EAST BY WEST

 

sketches

text archive

text archive 3

text archive 4

equipment layout

project description

 

 

Communication Archive

 


 


Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 19:33:33 +0200
From: Orm Finnendahl

Hi Johannes, hi Sher,

thanks for all these mails and thoughts!

It's remarkable how Johannes
ideas seem to fit with my own preliminary ideas. I actually was
thinking of some sort of installation of two spaces mirroring each
other. The idea was, to have two similar, if not identical spaces
(rooms, whatever) with multichannel audio and video (slides, whatever)
in each of them. My first idea was to have some sort of interaction
going on, where the movements of somebody in the room would control
visual and audio signals (related to the transformation of illusions
of space). The two rooms (performers) would get cross-linked in a way
that the person in one room would control the visuals in his own room
but the audio in the other room and vice versa (or the other way
round, or mixed, etc. but maintaining a perceptional orthogonality
between the two). This way some sort of communication could be
established, which I thought could be interesting to an audience (it
had some sort of a work-title "play with me"). Lots of problems remain
unsolved and open (about that later), but I thought it'd be worth
mentionig after Johannes coming up with the East and West wing of
Hellerau as it seems to be such a surprising match.

To keep the mail within tolerance length:

Sher, even if you don't have any documented material, I wouldn't mind
seeing rough material. Your past definetely makes me curious about
your work. But that should by no means regarded as an obligation to
put something together. I'm just curious.Sher, I think it's better if you help establishing the contact with
Tom Demeyer. My idea was to implement the recursive structures I use
in my work into some visual engine (with the possibility of
animation). I think you mentioned something like creating some sort of
plugin for keystroke. I imagine that it could be interesting to work
with this system for a while and figure out whether there could be any
interesting relationships between our results. So it would be not only
programming, but also research oriented. That might fit with the
general ideas about a collaboration. I would like to think of it as
using a common starting point (like the relation space/transformation)
with each of us making his/her experience in our very own fields and
then come together and show the results and discuss them. And
Johannes, you are invited to take part in it. I'd recomend that you
and Sher discuss your roles in the project, though (my part seems to
be quite clearly in the audio domain)

.Johannes, your report on Renato Cohen's work is very interesting and I
hope I can see some of it some day. Your proposal about the shifts and
transformations in musical and visual domain seem to match what I'd be
interested in and what I consider achievable. I'll also look for the
MIT book, being generally interested in that subject matter.
A lot of my own aesthetic thinking is related to (and in some part
deeply indepted to) the work of Niklas Luhmann, although I consider
referrals to great thinkers as a bad excuse for bad art. If anyone of
you has objections to his work, that's fine with me (I'm kinda through
with him anyway, even if he's left his traces). If someone doesn't
know him but would like to read his work, I can give recommendations
especially with respect to in what sense it inspired my compositional
thinking (in some of the pieces on the CD for example)


.But now let's get to practice:


The last 4 days I was working on a real-time version of the mechanism
presented in Nürnberg. It looks very promising. I could even get some
graphic engine working which visualizes the transformations in a
rudimentary form. I want to give you some description of it, as it
might be interesting for you to use and/or trigger ideas from your
side as I'm planning to use those concepts for Dresden as well:
The process is split into two parts: Part 1 is a sample space of
variable length (probably around 5-6 and less than 10 seconds).

The sample space just contains a mono audio recording (but can be reloaded
any time).Part 2 is a projection of this (one!) sample into the time and
frequency domain by putting copies of it according to x (time) and y
(frequency) matrices (like a two-dimensional grid: Each intersection
of gridlines is the starting point of one sample).

Controllers change the properties of the grid: By stretching and distorting it along the x and y axis, rotating it, etc.


Everything is quite simple (not really in technological terms, but
concerning how it works).By changing the values, quite interesting sound transformations can be
achieved, far from trivial but still linked to perception (at least
that's what I hope, as the audio part isn't yet ready). Those sound
transformations could then get linked to the spatial domain (to the
multiple speakers), but I don't want to get into too much detail now.
For a performance in Nürnberg in May it is planned to use dancers to
control part 2 and to have live musicians (Double Bass, Cello and
maybe Percussion) to control part 1 (the sample itself). This could,
for example be done in a recursive way so that the musicians feed the
multiplied sample material back into the sample, playing along. This
(densified) material would then again get multiplied and transformed
again by the dancer etc...That's it. Once again a long email (why is this medium so slow?) but
that probably can't be avoided.
Yours,
Orm

 

Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 15:03:34 +0200
From: sher doruff


hi johannes, orm

can't reply in detail now but wanted you to know i like the plan very
much. the theme is open for interpretation by all of us and very
appropriate. i'll write more later...
sher

Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 01:22:29 -0400
From: Johannes Birringer


Dear Orm, Sher


thanks so much for your long and detailed response, Orm,
I am glad we seem to all be on the same wavelenght, and I will study
your notes and suggestions carefully, give me a day or two, then Sher
and I can respond,
best wishes
Johannes

 

Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 03:05:48 -0400
From: Johannes Birringer

Dear Orm, Sher


:a brief response to Orm's last longer note:
I'm very glad you liked some of my ideas about the east/west wing spaces
and relations, and it's of course great that you also had been thinking
along such lines of an interaction between two rooms/spaces.
Let me repeat so that I understand you correctly:>>>>to have some sort of interaction going on, where the movements of somebody in the room would control visual and audio signals (related to the transformation of illusions of space).


[that would require sensors/tracking system?]


The two rooms (performers) would get cross-linked in a way that the
person in one room would control the visuals in his own room
but the audio in the other room and vice versa (or the other way
round, or mixed, etc. but maintaining a perceptional orthogonality
between the two). [perceptional orthogonality - please elaborate]This way some sort of communication could be established, which I thought could be interesting to an audience.as to the sound:<<My idea was to implement the recursive structures I use
in my work into some visual engine (with the possibility of
animation). I think you mentioned something like creating some sort of
plugin for keystroke. I imagine that it could be interesting to work
with this system for a while and figure out whether there could be any
interesting relationships between our results. So it would be not only
programming, but also research oriented.>>I suppose you will be communicating with Sher further on this.


I am all interested in the ideas you are developing for the music/sound,
and perhaps, if you wish, you could tell us more about the kind of sound
you are hearing for the spaces, what kind of sound environment would you
want to create? Could you imagine including the sound of voices?

Thanks for your reference to Luhmann.I'm also interested in hearing more about Sher's work and visual
interests/aesthetics. <<Your proposal about the shifts and transformations in musical and
visual domain seem to match what I'd be interested in and what I
consider achievable>>Good.In the last part of your letter you addressed practice and your current
work, you mention Nurnberg, so this must be something you are working on
with Palindrome, and not related to our plans, or are you using that
opportunity to try out some things musically?you mention:


<<I could even get some graphic engine working which visualizes the
transformations in a rudimentary form. I want to give you some
description of it, as it might be interesting for you to use and/or
trigger ideas from your side as I'm planning to use those concepts for
Dresden as well...>>when you speak about graphoc visualization, are you speaking of musical
representation in graphic form? what kind of graphics, similar to the
tree-like forms that you showed us at the Forum?When you speak of your performance, are you speaking of the sound or sound and visuals?<<For a performance in Nürnberg in May it is planned to use dancers to control part 2 and to have live musicians (Double Bass, Cello and maybe
Percussion) to control part 1 (the sample itself).

This could, for example be done in a recursive way so that the musicians feed the
multiplied sample material back into the sample, playing along. This
(densified) material would then again get multiplied and transformed
again by the dancer etc...>>I think you are refering to the sound.So, finally, this raises the question for us how we can get more concrete, in the next 10 days, about the content of visualization and
the kind of sound and recursive structures you imagine, and how we
imagine interactivity (a) between sites / performers and/or
between (b) sites and audience behavior


I think the last issue is not clear yet, since we would need to develop
a particular "play" or "action" scenario for the audience to become
interactively involved. Sher, have you worked with such audience
inter-act-invitations? With two spaces (east and west), we have the interesting problem that
changes or transformations, effected in one space with impact on the
other, do not become transparent unless the audience/visitor in one of
the spaces realizes that the motion or action or people in the other
space have such effect, and perhaps we could solve that by the
transmission of visuals between spaces (incorporating the visitors on
either side) which make it perceivable that action/behavior in part part
of the world has an effect on the other part of the world.


Following your Part 1 / Part 2 example, the interaction would then be
a question of the "controllers" ......... what kind of objects or
interactive surfaces could we invent for visitors to engage so that the
transformations occur? (in order to create a really interesting
musical-spatial experience, I think you migth want to have multiple
loudspeakers, right?). let us think about those controllers.
Let me use a crazy example. if in the middle of the constructed spaces
(both east and west) there were a table, perhaps like one of those
tables where a visitor faces a prison-inmate across a glass divide, and
there was a mic on each side (two chais facing each other across the
table), and we'd invite visitors to sit down and talk to each other or
play a game with each other, could Keytroke use the verbal input to
affect the visual media (transmitted to the other site), so that the
visitors in the east space would experience a conversation between the
visitors in the west side (like the current peace negotiations that are
not taking place in Israel?).

