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 discussed 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 separation 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 prop implys that is for a "theatrical" purpose. I think we should attempt to define those definitions on the article.--Amadscientist (talk) 11:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.138.16 (talk) 04:44, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

It is jargon. "Reads" in theatrical use means how something on stage appears to the audience. It is already explained in the preceding paragraph.oknazevad (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

New name needed

Movie prop redirects here, and the article discusses it as well, so this is not just "theatrical property". Any suggestions for a new name? How about prop (film and theatre)? Trying to squeeze TV there may be too much... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Not the worst suggestion I've ever seen. At one point the article was moved to prop (stage, screen), which is unacceptable as a disambiguator. Changing that to "(theatre and film)" is better, but still awkward. And "theatre" should come first because they developed in theatre centuries before film existed as a medium. In fact, that's part of the reason I don't mind the current title; props are essentially the same for both. Sure, some movie props may be more detailed because of close-ups (the "hero" props mentioned in the above section), but the concept and execution is largely the same. oknazevad (talk) 07:13, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

@Oknazevad: I used film first just b/c of alphabetical order, I have no strong feelings here. And for the record, I prefer film to movie/TV since the academic field is film studies, not movie studies or TV studies. My main issue is that the current title doesn't reflect the scope - the title is limited to theatre, whereas the concept has long spread to the silver screen format as well (and possibly even to video games). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I feel changing the title here in this way could lead to a slippery slope. While yes, theatrical props are used in other media they are still called theatrical, or stage, props. The only graduate program in the United States for properties calls it "stage properties"[1], Universal Studios Properties department just calls them "props"[2], and all the major hand books and text books about properties design refer the them as "props", "stage properties", "theater props", and "theatrical properties".[3][4][5][6][7] If the purpose of changing the name of the article is to be inclusive of things other than theater that use props we cant just stop at film. They are also used in exhibition design, window displays, interior design, event planning, restaurant and nightclub design, etc. etc. etc. I would be open to renaming the page "Stage properties" as that does seem to be more widely used in reliable sources than "theatrical properties" even though I personally know and use the "theatrical" term more. "Stage" may also be more inclusive as it relates to a theater stage, a sound stage, "staging" a house, and "staging" an exhibition.--Found5dollar (talk) 13:57, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

"Stage prop" is not the worst title I've ever heard. oknazevad (talk) 10:31, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Prop Gun

The info presented here on "prop guns" is mostly gibberish. There should be a differentiation between firearms (real guns, which is what most movies use), props (i.e. rubber rifles used for stunt work), and BFONGs (the legal term for a blank firing only non gun). 174.0.48.147 (talk) 17:35, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

This article seems to break it down https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-23/why-do-movie-productions-use-guns-questions-answered/100562686 174.0.48.147 (talk) 17:42, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

"prop" does not mean "fake". A real gun used in a movie is a "prop". SaltySaltyTears (talk) 02:09, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

The statement "it is considered a firearm, not a prop" appears to be a misquote that is contradicted by the cited source. The cited source states, "Prop Firearm: It's a loose definition and could apply to anything from a rubber toy to a real firearm that can fire a projectile." and "if it's used for firing — even just blanks — it's considered a real gun." In that any prop item resembling a firearm is to be treated/considered as if it is a real firearm. Fyrye (talk) 22:19, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

That's a good point. I'm going to be WP:BOLD and remove the "not a prop" part which is indeed contradicted by the sources in the article, and many others. SaltySaltyTears (talk) 22:25, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 24 October 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to Prop. Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Prop to become dab page. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 11:33, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

---

Theatrical property → Prop (stage) – WP:COMMONNAME, everyone calls it a prop. 150.250.5.20 (talk) 00:08, 25 October 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 02:16, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Theatrical property → Prop (acting) – WP:COMMONNAME, everyone calls it a prop. 150.250.5.20 (talk) 00:44, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

