still live process blog

playing with the idea of micro editing. the following text lists the simple processes for exploring the notion of a 2 second feed. taking motion and editing it to stillness then reanimating through compiling frames together. looking at composition, choreo-cinematography, remapping time, loss of information, redundancy, reconfiguring and perception. just for starters of course.

from these edits there are two main streams in terms of inscribing the images. the first is through following the chronological progression of the movement. that is, taking a phrase (be it through movement of body, camera or both) and pulling out frames so that there is still a sense of shape or linearity in the resulting images. it’s almost like the reverse of time-lapse photography or stop-motion animation.

the second stream is more about dislocating the images from their chronology and composing the sequence through other means. each frame has a relationship to the preceding and succeeding frames. this becomes a more compositional assemblage where the editing takes precedence in the choreography of the piece.

other things: what is the resulting visual impact of extracting frames from a linear progression? does it allow the inbetween moments to be represented? are those missing elements holding signifigance in their absence?
using a cell size of 2 frames instead of 1 creates a very different experience. the fractions of movement that the eye picks up with 2 frames makes the sequence fit into a dance idiom. some interesting reading here.
things to try: turn your sound off when you watch them. open them all up in pop-ups and view at once. download to your desktop and open all in quicktime – set them to looping playback. observe the topography of the studio. step through them frame by frame. the clips are listed in order below the body of this post.
process 1

fixed frame, dancer walking and standing score.
import entire 3min clip into FCP
edit frames from viewer onto timeline
1. choosing static poses (1 frame)
2. choosing ‘in-between’ moments (2 frames)
3. compiling chronologically

process 2

fixed frame, dancer walking and standing score.
import entire 3min clip into FCP
edit frames from viewer onto timeline
1. choosing static poses (1 frame)
2. compiling frames with repetition of images

process 3

fixed frame, dancer walking and standing score.
import entire 3min clip into FCP
edit frames from viewer onto timeline
1. choosing ‘in-between’ moments (2 frames)
2. compiling chronologically, duplicating
3. reversing duplication.

process 4

moving frame, dancer improvising with a focus on relationship to camera and sense of moving through the frame
log and capture clips into FCP – extracting ‘useful’ sections
edit frames from viewer onto timeline – one clip at a time
1. choosing dynamic moments (2 frames)
2. compiling chronologically – 5 segments only to create a section
3. repeat section

process 5
duplicate sequence from process 4
1. reduce each cell to 1 frame only
2. duplicate to fill 2 secs

process 6
moving frame, dancer improvising with a focus on relationship to camera and sense of moving through the frame
log and capture clips into FCP – extracting ‘useful’ sections
edit frames from viewer onto timeline – one clip at a time
1. choosing dynamic moments (2 frames)
2. compiling chronologically

process 7

same as process 6 – different footage.

process 8

same as process 7 but there are 2 frames for each cell – this is a 4 second feed

 Podcast Video [0:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
 Podcast Video [0:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
 Podcast Video [0:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
 Podcast Video [0:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
 Podcast Video [0:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
 Podcast Video [0:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
 Podcast Video [0:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
 Podcast Video [0:04m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Under threat of excommunication (followed by a slow and painful death) by Mr. Corbet, I have been digging deeply into the latest issue of Contact Quarterly (Vol 31 Issue 2).

Materials by Richard Siegal in which he describes a choreographic methodology (for work, “If/Then”) designed to envoke or foreground notions of authorship during performative activity. Ideas and concerns surrounding “networks” are almost painful in their current omnipresence and yet Siegal talks to a kind of logic-based flow chart of performative decision making that also integrates texts from filial relationships (and clearly, notions of relating and relationships are central his thinking and doing). It is stimulating stuff.

Siegal writes, “The subject of virtuosity is largely transmuted from the physical to the mnemonic. The cause and effect relationships, which set the vocabulary into motion, are a feat of extraordinary memory for which dancers are especially qualified” (p. 60). I am reminded once again of the breadth of the term virtuosity – and how it tends to represent a seeing or visual hegemony. That is, that which is visible is able to be virtuosic (stronger, faster, higher).