Could we construct a game of peace
negotiation or something along such lines, each word that is spoken
affecting the recursive sound and visualization components and
"landscapes" of the other side/site?

with regards
Johannes Birringer

 

Sun, 14 Apr 2002 14:35:54 +0200
From: Orm Finnendahl

Dear Sher, Johannes,

Johannes Birringer wrote
>> to have some sort of interaction going on, where the movements
>> of somebody in the room would control visual and audio signals
>> (related to the transformation of illusions of space).> [that would require sensors/tracking system?]
Yes, that's what I had in mind.>>

The two rooms (performers) would get cross-linked in a way that the
>> person in one room would control the visuals in his own room
>> but the audio in the other room and vice versa (or the other way
>> round, or mixed, etc. but maintaining a perceptional orthogonality
>> between the two).
>
> [perceptional orthogonality - please elaborate]
>
It's a rather metaphorical term, meaning that there is a mirroring
between the two. My head is full of matrix operations these days and
that might be the reason, sorry. With the term orthogonality I mean,
that for example, if person1 in room1 controls the spatial
distribution of sound in room2 (while he could control the
transformation of sound in his own room1), it should be vice versa for
the other person. This is not necessarily the case: As there are two
sound sources and two light sources, there could be an imbalance
ending that one person controls everything in the other room and
something in his own room, whereas the other person doesn't control
anything in her own room and something in the other room.
In short: Each person should do the same as the other person (with the
room numbers exchanged). And maybe there should also be a similar
cross-reference concerning visuals and music.
>
> I suppose you will be communicating with Sher further on this.
> I am all interested in the ideas you are developing for the music/sound,
> and perhaps, if you wish, you could tell us more about the kind of sound
> you are hearing for the spaces, what kind of sound environment would you
> want to create? Could you imagine including the sound of voices?
I didn't think about the specific sounds to use yet. But the voice is
a very special subject as it is able to use language. It would have to
be dealt with very carefully. That doesn't at all mean I'm opposed to it, though.
>
> In the last part of your letter you addressed practice and your current
> work, you mention Nurnberg, so this must be something you are working on
> with Palindrome, and not related to our plans, or are you using that
> opportunity to try out some things musically?


Yes. It is not really related to it. They asked me for a collaboration
for a couple of concerts starting in May. It is related to dance/music
interaction. I'm working on a setup, where live perfomers are
providing sound material which gets transformed by the dancers (and by
the musicians themselves). The musicians get some visual feedback of
the transformation (something like a frequency/time plot) on a
computer screen, which makes it easier to react musically. I'm
planning to use the program and the same transformations for the
project in Dresden (and for other merely musical performances with
improvising musicians). These transformations are very similar to the
ones I was using in my compositional work before. I'm just working on
making them realtime as in the moment I want to focus on performance
rather than on writing scores (while trying to maintain some of the
advantages of composed music through the use of computers).
>
> when you speak about graphoc visualization, are you speaking of musical
> representation in graphic form? what kind of graphics, similar to the
> tree-like forms that you showed us at the Forum?


In some sense. It is a time/frequency plot of a very rudimentary
nature, just showing horizontal bars equally spaced on a 2-dimensional
plane. The bars represent a soundfile which is controlled by the
musicians and the transformations rotate and stretch the coordinates
in realtime while a cursor moves across it. It is quite trivial
graphically, but the live stretching of the bars or coordinates make
it appear like a plane rotated and moved in space. Once the audio
engine is working, it is quite easily expandable. There's where I hope
to be able to throw in my experience with recursive structures as the
distribution of these horizontal lines doesn't have to be regular at
all. But I'm sure already this regular layout will yield very
interesting sound transformations. But that's still theory (I can't
wait to hear it!).
>
> When you speak of your performance, are you speaking of the sound or
> sound and visuals?
>
> <<For a performance in Nürnberg in May it is planned to use dancers to
> control part 2 and to have live musicians (Double Bass, Cello and maybe
> Percussion) to control part 1 (the sample itself). This could, for
> example be done in a recursive way so that the musicians feed the
> multiplied sample material back into the sample, playing along. This
> (densified) material would then again get multiplied and transformed
> again by the dancer etc...>>
>
> I think you are refering to the sound.


Yes.
>
>
> So, finally, this raises the question for us how we can get more
> concrete, in the next 10 days, about the content of visualization and
> the kind of sound and recursive structures you imagine, and how we
> imagine interactivity (a) between sites / performers and/or
> between (b) sites and audience behavior


I would define it -prematurely- as both: By controlling the visuals
and the sounds, the audience is (technically) interacting with the
visual/sound producing devices. And by crosslinking the controls
between the two rooms, the audiences in the two rooms are interacting
(socially).
>
> I think the last issue is not clear yet, since we would need to develop
> a particular "play" or "action" scenario for the audience to become
> interactively involved. Sher, have you worked with such audience
> inter-act-invitations?


