Wednesday 9 July 2008

Low tech saves high tech.

today was that day when you feel like things are going really well and you are then fed a huge lump of humble pie. As your computer keeps crashing. over. and over. and over.

I figured it all out, and as much as I say I'm about exposing my process here, I doubt that you really want to hear me discussing the maddening nature of debugging sound and video capture optimization in Isadora. However, if you're geek like that and would like to know my beginner's woes, please leave a comment and I will happily go into more details.

As it is, I will say that the solution became apparent when I got home. And it involved masking tape.

See many of you for the scratch tomorrow.

Monday 7 July 2008

Notes on scratch 1.

Overall I was really happy with how last week went. I think that the scratch performance went off very closely to how I had imagined it would and that I now have a good foundation on which to build the final performance. Things will be tweaked and tested from here, but at this point I don't feel like I need to throw any of it away. In fact, I want to be systematic about this and keep what I have until I am certain that I've tested its possibilities and decided it shouldn't be there.

Things I was happy with:

  • the space. Primarily, I love the acoustics in the space and the sound of the kids playing at the school next door. I also just felt really focused and able to work in there.
  • the setup. I think will stick with the technology setup. It gave me alot to work with without being overwhelming.
  • the foundation setup in Isadora. It did exactly what I wanted it to do.
  • interacting with the video projection. I think the projection gave both me and the audience a point of entry into the performance, but didn't completely submerge the other things going on in the space once the performance had been running for a couple of minutes.
  • inviting the audience to get up and move around during the performance. I've been struggling with how much to guide an audience since the Nunnery. I was really resistant to giving any instructions on how to approach my work relying on people's natural sense of curiosity to kick in. However, research in the last couple of weeks has highlighted for me that people will look for clues on how to interact with the space/performance they find themselves in and that the placement of equipment and other people in the room are the biggest factors in determining how members of an audience will position themselves. To combat this, I need to speak up and invite them to move around. The people who did were glad they did. I was also glad that I had told them because everyone determined where they were going to position themselves based on who was already there.
  • placing my rig and myself in the center of the space. This may have seemed subtle to most, if not everyone there on Friday, but it's critical to my practice right now. In most situations where an artist is manipulation video, they are BEHIND the audience, almost completely hidden, or shoved to one side so that people have a clear view of the screen. My body, however passively hunched over my computer is right there in the middle.
  • projecting straight onto a wall in a lit space. Related to the point above. While still a focal point of the performance, I think this projection strategy breaks the absolute authority of the projected image. Going to review discussion from Friday and post some elaboration on this.
Things to work on/Next steps:
  • Call and response with projection. The performance started to take on a narrative for me based on the pre-recorded tape. I originally envisioned this dynamic to be more of a call and response: video plays, I react vocally to what is being projected, I create movement or a new projection based on the sound, modify the sound in response to the new video and so on.
  • Triggering the scream. Doug mentioned that there are different ways to trigger events with Isadora, such as having it react to a certain pitch. This seems really interesting to me. Would like to experiment with this and see what happens.
  • Do I keep the scream at all? It was fun to do in scratch 1. Is its purpose going to fade if/when the performance gets longer?
  • What is the right balance between naturalistic and hypertheatricality? I think this was an underlying thread to the whole discussion on Friday. I'm going to keep the singing, which is already an unnatural/theatrical mode of expression, so why or why not continue to push the performance along that naturalistic/theatrical spectrum?
  • Find a good reason to keep the monitors. My gut is telling me they need to stay, but they were the weakest link in the performance on Friday. Just need to push their use more to find the answer to this.
  • Spend more time moving around the space. Positive response to the moment when I got up and starting walking and singing in the space. It's an interesting moment for me too to "break free" from my tethering to the computer and projected image.
  • If I do spend more time up and about, do I also build in triggers that might respond to something I'm doing that can happen when I'm not at the computer?
  • Make the performance longer. 10 minutes isn't enough time! I knew this. Was a good test. Time to try different lengths. 15, 20, 30 minutes? 1 hour? 2 hours? Hm...
What to focus on for Thursday?
I think I will try to focus on the call and response method of building the performance and see if I can work out a more 'random' trigger for the scream so that it takes me by surprise when it happens. 15-20 minute duration.