices at the time as well.

and from further away, you no longer see the texture at all, only the dotted lights.

You must have some super crazy eyesight, because the 'texture' looks exactly the same to me as it did in 2007.

Basically, elaborate LED light displays are a dime a dozen, but a 180 foot geodesic sphere isn't. The emphasis should be on the structure.

I agree... And the lighting design does that very well.

Sorry, man... I'm not buying it. This was the one thing from the 50th they got super right.

 

[No Name]

View attachment 745883

View attachment 745884

Hmm... Yep. No similarities here!

The big difference is one looks far nicer than the other, and even if they are similar, it’s not like that “carnival” ride is even ugly. I think the lights on the ball are a great use of modern lighting that just wasn’t available until recently.

 

[WondersOfLife]

I don't mind a good debate on the topic of theme parks on a theme park fandom website.

Why can Harry Potter fans go nuts and crazy over the tiniest details at conventions and forum sites such as this one, but those who are passionate about theme parks get ridiculed?

Side note -- I prefer to ridicule your opinion because I think it's wrong. But I respect your passion for a theme park on a theme park fan site. Lord have mercy, what a concept.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Uh... There's no such thing as a "wrong opinion," but if there was, yours would be it.

View attachment 745885View attachment 745886

It depends on the lighting scheme the Starflyer is showing. See my post above, where they look more similar.

It still has that.

And up close without the lights, you could also see all the drainage stains in those crevices at the time as well.

I meant to say that from far away at night you only see the Points of Light and not the triangle texture.

I agree... And the lighting design does that very well.
View attachment 745889


Sorry, man... I'm not buying it. This was the one thing from the 50th they got super right.

See I like the way this looks in this image, but in person the lights are more glaring than that and I think that is my main issue.

 

[mysto]

I'll offer the unpopular opinion that LED lighting is a scourge on humanity. I love the efficiency, but when that's used to blast a billion lumens at hapless people I am saddened.

More on topic, I do love SSE lit up, but I agree with Tom some subtlety would actually improve it.

 

[WondersOfLife]

It depends on the lighting scheme the Starflyer is showing. See my post above, where they look more similar.

Who's to say it doesn't depend on the lighting scheme on SSE for when it looks better?

I meant to say that from far away at night you only see the Points of Light and not the triangle texture.

I think it depends which lighting package is being showcased at the time. But even the bare lights look immaculate.

And how cool is it to actually showcase an earth on Spaceship Earth itself?

See I like the way this looks in this image, but in person the lights are more glaring than that and I think that is my main issue.

I don't recall ever having an issue with the lights or their glare... But to each their own. I think the lighting package is fantastic, and they can do so much with it, the more they continue to experiment.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Who's to say it doesn't depend on the lighting scheme on SSE for when it looks better?

I think it depends which lighting package is being showcased at the time. But even the bare lights look immaculate.
View attachment 745890

And how cool is it to actually showcase an earth on Spaceship Earth itself?

View attachment 745891

I don't recall ever having an issue with the lights or their glare... But to each their own. I think the lighting package is fantastic, and they can do so much with it, the more they continue to experiment.

I think the show portions are cool. What I'd really like is for it to be fully bright for the show portions and like 50% dimmer during "idling" times.