It would be great, if we could come up with the practical issues of
how to get the people interested and involved as I didn't think about
that yet. But I'm sure that can be solved. Any ideas?
>
> With two spaces (east and west), we have the interesting problem that
> changes or transformations, effected in one space with impact on the
> other, do not become transparent unless the audience/visitor in one of
> the spaces realizes that the motion or action or people in the other
> space have such effect, and perhaps we could solve that by the
> transmission of visuals between spaces (incorporating the visitors on
> either side) which make it perceivable that action/behavior in part part
> of the world has an effect on the other part of the world.
>
>
> Following your Part 1 / Part 2 example, the interaction would then be
> a question of the "controllers" ......... what kind of objects or
> interactive surfaces could we invent for visitors to engage so that the
> transformations occur? (in order to create a really interesting
> musical-spatial experience, I think you migth want to have multiple
> loudspeakers, right?). let us think about those controllers.
>
> Let me use a crazy example. if in the middle of the constructed spaces
> (both east and west) there were a table, perhaps like one of those
> tables where a visitor faces a prison-inmate across a glass divide, and
> there was a mic on each side (two chais facing each other across the
> table),

I imagined a very similar setup, like projecting the visuals of the
corresponding rooms into each other (even with people facing each
other). It's quite astonishing how that matches. Although I didn't
think of it, the prison/visitor situation for me somehow hits the nail.
(Like being a perfect picture for something I couldn't verbalize).


> and we'd invite visitors to sit down and talk to each other or
> play a game with each other, could Keytroke use the verbal input to
> affect the visual media (transmitted to the other site), so that the
> visitors in the east space would experience a conversation between the
> visitors in the west side (like the current peace negotiations that are
> not taking place in Israel?). Could we construct a game of peace
> negotiation or something along such lines, each word that is spoken
> affecting the recursive sound and visualization components and
> "landscapes" of the other side/site?

I'm a little sceptical about this part of it, but maybe you can
explain it a little better. My concerns are:1. I don't think people want to talk to each other using microphones in an exhibition situation.


2. I can't see how the sound could be processed in the technical
sense. There's no way to extract semantical information from the
spoken words (it's not even easy to isolate words technically when
it's done realtime).I was rather thinking of using preproduced sounds. They are much
easier to handle and reduce the parameters which have to get finetuned
to get an interesting result. Considering the amount of live
interaction already involved and the amount of time we'll have I
wouldn't want to cope with too many things at once. And I'm also a
little sceptical about using speech as sound source. As it is used in
ten's of thousands of (for my personal taste!) uninteresting computer
music pieces and radio plays I would probably want to transform it to
a degree of inperceptionality (<- does this word exist?) in order to
find the result interesting that the use of speech might become
questionable in the first place. Don't get me wrong: I don't mind
referrals to the political situation, be it in Germany or Palestina or
anywhere else and I like the use of language in works of art. I just
don't like the cliché of speech sound in sound art (murmuring
textures, isolated words etc.). Anything (to me) interesting would
open a completely new thread, dealing with the relation of semantics,
meaning and sound. I just don't feel like I want to cope with it in
the moment.
Sher, what's your opinion?
Yours,
Orm

Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:43:47 +0200
From: sher doruff


jI just spent two hours answering the last missives and my computer
crashed on send. sigh. will have to try and retrace tomorrow.
all the best,
sher


Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:19:35 +0200
From: sher doruff

hi johannes, orm


ok. hopefully no fatal crashes today.

i'll just jump to orm's last suggestion. i like the idea of parallel
imagery of the spaces. one simple technique could be making qtvr's
(360 degree panoramas) of each empty space that are zoomed, panned
and tilted by presence in the other space. i see it as a subtle,
quasi-immersive mirroring. with semi-transparent screens that gently
mix the realities of one room with the next. the navigation through
the 'virtual' room could be accomplished by tracking movement in the
'real' room (and vice versa).

i might add here that it may be more
interesting to track or control with sound than image.movement within the space modulating sound parameters that effect the navigation of the image of the other space. be much nicer with live
cameras on a rotating mounts but i don't have those up my sleeve.
longer term project with a budget.if we tried it with the premade qtvr's then the question would be how
to further engage the audience.?


apply live video feeds in a relevant way?getting back to the tables.