*Move to 'Prop (theatrical)' not every scene using props has actors. SaltySaltyTears (talk) 01:48, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Agree, although Prop (stagecraft) would be my suggestion. 162 etc. (talk) 18:29, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Or simply Prop (stage) as suggested above. Films are shot on sound stages, after all. oknazevad (talk) 22:12, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

My thought was to be consistent with Category:Stagecraft, though there's nothing wrong with Prop (stage) either. 162 etc. (talk) 22:42, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Prop (stage) works for me. SaltySaltyTears (talk) 00:48, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

• Move to Prop as the clear WP:primary topic, and move the dab page to Prop (disambiguation). Pageviews for 1/1/20-6/30/21 show a clear and consistent trend (I left out the last few months because a couple of recent huge spikes would make the numbers even more overwhelming). The dab page is averaging 29 daily hits this year, most of whom want this article. This will also avoid the stage/screen dilemma. Station1 (talk) 05:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

  "Propeller" dominates them all: Pageviews. And "prop" is a common term in boating and aviation... a Google search for "Boat prop" and "Boat propeller" yields only about a 20% difference in the number of pages returned. I don't think movie props pass the WP:primary topic test that it be "much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term." SaltySaltyTears (talk) 05:43, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

  It's true "propeller" is sometimes shortened to "prop", but I doubt many readers are expecting to find the article about propellers under the title "Prop". The words "prop" and "props" appear only once each in the body of the propeller article, plus "prop" once in a header and once in a footnote. On the other hand, "theatrical properties" are almost universally known as props, with the current article title being quite obscure. In contrast to the propeller article, the word "prop" or "props" appears in the shorter "theatrical property" article about 50 times. Station1 (talk) 06:11, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

• Move to Prop and move the current disambiguation page to Prop (disambiguation) as per Station1's solid reasoning above. SaltySaltyTears (talk) 06:27, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support move to "Stage properties" My take on changing the name from. The previous discussion, "I feel changing the title here in this way could lead to a slippery slope. While yes, theatrical props are used in other media they are still called theatrical, or stage, props. The only graduate program in the United States for properties calls it "stage properties"[8], Universal Studios Properties department just calls them "props"[9], and all the major hand books and text books about properties design refer the them as "props", "stage properties", "theater props", and "theatrical properties".[10][11][12][13][14] If the purpose of changing the name of the article is to be inclusive of things other than theater that use props we cant just stop at film. They are also used in exhibition design, window displays, interior design, event planning, restaurant and nightclub design, etc. etc. etc. I would be open to renaming the page "Stage properties" as that does seem to be more widely used in reliable sources than "theatrical properties" even though I personally know and use the "theatrical" term more. "Stage" may also be more inclusive as it relates to a theater stage, a sound stage, "staging" a house, and "staging" an exhibition.--Found5dollar (talk) 13:45, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I should probably add that I do not support a move to just "prop" or "props".--Found5dollar (talk) 13:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

• suggest move to Prop (Theatrical Property) as a disambiguation it seems to me that Prop is most likely to be searched and Theatrical Property is the accurate long-form origin of the term. Whether on film, television or stage it's all acting and therefore theatrical in nature. Hence the terms screenplay, teleplay and stage play. Also why cinemas are movie theaters and films are "theatrically released" WakeUpBoo (talk) 00:09, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

That's a terrible title that flies in the face of pretty much every Wikipedia naming convention. oknazevad (talk) 05:21, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Wow! this comment flies in the face of civility, I see you have your own pet favorite. if you want to be constructive try explaining naming conventions.WakeUpBoo (talk) 14:27, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

As per WP:QUALIFIER "...when a more detailed title is necessary to distinguish an article topic from another, use only as much additional detail as necessary. For example, it would be redundant to title an article "Queen (rock band)", as Queen (band) is precise enough to distinguish the rock band from other uses of the term "Queen". In your suggestion, including the word "property" is redundant and unnecessary to disambiguate it from other articles about other subjects. SaltySaltyTears (talk) 15:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC) Thanks. WakeUpBoo (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

