Archive for interactive
January 23, 2008 at 4:36 pm · Filed under dance, guest, TONY, dance technology, interactive, research, sarah lawrence college, students, education, dance teacher, performance, project, choreography, discipline, pedagogy, process, learning, intelligence, fun, dance criticism, dance lesson, social network, improvisation, Julie Cruse, VICKI, choreobot
For the last meeting of my class last semester, 12-21-07, I had Julie Cruse of Ohio State’s EMMA Lab as a guest to share her research in developing Chorebot VICKI. VICKI stands for Virtual Improvisational Choreographer / Kinetic Instructor. She a virtual automaton who guides a dancer through a structured improvisation using randomly generated verbal cues. Upon initializing VICKI she describes her purpose.
She says:
Choreobot is designed to challenge a dancer’s movement skills, and asks the dancer to draw upon advanced improvisational interpretation. I am programmed to make dances using theme and variation as prescribed by my creator. I use textbook dance methods, but - I am unpredictable. The dancer will demonstrate as I begin my next new dance.
Read more of Julie’s description of the technology HERE at the project website.
Before the lecture demonstration Julie and I had to rebuild modules of the assembly so that we could get VICKI to talk off Intel-based Macs. Retooling software under time constraints can be terribly stressful but I am glad to report we patched things up in time for the class. Julie’s lecture/demonstration was wonderful. She took some time to explain her impetus for building the machine and gave the students a tour of VICKI’s inner workings. Next Julie fired up the choreobot and demonstrated how she danced under VICKI’s instruction. Next she invited the students to try. Watching the student’s improvisation was exciting.
The system forces the dancer to think on their toes and make quick decisions. With time I could see a dancer becoming expert at navigating in this environment. Julie has clearly taken the time to do this. For her it was the first time she was able to observe other people dancing inside her system. By the end of the class everyone was incredibly energized and immersed in conversation regarding future research using choreobot VICKI. Julie has left us with a copy of VICKI and has encouraged us to continue experimenting with and mutating the system.
Matt Gough has taken a good deal of time developing an analysis of this work. In particular Matt takes issue with the description of the work as an “artificial intelligence” simply seeing it as an automated version of Cunningham’s method of chance procedures. Julie has documented the critical discourse HERE.
I met Julie inside Sector 9 of the blogosphere. There she has made bold gestures regarding dance-technology as a field. Like Matt Gough, she has voiced discontent over the current state of dance-tech.
She writes:
When I hear dance and tech, I think - it better not be ANOTHER interactive audio/video environment. It better not be ANOTHER…
…dance contextualized by projected videos
…dancer controlled by robotics or sensors improvisation in real time that composes the score
…motion capture in real time translated to animated projections
…wearable technologies that do something with sound or video
…animated avatars in second life real time “telematic” improvising
I find such pugilistic remarks invigorating and am excited to see what trouble Julie stirs up in the future.
Recent Posts by tony schultz
April 19, 2007 at 5:54 pm · Filed under SLOAN, welcome, interactive, wingers, choreographer, musician, nancy, monotract, ITP, NYU, nancy garcia
Posted by Kristin Sloan
Nancy with one of her dancers, Jacqueline Fritz, on a sailboat.
O my how our family is growing with such fun and interesting people!
I’d like to welcome our latest addition, Ms. Nancy Garcia (on the left), who covers many interesting bases. I’ve read her bio, and have had some back and forth with her over email, and I am still trying to get a handle on all the things she does… and wants to do.
She’s currently a Masters student at NYU’s Interactive Telecommunications Program (ITP), which those of you who read my posts will know I’m very excited about. One of the projects she’s been working on involves 360 degree cameras and dance, and she is hoping it will be shown at ITP’s Spring Show in May. (You can see my post from their past Winter Show, here).
In addition to her creative technical pursuits, she is also a dancer, a choreographer, and a musician with her own band, Monotract. She says her work focuses on integrating the processes of soundmaking and dancemaking, in the studio and in performance. The people and places she has worked with are impressive… I can’t wait to see what she will share with us.
Welcome Nancy!
Recent Posts by kristin sloan
October 14, 2006 at 9:52 am · Filed under dance, architecture, technology, TONY, cities, installation, interactive, visible
| | Posted by Tony
This past week was designated Architecture Week by the American Institute for Architects. Thursday night my students Ashley Byler, Hadar Ahuvia and I stopped by the Center for Architecture at 536 LaGuardia Place to check out Visible Cities. This architectural performance installation, by Dana Karwas and Liubo Borissov, featured dancing by Andrea Haenggi, Jeff Crumrine and Einy Aam of the AMDat Dance Company.
The friday before, Ashley and I, helped Dana demonstrate the installation to a small group of architects and designers. It was exciting to talk to Dana and have her give us a proverbial look-under-the-hood of the computational assembly that powered the work.
The masters: Dana Karwas and Liubo Borissov are a dynamic new media duo teaching interactive technologies at the Columbia School of Architecture. Dana is trained as an architect while Liubo is trained as a physicist. Both are interested in exploring the interface between their work and dance through collaboration.
The machine: The installation consisted of a camera, computer and projector system. Movement in the visual field of the camera was used to control the displacement of abstract graphic architectures. As people mulled around the party their movement was mapped onto this virtual space.
The dancing: The dancers, dressed in bright yellow, could be seen throughout the party. The camera/computer system used a simple color tracking algorithm to help pick out the dancers from the rest of the party goers. These signals had more impact on the virtual space, giving the dancers greater agency in shaping the projected digital landscape.
Here is a picture during a wonderful avant-garde moment I shared with one of the dancers.
I enjoyed the concept for the event. It was fun and left me with lots of unanswered questions. What is the relationship between dance and architecture? What characterizes the power dynamics? Who has real control over our unfolding virtual landscape, the dancer or the architect? Perhaps the biggest and most profound question of all…where can I get a gold lamee shower cap?
I hope to see much more from Dana and Liubo in their creation of architectural dance technologies.
Here is a picture of Ashley, Hadar and I being dancerly and representing The Winger.
| | Posted by Tony
Recent Posts by tony schultz