But I want to go back to networks (such a broad word). Siegal expresses the desire for “systemic complexity” and in dissolving individual control so that the “more qualified organizational abilities of communities” might shift and expand and improve his “If/Then” methodology.This paragraph – the second to last on p.60 – prompted a consideration of “Crevice” on my part – how might the relinquishment of individual control, and (subsequent) enabling of “systemic complexity” via networked communities, impact on a lonely man?

Pushing this idea further, what is it to not be able to assume or choose loneliness?I was thinking about the world’s last lonely man or the final lonely man. Where the viruses and organisms of community and network prevent or denature (the option of) loneliness.

A big jump I know.

But I both love and loathe literal and metaphorical networks (as this wireless one we are working on ducks in and out of being serviceable).

And I am now starting to think that it seems odd to consider sharing these ideas on that big dubdubdub network in the sky – who is this writing for? David and Paea? Or just a very public means by which I might organise my thinking?

Spent some time with a small group of people yesterday (including Paea and David) working on sighted and unsighted materials. This was based on the work that Alexandra Macdonald and I did in the UK (at the Choreographic Lab in Northampton) in March this year. Interesting to work within a group situation (Alexandra and I spent the entire time in a large studio alone), and attempting to articulate information that had been developed in quite an organic way (and with no particular ‘endpoint’ in mind).

Issues related to movement “defaults” emerged. Not really surprising, but because Alexandra and I worked mostly outside of what might be called contact idioms we seemed to approach the moving/viewing/unviewing with a greater emphasis on soloing within a duetting structure – what State of Flux call Duoloing I think it is). But this also has to do (perhaps) with how the information is provided in the sharing – and b/c this is my first go at facilitating these ideas/actions/provocations I am bound to come upon moving misnomers.

The difference between the process of finding and the process of sharing is perhaps the awareness of what the experience ‘might’ be like. My capacity to adapt the information, and remain open to surprise in where people direct (or corner) the materials is critical. Is the endpoint that Alexandra and I experienced the one that ought to be experienced? No — and yet its richness is something I’d like to have shared, and to enter various moving communities. These questions then return to what it is that I might be seeking in this particular aspect of my practice. Simply more stimuli? Or an increased/altered sense of intra and intersubjective (space/time) corporeality?

On a completely different note – Alexandra and I used the terms “assist”, “resist” and “t-bone” to cover the kinds of options open to the sighted person in the duoloing. These need clarification and refinement (especially ‘t-bone’ – which we used (thanks to Teb) as a note to have the capacity to completely fuck things around) … seems like good fodder for a venn diagram.

Spent some time yesterday (day before?) working with two cameras that were taped together (or their tripods were) at right angles to each other – as a possible idea for development of four-angled materials for “Crevice”.

Link to some video here: http://www.choreographiclab.org/Main/?p=148

Always intriguing to execute an idea that has only been conceptualised. The practicalities become evident very quickly. For example – a question of focus. Passing through the door the camera which I was “sighting” (or viewing through) was nicely focused, but the second camera at right angles couldn’t handle the closeness of the door frame. How to resolve?

Also, the gaps between the two frames of the cameras lead to a particular kind of disorientation – quite stimulating. My thinking at the moment would be to use a combination of “real” materials shot in a (yet to be found) location, AND some constructed animations/3D modelling of the same location. That way I would have the capacity to give the architecture “sense” as well as to render the four angles a more abstracted (torn apart) feel – as is present in the above (two angle) version.

Quite a lot to learn.

Today begins the last day of the first week. I have spent this time considering the idea of research – what is it, how does it work, how can it feed the physical? I realise it is, of course, vitally important. This time in Perth is also a unique chance to not have to find time to read and be engaged in other modes of performativity outside of or in addition to the time spent in the studio in the physical practice of moving.