• Move to Stage and film prop. The term is as commonly used in the film industry as in the stage industry. And film props cannot be called stage props, as many are used on location and not on sound stages. The current title is certainly not the common name and WP:NATURAL does not recommend parenthetical disambiguation when it's unnecessary. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I think that the title should lead with "Prop" followed by whatever disambiguation is preferred, wherever they are in use this is the term used, as it says the at the beginning of the article.WakeUpBoo (talk) 15:38, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

As I said, we generally prefer natural disambiguation to parenthetical disambiguation where possible. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:44, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

That is fair comment, but there is also recognizability, precision and concision to be considered.WakeUpBoo (talk) 15:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Your suggestion is indeed used occasionally, although I would not categorize it as "common", and is not used enough to make it preferable to parenthetical disambiguation in my opinion. SaltySaltyTears (talk) 16:15, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support move to prop or prop (stage) per nominator, everyone calls it just "prop" instead of "property". JIP | Talk 23:57, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
• I think that parenthetical disambiguation is necessary, either Prop (stage) or Prop (theatrical).WakeUpBoo (talk) 23:03, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I don't think this calls for parenthetical disambiguation. Per WP:QUALIFIER and WP:NATURAL Natural disambiguation is always preferable to parenthetical. My comment above shows there are terms for these objects which separate them from other kinds of "props" with out using parenthetical disambiguation. The major handbooks and textbooks on the subject call them "stage properties", "theater props", or "theatrical properties" (see citations above). We shouldn't be making up terms or saying what we think people call them. These are the terms used by reliable sources so should be the ones we are picking from. I prefer Stage Properties. --Found5dollar (talk) 13:58, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
  • If natural disambiguation is always preferable it's hard to see a good argument for changing the name from the current one. There's a risk the name is changed as a resolution to the discussion rather than making a genuine improvement on the original. Theatrical is a more effective WP:QUALIFIER across disciplines than stage or theatre/theater. Query how regional USA/UK dialect preferences affect the discussion, are we lost in semantics?WakeUpBoo (talk) 17:18, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
• Relisting comment while every participant supports some type of move, it's not yet clear which specific changes have consensus. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 02:16, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
  • After reviewing the page, suggest four finalists Theatrical property, Stage properties, Prop (theatrical) or Prop (stage). Support Prop (theatrical) WakeUpBoo (talk) 17:37, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support move to Prop Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. I don't believe this needs to be disambiguated. When used in the propeller context it is usually alongside another word (i.e. "prop plane")._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:06, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support move to Prop per primary topic. Lizard (talk) 04:13, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
• I would support Moving to Prop. 150.250.5.20 (talk) 17:22, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Two points

First, in the Prop#Collecting paragraph, it is stated that "In recent years, the increasing popularity of movie memorabilia has elevated many props to the status of prized collectors items." - which recent years? How can this be rephrased to make more sense long-term, without saying something equally strange like "from the 2000s onwards", as this cultural shift was gradual and not something that can be pinpointed in time so simply. Might "in recent decades" be better given that one of the citations at the end of the paragraph is from 2006 while the other is from 2017?

Secondly, the term "prop" has become ubiquitous in video games, both amongst developers and players, most notably through the "prop hunt" gamemode present in several video games, as covered in the Wikipedia article Garry's_Mod#Prop_Hunt. I am unsure how this can/should be worked into this article, or if it should be at all. Might it be better to create a Prop (Video Games) article, or work a paragraph into this article somewhere, and if so, where? WindowEnthuziast557 (talk) 19:28, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Two thoughts.

First, "in recent decades" is no better than "in recent years". "Since the early 2000s" is actually much better because it's specific and doesn't become dated language. See MOS:DATED.

Secondly, the video game use is outside the scope of this article, which is about actual physical properties used in theatre and film. It definitely belongs in a separate article. But I don't think a new article is needed. Though the term from theatre may have been taken up by gaming, it's just another synonym for item (game terminology), which already has an article. oknazevad (talk) 21:28, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Theatre and Technology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 8 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Walrusedit (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Pandastmina.

— Assignment last updated by Pandastmina (talk) 21:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)