in my lost mail i described how effective
the dinner party was last week by simply extending the real table
with a projection of the streamed table on the wall (to scale) at the
end. when you turned your head to speak to the person next to you you
would see the toronto party (15) seated, eating talking (ambient).
all very present and 'normal' we used some brilliant kinetic devices
designed by the canadian robotics group that klinked crystal wine
glasses for attention when someone from one side wanted to make a
speech to the entire group. this speech was also translated through
the moving mouth and flopping of 'billy bass' the talking fish on the
central platter. he responded to the speech of the other side.
simple. funny, but very useful in creating a sense of presence.
graham smith also built a special table that projected the overhead
view of a toronto place setting opposite a diners place setting. we
didn't use this properly in all the excitement of the event but it
does remind me of the prison table idea. can table props be
integrated into a more abstract, spatial installation? i'm not sure.
johannes?

all the best,
sher>


>
> > i wrote at length in the lost mail that keystroke can handle much of
> > the dynamic data between the proposed east/west spaces, but the
>> actual triggering mechanisms, sensors, sensor interface, image
>> analysis software, etc, may need to be external to keystroke and
>> require another programmer or engineer. i hate to emphasize the
>> technical when we're struggling for a concept, but i can foresee
>> frustrations. but this is the cart before the horse. if we have a
>> defined concept and we can extrapolate the parameters, we'll then
>> know what's possible.
>
>Agreed.
>
>> the idea of the tables is interesting as i feel that prop has the
>> potential to engage action or participation from an 'audience'. ( i
>> rambled on in my email about the dinner party performance we did last
>> week between toronto and a'dam). we had a specialized designed
>> projection table by Graham Smith a canadian artist and it worked as
>> trans-local prop. yet somehow i feel with your sound that the space
>> needs to be open and that moving around the space or proximity to
>> objects in the space effect the iterations, the spatial diffusion of
>> sound.
>
>Although as I said in the previous email, I like the idea of the
>tables (and especially what Sher mentioned about the dinner party), I
>don't really like the situation of people sitting down in this
>installation. I also was thinking that moving around was the main way
>of changing the behaviour of the images/sounds. The image of tables
>struck me most because of the confrontative situation, which might be
>interesting to trigger response and to encourage the people to
>correspond.
>
>> i would scale the image down, small and perhaps mobile. i'm
>> not sure there needs to be an intimate one-on-one. the spaces can
>> become intimate with the memory and density of the sound.
>>
>
>I agree (partly). The one-to-one relationship could be interesting, if
>the relation of movement to the transformation of sound/imagery was
>transparent in a way that it was some sort of real dialog between the
>two. Like one person moving into the corner of the room makes the
>sound/imagery focus there, but travel to another location in the other
>room (or become hardly audible/visible or whatever) in a way that
>stimulates some sort of reaction by the other person. But that again
>is a lot of work to be thought out and it would have to get tested.
>
>For the design of the installation I thought more of different
>projection spaces (coupling the multi-speaker setup) and one of the
>projections either being a mirror-like image of the other room (as one
>other possibility to transform/prolong the space) or using live
>imagery of the other room as input. In general I could imagine some
>setup, which doesn't impose all the creation of multilayered
>space-transforming imagery on the technology, but rather add
>reflections and spacial imagery through items in the room like
>reflective surfaces or halftransparent projection canvases in a way
>that the actual space is used and modulated with the images. At least
>that's normally the way I prefer to work acoustically: I don't like to
>use reverbration in the mix as this is normally added by the space in
>which it is projected and rather turn loudspeakers or put them at
>special locations.
>

>warm greetings,
>Orm

Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 01:37:09 -0400
From: Johannes Birringer

Dear Orm, Sher


thanks for your prompt and very complete replies, Orm, and I think I
understand you well and can imagine well were your main emphasis in our
project might lie. this is fine.i hope you didn't mind my - perhaps - too literal reference to a face to
face encounter as possible interaction/controller scenario, whether
playful or somber or both.

While I agree with you about needing to avoid superficial or banal
"voice" sampling or audio voice/radio muttering, I was probably mostly
worrying about the concrete interface/interaction scenario, and what the
content and intention for such interactive playing field will be like,
how we can involve the visitors in perceptional (formal & psychological)
as well as other content matters (narrative, play/game or social ritual
structures --- and after all, unless the visuals are distorted and
abstracted (have also seen much of the usaal psychedelic stuff in discos
and on mtv and in rock concerts and vj's work that doesn't interest me),
they are going to reference something in the world? no?
I also agree that refering to political disasters such as the current
"uprooting of the infrastructure of terror" (quote Sharon) is a very
touchy subject and should be avoided.

