Tuesday, April 21, 2015

Leap as a MIDI controller


This is a really cool idea. If I had abelton live or logic pro I would try using the leap motion and one of these apps as a controller for instruments in the DAW. For live performance, this could add a more physically exciting way to play keyboard or synth.

Sunday, April 19, 2015

Leap Motion for Music

While looking into using the leap motion for my final project I came across this really interesting app someone designed for it. http://thenextweb.com/creativity/2014/04/04/leapmotions-new-muse-lets-create-music-hand-gestures/ It allows you to create music with hand and finger movements. If I had more time I think I would try developing a some type of synth controller with the device.

Friday, April 17, 2015

Comments on chap 6

Television has essentially formed its own culture and environment. Arguably, the same could be said today of the internet. Computers and the performing go along together in digital performance. However, one ca argue that theater, dance, and performance art has focused in demonstrating “liveness,” but within a media-saturated world. According to this week’s readings, on live performance, Auslander is trying to challenge the ideas of the traditional value of liveness. He proposed that “the dominant aesthetic force is the digital into which the live is assimilated may be persuasive, but the problem remains that there are clear differences between the digital and the live” (p.128). As digital media continuous evolving, taking into account Auslander’s argument is fundamental. In live performance what should be the priority is to represent a live event and watch it without focusing in artificial reproductions of the real. Something that it should be remember is the unique experience that viewers have during a live event.

Thursday, April 16, 2015

Chapter 6 review

This chapter analyzes liveness as one of the key concepts of digital performance. It begins with opposed views of Walter Benjamin and Roland Barthes. It seems to me that Benjamin’s theory is more persuasive than Barthes’s. In one respect, today no one will think that ‘every photograph is a certificate of presence’ because it is easy to distort contents of audiovisual products via technology. Also at another level, Barthes’s theory cannot hold water since photography is a major form of visual arts rather than a reference of reality. At this point, the author mentions about the position of authenticity in the performing arts. He points out that liveness actually depends on the factor of time. “Liveness in itself has nothing to do with the media form, but at core concerns temporality. Put simply, for the spectator, liveness is just ‘being there’, whatever performance form is being watched.” (p. 129). It can be said that temporal and presence are two prerequisites of liveness. Furthermore, apart from culture and cognition, technology may have a siginificant impact on the experience of digital performance through real-time transmission and interaction. 

Friday, April 10, 2015

Project Proposal
live instrument audio manipulation with visual animation
Using live an pre-recorded instrument looping along with prepared and live sample manipulation using an OSC linked wii

hardware- laptop, audio interface, guitar or moog or electricribe, wiimote
software- MAX/MSP, OSCulator, Audiomulch
visual- “found” archived video overlayed on scenes of earth, our solar system, galaxy, stars being formed, other galaxies, known universe; camera turns on audience?

video ref: 

flickr- the commons search: Florida film

Monday, April 6, 2015

Thoughts on Chapter 24

Life is like a drama and a video game is a place where we can apply our life principles and role-playing habits to it. Therefore, it is easy to understand author's standpoint in this chapter: the close correspondences between theater and video games.
Theoretically, this chapter offers us a series of explanations and examples to argue the theory of game performance but I thought the most instrumental significant is that opening a door for me to interpret and think everything from a performance perspective.  Every event combining with human's action could be viewed as a time-based activity, a book I read mentioned that a game that normally just made players spend several hours on addiction but left nothing, it inquired the meaning of making games.
However, I thought the glamour between life and game, reality and virtual reality or tangibleness and intangibleness is not how the boundary set for them but the relationship how to consider them as a whole. We perform ourselves in lives, we also perform ourselves in games. Just like our life, we couldn't say that sitting in a place without doing nothing is no meaning so we are never ought to do that. We need meaningless stuff to construct our meaningful life. In addition, human's thoughts always could give a thing a significance as long as he wants. Besides, as a performance, we also could appreciate and analyse a game from beginning to end, or from participants to spectators' perspective, through this process, which helps us to be more familiar with not only games or performances but also ourselves. All in all, the exploration of games and their significant aesthetic, cultural, psychological, and social implications is never going to stop, and the key to exploring everything is where we stand, from a human's angle.

Friday, April 3, 2015

Ch. 23 review

Although there are many ways to define interactivity, I feel that Simon Penny's definition is more relevant to todays' digital art and beyond. He states "An interactive system is a machine system which reacts in the moment by virtue of automated reasoning based on data from its sensory apparatus interactivity implies real time". One could say all art is interactive, as long as the work triggers a reaction from the participant/viewer. Paul Vanouse would agree that participation can be as simple as watching a film, movie, or commercial. If that's the case and basis of interactivity, what separates using our visual senses from our other four. Participation is a little too broad of a definition for me. Navigation is a more concrete definition and this makes it easy to agree with. There always is a cause and effect when it comes to navigation interactivity. This is when users know where they stand as participants and they feel in control. This applies to gaming, which is not going anywhere anytime soon. As we know, gaming is one of the most, if not the most interactive art styles and interactive performances. 

Chapter 24 Initial Thoughts and Final Project Ideas


We start off with the quote "A game is a machine that can get into action only if the players consent to become puppets for a time."- Marshall Mcluhan.

I feel like that quote is extremely accurate from my experiences. For the last 2 years I have been a part of a group that creates a giant game for people to play on campus. And as we have learned that game only happens if we have people who are willing to jump in a follow our instructions, essentially become our puppets. The first section of the chapter talks about making videogames an actual study rather than just something that happens. In order to to be a true art there must be some sort of theory as to how videogames work.

I think the most interesting part of the beginning is the argument between Narratologists and Ludologists. Narratologists focused on the games significance and the philosophy behind it. Ludologists focused more on gameplay and manipulation.

