Re: dance- tech in architectural design

From: by way of dance-tech-admin@dancetechnology.org (orpheus@rice.edu)
Date: 12/22/02


The following message was posted to: dance-tech

>   I am interested in technologies that are
>capable of translating aspects of human movement into
>architectural space and into particular
>qualities/properties of space. Specifically I am
>looking for technologies that can recognise aspects of
>human movement and interprete them as deformations or
>other modifications of a pre-designed digital
>environment/space. (SY)


>You should look at the work of Marcos Novak.  He did some work with
"liquid architectures" that inverted our usual notions about
motion-sensing in that it was using the body (the hands, usually) to
sense a virtual object in space.> (RP)



Socrates's inquiry this week, to which Richard already responded, caught
my eye,
distracting me from the aftermath of the Monaco Dance Forum, which many
of you will have attended and formed an opinion on. [And I'd be
interested in some conceptual and descriptive viewpoints on the work
that was shown rather than the organizational matters only; naturally we
should all be very pleased/grateful to have such a forum]....

It intrigued me that Socrates would approach the dance & technology
community with questions about design (and spatial/architectural
research) and, I gather, software or sensing/tracking technologies that
interpret movement and then, if I understand Socrates, could lead to or
effect a modification of designed space.

What was unclear to me was the issue of what the nature of the designed
environment is -  I gather it is not real/built space but projective
space (in a virtual design stage?) or architectural space that can be
VRML-moved through, and movement or movement behavior/attitude is
envisioned to be "deformable" or impactful on the design-space.

This, on the whole, raises interesting questions also for those of us
working with design models for site-performances, dance environments,
installations, stage scenographies, interactive and responsive
environments, networked (virtual) space, and 3-d animation projects that
may use motion capture data to animate a figure that moves through a
world and affect it, as such 3-d worlds and game environments also are
affected by animated avatars or game players.(yet how are these worlds
"affected"?).  I would write back and ask Socrates what architectural
environments he has in mind, whether they are virtual-architecture
projects or social spaces or buildings or corporate rooms or aesthetic
spaces or game spaces or digital fantasies?

In the latter cases we have numerous possibilities to talk about
responsive environment, but in the dance-technology scene most often
that refers to actions or projections (images, sound) that happen in a
space and on screens. The sound or filmic images that dancers may affect
through gesture and movement generally do not affect the architecture of
the room directly, only indirectly through our sonic experience (of
space, and the psycho-acoustics of such experience) and our
visual-perceptive apprehension of something we might call imaginary
space, narrative space (rather than decorative).

As you can tell, I am approaching the issue from a physical and
performative, experiential, point of view, not a software viewpoint,
primarily.

Equally interesting might be the issue of whether interactive software
such as Max/Msp/Jitter, Isadora, Keystroke, Choreograph, BigEye, EyeCon,
etc,  infact allows us to work with spatial design for any
theatrical-social or environmental performance that enables the
performers or engagers to affect the built, spatially perceived and
cognitively processed environment in real time.  I would love to hear
those of you interested in architecture tell us how an interactive
movement could translate into specific qualities or properties of space
you would like to see changed/deformed, and what for, and under what
conceptual ideas?

In terms of experimentation with liquid architecture, yes, Richard
mentions Marcos Novak, and we might also mention Yacov Sharir's
collaboration with Novak and Diane Gromola on "Dancing with the virtual
dervish," which allows the gestural inflection of 3D design-space or
design projections of images derived from parts of the body. Interesting
in this case is that the "environment" (though an illusion since
composited through computer-processing and perceivable only with
goggles) here is a female body and not a "building".   We might mention
"Osmose," or the "T-Garden" project, or "conFIGURING the CAVE" (Jeffrey
Shaw, Hegedüs, Lintermann et al) or Blast Theory's "Desert Rain." I
think there have been a few VR projects out there that may be relevant
here.

What tends to happen with interactive dance performances of course,
including current experiments some of us are making with the Jitter
plug-in to Max/Msp which allows real-time manipulation of the
camera-tracked image of the mover, is that the attention or audience
perception is often directed at the transmutation or malleability or
deformation of the image of the performer, not of the surrounding
environment or space as such.  It would interest me, however, to see
performance experiments, perhaps with you, Socrates, that allow the
interface to work in other directions too, deformations not only of the
gesture or the mover-image, but of the entire cognitive and
proprioceptive experience of the space in which this happens (including
the acoustic space, or the "mystic" space that some of you may have
apprehended in the recent Marina Abramovic performance in New York of
"Rooms with an Ocean View"). Sascha Waltz's dance company, in their
recent "Körper" performance at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, also
worked explicitly with/against the architectural space and the huge
wall/glass container, but no software involved there, just human bodies
and choreographies.

>From your letter it was not clear to me whether you are thinking of this
experience to happen on a computer screen or in a real bodied
space/shared space! The problem with Jitter and all interactive software
using video output, naturally, is that we receive "spaces" that are
rarely spaces with volume or mass or tactile materiality -- they are
screen projections, flat and thin, since our video never obtains the
spatial-illusionistic quality and tactility of 35mm film.  And do we
live in the postcinematic era, already? hmm.

I hope we can continue this dialogue,


sincerely

Johannes Birringer
Alienation Co.
currently on exhibition with "finally a place...."
Trans-Site Studio, Houston, Texas
http://www.aliennationcompany.com/gallery/vs.htm
----------------------------------------
The Dance-Tech mailing list has recently moved to a new address.  To post a
message, send email to dance-tech@dancetechnology.org.  To unsubscribe, send
email to lists@dancetechnology.org, with the words "unsubscribe dance-tech" in
the message body.
----------------------------------------

 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/23/02