I agree.I'd rather then suggest that we opt for a social interaction situation
that can work on a more subliminal level, and imply perhaps the theme of
"geography", asymmetry, bilaterality, convergences, co-resonances,
letting the visitors choose what they do once we prepare a scenario
(say, like a boccia game in a park), so they may feel that their action
or entry into the situation has an effect, on the other end. How does
the visitor know there is a corresponding end? I suppose it will be
announced when they enter the exhibition (wall text, flier), so they can
orient themselves, and visit both "sides" if they wish.
I am sad to hear that Sher experiences repeated crashes since we need
her input. I suppose I am working on the content -of- interaction" side
of the plan right now, since I wish not to submit a proposal that is
purely technical/technological[<<As there are two
sound sources and two light sources, there could be an imbalance
ending that one person controls everything in the other room and
something in his own room, whereas the other person doesn't control
anything in her own room and something in the other room.>>}
Two rooms with a view, did Virginia Woolf say that, or was it a room of
her own?

Room?


(just saw/heard Ben Rubin's "Listening Post," which was composed of
filtered/selected voice streams (real time) from thousands of chat rooms
and bulletin boards on the Web... the show was installed at BAM in 2001,
he came to talk to us last week - we had a long and furious debate
afterwards, and I disagreed on almost all points).
http://www.earstudio.com/projects/listeningPost.html

room and board.

perhaps we should begin to play with the semantics of our east and west
wings/rooms, or imagine the kind of different layers of music/sound that
you might want to create for different geographies, transports between.
transport. (einstuerzende neubauten) do you ever work with industrial sounds?

what is the surface of the floor of our rooms
(one has sand, the other coal? grass? or steel?)
different surfaces, different geographies or topologies?
one fills slowly with water, rubber boots will be supplied.
the other is very dry.does music sound different in wet and dry surrounding?with warm regards
Johannes

Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 03:40:55 -0400
From: Johannes Birringer


Dear Sher, Orm

good to hear from both you responding and taking ideas further, I had a
long day today and am too tired to write, but i am beginning to see many
potentials for our rooms, and I think, as Sher also suggests, that
(possibly a small table, with other potential props that invite
interaction) props will be our best way to initiate audience
participation, and those (including projectiopns/reflections) could well
be used to link the two spaces.
soon more


Johannes

Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 19:25:37 +0200
From: Orm Finnendahl


Dear Sher, Johannes,


what are "props" (sorry, I really don't know what you're talking
about)?

In general I think I can very well relate to the ideas and suggestions
of you, Sher. I propose to start with a list of requirements, even though we are not
through with the ideas yet and refine them over the next days. I think
that also helps us to understand, how we want to do it.Let me start:
For the audio I would need 1 Computer with 2 multichannel audiocard as
well as 8 Loudspeakers plus 1 subwoofer and amplification in each
room. (I think, a minimum of 6 loudspeakers could be sufficient, less
than 6 is less than satisfactory). In addition we might have to build
a small network for communication/synchronization (1 8-port switch).
I need control signals from somebody (measured data from the movement
of people in space as MIDI or OSC). Sher, Johannes, How do you want to
do it? We could use EyeCon or any other system (I don't know big
eye).


I think, it would be nice, if also smaller movements of parts of
the body (like turning around or even turning the head) would somehow
be translated to transformations of sound/visuals. Do you think of
more than one person in the space? How do we track their movements. I
could assign a lot o f control signals to different ways of
transforming ONE single sound, or, alternatively assign one place in
space to one sound with its transformation (generating overlaying
sounds, which get individually controlled by different spots in the
room).In general I would recommend a one way control situation: The control
data changes the sound, but the sound is not analyzed in order to
create control data. We could come up with some sort of linkage
between image and sound (in a way that the imaging system gets the
same control data but interprets it in another way than the sound;
that would create the illusion, that the sound and image are linked
(the sound transforms the image or vice versa); was that what you
meant, Sher?)

Orm

 

Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 03:17:21 -0400
From: Johannes Birringer

(props/"properties" was meant as a reference to objects in space, as
they are often used in the theatre or in phsyical/plastic installations
where objects are meant to be used for something,).I came home late tonight. I marvel at our collaboration, and our various approaches to making art, it's very interesting to me.


I cannot entirely follow the approach (say, your list of equipments) you
take Orm, since we have not defined what it is we have to say or want to
install as content and experience for interaction, so the equipment
issue comes last for me, once I know what kind of images and sounds we
may be creating in the spaces we are building. On the other hand, you do
raise an important issue, if we reflect on some of thematic or action
ideas that were raised by us - and that is the question of how any
visitor behavior or action is tracked or sensed, how precise we can or
might be able to do this (we don't have EyeCon,

I personally don;t work with PC platform, so we would have to borrow a system and work cross
platform?? this makes us less independent I think). I do think we can
get around this and use a camera tracking system (with our Macs) that
can feed midi data to your computers, Orm, but for the moment I still
want to understand the relationship between your sound ideas and program
and the visual scenarios that we can create with Keystroke utilizing
image/movie inputs that are a mixture of prerecorded and real time (with
the real time visuals affecting and changing the prerecorded one).