Teaching yesterday I was aware, again, of how very long it takes to find your ‘mojo’ as a mover. I was saying to Simon, sitting in the sun, that that morning as I watched younger dancers against (or rather beside) older, that there is something about one’s sensuality that comes into play. Is it that the more sensual you are the more luscious, grounded and virtuosic your movement?! Not sure about that one….but there is something to be said for giving your body up to experience that is diverse outside of the studio.

today began with Paea leading a contemporary class for Strut. i had a good time. really. despite being the unco dancer at the back of the class.

then simon led an improv class looking at the work he started with Alexandra MacDonald earlier this year. in one part of the investigation/exploration simon mentioned one person engaging in resistance, assistance or t-boning (fuck it all up)

hang on – got to go and do some body work… will continue this in a moment

will come back tomorrow now… blah

ok, so a couple of days later i return to finish off my train of thought. and, of course, in the time between i have read the other posts by simon and paea, had a few conversations about the classes, been swimming in the ocean, enjoyed some preservative free wine, helped put in the floor of a tent in Forrest Place and done a couple of loads of washing, all of which mean my original thoughts have been somewhat influenced and diluted by other information.

in fact, one of the thoughts i was having about the classes was to do with information and processing. in paea’s class the information came incrementally and was explicitly directed. it also came at a particular pace, which, to my un-contemporary/un-institutionally trained body, was at a considerable speed. to make a dodgy tech analogy, my CPU had to work at capacity for most of the class to keep on top of the information. towards the end of the class i noticed that i was not taking any new information in – i had reached a level of saturation. and with it the ability to process information? mental fatigue? overheated CPU? i enjoyed working at that capacity. and also of remembering the practice of allowing – that it is possible to let information in without making a conscious decision about the information.

in contrast, simon’s class began with a packet of information that was setting up an exploration. the information was presented to the class without being overly prescriptive. as the class progressed smaller pieces of information were transmitted, which acted like triggers or reminders of the exploration. as we were working in duets, the processing of this information was necessarily handled differently by each person. as a unit, the processing and creation of data were indivisible – is this a recursive system? acting independently but implicitly linked – reminds me of the uncertainty arguement – mutually exclusive, yet jointly essential for a complete description of quantum events.

The day begins with me noticing that Simon has excellent extension in his foot but not great flexion. And also, this flexibility of ankle, means his sickle is guaranteed to be great and convincing.

Secondly, dancing with, being shifted, moved, thrown and caught by Simon and David is a superb experience of the senses. It is an experience of safety. Paradoxically one that could be harmful.

I stopped looking with my eyes – an important observation.

computer purchase occupying too much of my brain space.

this morning i led a little contact exploration – a trio of investigating the physiology of eachother’s bodies as a preparation for moving with increasing responsiveness (to tactile information) through considering our roles and the intention behind the movement.

the information i gave was sparse – enough to act as triggers but not overly prescriptive. i think one of the reasons i often try to offer less prescriptive task or thoughts is to do with allowing ownership and agency.

i think now i’m going to go and start building something. i want to look at replication and degradation – the simple idea is to build a little web app in php that uses GD to recompress the images that are uploaded. the image that is created will then be compressed again. this is a recursive action. need to find some info about jpg compression and how it anaylses and then reduces information.

off to work.

David leading listening/agency task. Moving with and about others. From released to resistant. Experienced range of sensations from the ultra-clear, to more “slushy”. I questioned my response to this feeling of blurring  (or slushiness) – to be led to more “known” pathways/experiences, OR to feel my body perturbed and extended. The relationship with a beginning (or baseline) state and the subsequent extensions feels critical in my experience. To keep checking in the with the point of entry (and its associated clarity) as a means of organising (and allowing?) the bodymind to venture into newness.

The doing (initially – before I began to acquire an increasing amount of agenecy) felt light, absorbing, and surprising. Corporeal surprise – sounds like a cocktail. But it is those moments that propel me – or are nurturing.

I am not sure what this is. will be.

I am in good company though. This makes me feel assured that some progress will be made.