I also liked the comparison between theater and videogames at the bottom of 601 to top of 602. They linked Hamlet to Final Fantasy.

Haven't gotten to finish reading but will update post as I read.

As to final project I want to use a series of leap motions to be able to create a music game similar to ones I've played in the past and similar to an app Pat has shown me on his iPad before. The game style is similar to this game http://www.cipherprime.com/games/auditorium/ As well as sharing aspects with Borderlands Granular for iOS

Art wise I like the visuals of this image. And this game http://www.kongregate.com/games/deleongames/tumult-hd

Ch. 23 Interacitve Art

Interactive art is a form of art that involves the spectator in a way that allows the art to achieve its purpose. A lot of this interactive art that is used today involves computers, sensor, and live motion tracking. The more advanced the technology that is used, the more reactive the computers and sensor will be to motion, head, and other factors that are programmed to change. I have ben thinking of an idea to try to create a “One-Man Band” that uses different programs and sensors to track motion on your body and connect each motion to a different sound or instrument. A lot of live interactive performances that I have seen use real-time interactivity via xbox Kinect.

Personal Project

For my personal project I chose to use Gamesalad as my software. The devices used for my project will be my phone or any mobile device that can access the web through Firefox. I will use gamesalad to program the functionality of the interactivity. Users will be able to control ambient sound and animations with their devices. The sound and animation will depend on the position of the touch. The user can create various combinations and even perform together.

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Navigation, Participation, Conversation and Collaboration

Chapter 23 begins with the proclamation that "All art is an interaction between the view and the artwork, and thus all artworks are interactive in the sense that a negotiation or confrontation takes place between the beholder and the beheld".  This is a static relationship that while it may influence the visitor's experience, interpretation and perception of it over time, the visitor cannot influence the artwork.  It goes on to say that "digital interactive artworks and performances differ... in the ability of the user or audience to activate, affect, play with, input into, build, or entirely change it."
If a work is not complete without the viewer viewing or experiencing it, then there clearly is an interactivity inherent in the contemplation of a work.  But I would like to highlight that the creator must have the viewer or visitor in mind when creating that work of art.  The question might be asked here on the fundamental basis for creating anything that is: who is the creator creating for?  If the artist is creating a work of art for herself and for the immersive experience of playing with the mind in the act of creation, then there is no consideration for how the viewer will experience it.  Th interaction is between the creator and work being created. 
I know many a musician who does not consider the listener when creating their works.  The pleasure is derived from the mere act of creating and the purpose is to generate a collection of vibrations that are amusing or pleasurable, or conchordant.  But perhaps, this is fundamentally a different kind of art.
In the case of creating digital works, navigation, participation, conversation and collaboration are all an aspect of viewer-based considerations.  In creating works for visitors and participants, I do not think that the "choose-your-own-adventure" style of narrative form will ever become as common in the collaborative style.  Narratives are difficult to piece together on one's one let alone, with a group over time.  I could however see a potential collaboration on a generalized idea that in a kind of "telephone game" the plot is passed along by participants using key words to build a world or a narrative or a story the is added on and arranged by participants.  A kind of Graffitti-in-the-Minecraft idea which is what i guess, really is the current online gaming community. 
Perhaps it really all does come down to the idea of playfullness and gaming in the end.

Comments on Chap 23

The fact that the internet is a space rather than simply a window makes navigation a key aspect for interactivity and participation. Freely navigating from one site to another, browsing for information, and checking out different links are functions that allow the users customize their own online experiences.

As Dixon pointed out that the Web has developed a bulk of interactive stories, video interfaces, and online dramas. As users we enjoy interactive media because it provides us a sense of agency an opportunity to customize our experience. “On the Web, navigational interactivity is the very act of surfing and includes interaction and includes interaction with varied net.art and hypertext narratives” (p.568).

In game interfaces, users can move through spaces or levels, having more navigability affordances than less dynamic interfaces. With video games, we have the opportunity to navigate and have a sense of exploration and smooth transitions that allows to have the control of the movement.
.Moreover, with interactive cinema, the audience has the power to access, transform the narrative, and complete the work. Some works that I did some research on and found interesting were "The Legible City” by Jeffrey Shaw and “ Point of View” by David Wheeler.

In the ‘Legible City”, participant sit on a stationary bicycle and uses it to navigate through a computer-generated 3-D representation of a city projected on a large screen. On the other hand. in the movie “Point of View”,  the viewer can guide the reactions and actions of the characters by answering periodic multiple-choice questions. Also, the viewer gets to select from different endings.

Chapter 23 Thoughts

The beginning of the chapter talks a little bit of defining what the difference between interactive and reactive is. I thought it was interesting because they defined it basically how I defined it earlier in the semester. I also found it interesting how they talked about television actually prevents communication with people between there is no way to interact with the media that is showing.

They define interactivity into 4 categories: Navigation, Participation, Conversation, and Collaboration. These categories are not ranked based on being better than each other just on what is more interactive than another. It will vary on the situation as to which category is best for you.

They talk a lot about CD-ROMS and how they are interactive but limited because they are still programmed and an example they use is how there really isn't a conversation that is had through the dialog in a game. This shows how this book is a little dated because since then there has been advancement in AI and I have seen examples where the computer will learn from past conversations and have new conversations based on what it has learned.

Navigation: simple things such as choosing yes or no/right, left, up, or left. What they started to describe in the Interactive Cinema section sounds to me like a game more than a movie. It definitely seems more interactive with Deep Contact with how they made it so the Zen master's dialog was backwards and how they brought the user into the space with a camera.

I also liked how they talked about the audience choosing how a movie would go. It is an interesting concept but they are right in the fact that half the audience would be disappointed because they wouldn't go the direction they wanted to go.