Once again, here are my questions as to content - space--- the actions performed within these particular rooms (east and west chamber)- the physical space that defines thd chamber (it's real, and the images
are also real, not virtual althouigh they may imply imaginary space) -
are there any border areas? spaces within the space? specially defined
areas?(example: the small table with a screen/plexiglass divide - this could
also be an opaque/sem-transparent screen, and I could imagine a
situation as in Javanese shadow theatre where the audience on one side
sees only the shadows, while the persons on the other side see the
puppeteer- the active visitor who manipulates a prop. The visitor on one
side of the shadow screen who manipulates the object would be tracked by
the realtime camera, or the objects, once manipulated, could be the
'controller')- one's reasons for needing/seeking out this space - is this a journey,
a resting place, a discovery place, a meditative area, a screening room,
a shadow theatre, a cell, a refuge? ?


what is virtual about it? and why do we need virtual spaces at all?
with regards
Johannes

PS, notwithstanding our concern with literal references, I did collect a
few statements from the refugee camp in Jenin, and added some
reflections.

Whenever I passed a few meters, I saw two or three bodies.
After a few minutes, I couldn’t hear anything.
Bulldozers loaded the bodies into the trucks.
The bodies that were not ours.
Others were concealed under collapsed buildings.
Some bodies will be buried in what we call the enemy cemetery site.
The dead should be treated with respect.
After midnight, he stopped breathing.
She said she remained trapped in the house with the bodies.
Then they ordered us to leave the bodies and go outside.
He said he was ordered to strip.
He had to prove he was not carrying a bomb.
He was then permitted to replace his pants.


***


Deserted and disinherited. Life goes on, and we have lost.
What is lost needs to be resurrected.
Images in relation to such disasters are not resurrections.
Who can still ask: “why did I and this building survive while so much
else was destroyed.
All was destroyed. The surviving ones are dulled to pain, limiting their
horizon to the most abject survival of the fittest, thus undoing any
community. Everything is leveled. So what survives was also destroyed

 

.* ** **

From: Sher

ok. hopefully no fatal crashes today.
i'll just jump to orm's last suggestion. i like the idea of parallel
imagery of the spaces. one simple technique could be making qtvr's
(360 degree panoramas) of each empty space that are zoomed, panned
and tilted by presence in the other space. i see it as a subtle,
quasi-immersive mirroring. with semi-transparent screens that gently
mix the realities of one room with the next. the navigation through
the 'virtual' room could be accomplished by tracking movement in the
'real' room (and vice versa). i might add here that it may be more
interesting to track or control with sound than image.
movement within the space modulating sound parameters that effect the
navigation of the image of the other space. be much nicer with live
cameras on a rotating mounts but i don't have those up my sleeve.
longer term project with a budget.


if we tried it with the premade qtvr's then the question would be how
to further engage the audience.?


apply live video feeds in a relevant way?


getting back to the tables. in my lost mail i described how effective
the dinner party was last week by simply extending the real table
with a projection of the streamed table on the wall (to scale) at the
end. when you turned your head to speak to the person next to you you
would see the toronto party (15) seated, eating talking (ambient).
all very present and 'normal' we used some brilliant kinetic devices
designed by the canadian robotics group that klinked crystal wine
glasses for attention when someone from one side wanted to make a
speech to the entire group. this speech was also translated through
the moving mouth and flopping of 'billy bass' the talking fish on the
central platter. he responded to the speech of the other side.
simple. funny, but very useful in creating a sense of presence.
graham smith also built a special table that projected the overhead
view of a toronto place setting opposite a diners place setting. we
didn't use this properly in all the excitement of the event but it
does remind me of the prison table idea. can table props be
integrated into a more abstract, spatial installation? i'm not sure.
johannes?all the best,
sher

 

From Orm

Hi Sher, hi Johannes,
>
>Sher, thanks for managing to put a brief mail together after you lost
>the long mail to us and all that computer hassle last night.
>
> > i wrote at length in the lost mail that keystroke can handle much of
> > the dynamic data between the proposed east/west spaces, but the
>> actual triggering mechanisms, sensors, sensor interface, image
>> analysis software, etc, may need to be external to keystroke and
>> require another programmer or engineer. i hate to emphasize the
>> technical when we're struggling for a concept, but i can foresee
>> frustrations. but this is the cart before the horse. if we have a
>> defined concept and we can extrapolate the parameters, we'll then
>> know what's possible.
>
>Agreed.
>
>> the idea of the tables is interesting as i feel that prop has the
>> potential to engage action or participation from an 'audience'. ( i
>> rambled on in my email about the dinner party performance we did last
>> week between toronto and a'dam). we had a specialized designed
>> projection table by Graham Smith a canadian artist and it worked as
>> trans-local prop. yet somehow i feel with your sound that the space
>> needs to be open and that moving around the space or proximity to
>> objects in the space effect the iterations, the spatial diffusion of
>> sound.
>
>Although as I said in the previous email, I like the idea of the
>tables (and especially what Sher mentioned about the dinner party), I
>don't really like the situation of people sitting down in this
>installation. I also was thinking that moving around was the main way
>of changing the behaviour of the images/sounds. The image of tables
>struck me most because of the confrontative situation, which might be
>interesting to trigger response and to encourage the people to
>correspond.
>
>> i would scale the image down, small and perhaps mobile. i'm
>> not sure there needs to be an intimate one-on-one. the spaces can
>> become intimate with the memory and density of the sound.
>>
>
>I agree (partly). The one-to-one relationship could be interesting, if
>the relation of movement to the transformation of sound/imagery was
>transparent in a way that it was some sort of real dialog between the
>two. Like one person moving into the corner of the room makes the
>sound/imagery focus there, but travel to another location in the other
>room (or become hardly audible/visible or whatever) in a way that
>stimulates some sort of reaction by the other person. But that again
>is a lot of work to be thought out and it would have to get tested.
>
>For the design of the installation I thought more of different
>projection spaces (coupling the multi-speaker setup) and one of the
>projections either being a mirror-like image of the other room (as one
>other possibility to transform/prolong the space) or using live
>imagery of the other room as input. In general I could imagine some
>setup, which doesn't impose all the creation of multilayered
>space-transforming imagery on the technology, but rather add
>reflections and spacial imagery through items in the room like
>reflective surfaces or halftransparent projection canvases in a way
>that the actual space is used and modulated with the images. At least
>that's normally the way I prefer to work acoustically: I don't like to
>use reverbration in the mix as this is normally added by the space in
>which it is projected and rather turn loudspeakers or put them at
>special locations.
>
>My train is leaving soon (I have to teach in Essen) and i have to
>go. I'll be back on Tuesday night but will check my mails (sorry, I
>just checked the clock...)
>


>warm greetings,
>Orm--


Sher DoruffDate: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 11:33:58 +0200
From: sher doruff

Thai to you both,
where to go with this now?

johannes, thank you for the jenin quotes and your reflections. i
understand a deeper sense of why anyone should enter these rooms and
what they might find there is central to our still point.
i also must clarify my negligent use of the word 'virtual' (which i
put in quotations to offset it's lameness). of course there is
nothing virtual about these spaces. presumably there are people in
both and they are experiencing something of the other. better to
assign names like east and west to the spaces when we talk about
them. i made the mistake of using 'virtual' and ' real ', even
against my better judgement.


that said, there is, arguably, a certain virtuality in prepared
media. in practice, i prefer using live media for everything. this
is not always possible or may not be conceptually appropriate.
we still don't have a defined concept of the space(s). for orm i
believe it is abstract, self-contained and self-modulating. a space
free of literal reference and association other than the sensory.
johannes, i believe you're looking for a reference. a metaphor. me,
i'm somewhere in the middle. i have a desire to make work that is
self-referential but often need the metaphor to clarify my own
choices. [ i was just thinking that this whole series of emails
between us is like the east west rooms, each impinging on the other
without consequence (yet). but i digress...


orm is very clear about his technique and i feel that's a useful
starting point. so, forgetting visuals for the moment, we have these
two spaces and the sound. what needs to be further clarified is the
sound itself - is there a literal element in it? can or should there
be voices or identifiable words or utterances? orm, you are against
this? can you tell us the quality of the sound you imagine - without
visual association? if the sound fields in the spaces are responsible
for all the data control (through EyeCon) then what are the images?
where are the images? this is assuming that there is free movement
(walking around) within each space controlling the sound and image
sphere.


if a table is brought in then the entire space changes and there is a
focal point. this point would need to have dynamic qualities and
control. or perhaps not. perhaps the communication between the spaces
and in each contained space happens everywhere but the table. here
contact is analog, eye-to-eye. a sort of embedded subjective reality
within the external world(s).


i don't know, i'm just trying to sort out where to go and where to
compromise our intentions and aesthetics. collaboration via email is
very difficult and i have to say, this has so far, been a valiant
effort. got to run now, hope i haven't further muddled things.
i will just add that orm's tech specs seem realizable to me but we
would need to use eyecon, if possible, as a means of gesture control.
ultrasound and infrared sensors would additionally work.


warm regards,
sher

 

page 2 of 4

click for more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


NavMenu
Core Page Schedule Gateway News Gallery People Projects