On day 3 we continued to look at motionbuilder and later in the day we moved on to softimage. I felt like I was getting a grasp of the software and could start to envisage how I might be able to create a narrative. Allowing a narrative to come forth in motionbuilder is an aspect to this course that I felt is necessary and yet I could not hide the feeling that the motion capture data that the class collected from Dean Walsh may have been a limiting factor.
(above) Early attempts at building particles.
I considered this a part and parcel with the ‘journey’ of the subject as described by Chris – which I was more than happy to allow to unfold. In the afternoon of day 3 the class was introduced to softimage (image below). I was pleasantly surprised at its usuability after Holger talked about how difficult it may be for some people.
On day 4 we met on level 7 and manually developed a visual narrative to take back into the software. This was a good team building exercise and after the challenge of all getting on the same page, we decided on the preliminary concept of the intrusion of thoughts into a territory. From here we attempted to extend this thinking to adapt to the brief. I introduced the idea of rational or logical thinking versus emotional thinking and the dicotomy thereof.
I brought in a number of materials to work with and some images to inspire and work off. I have always loved and studied in my own time mid 20th century art in America – mostly the abstract impressionists and similarly, the experimental music scene in new york and the US in the late 70’s and 1980’s. As such I brought in some images that epotomise that era in painting, image and sound to inspire myself and the team (below).
I settled on (clockwise from top-left) an early Jackson Pollock painting from the 1940s, AR Penck painting from 1990, A Man Ray photograph, a drawn choreographed dance diagram, lined dancers image, an Orozco painting from the 1950s.
The group was generally accepting of the images I brought in and they helped in the structure of the panorama (below).
The following entries into my note book are the foundations of our group direction. At the end of day 4 the group and myself were hitting a road block in terms of the progression of our design response. No-one seemed to be on the same page, although everyone seemed to be on similar pages. I suggested going down the path decribed in the image below where by the estuary is a metaphor for the division of thoughts in the mind. We talked about how to include the subsets of territory and intruder and established that from time to time people have intrusive thoughts that are not wanted, nor were they planted in ones mind knowingly. An example of this that I found was advertising, ie. mcdonalds – ‘i’m loving it’, or a more insideous example – a recurring negative thought that one may associate with a place, a sound or a feeling.
Below are my clarifycations of what I thought was expected of myself and the group. I tried to maintain to the group that the visualisations needed dynamics to establish a narrative. A crescendo may be neccessary or appearing and disappearing elements. I found it too early to speculate about such details too much without getting my feet wet in the data arena.
David Alfaro Siqueiros, (1969), Vista Aerea [ONLINE]. Available at: https://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/beta/u/0/asset/vista-aerea/FgEgHUKC5i3hwg [Accessed 20 January 2017].
AR Penck, (1983), TXT [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.artnet.com/artists/ar-penck/txt-a-kJoSbLPSElqUEoE4jFTTww2 [Accessed 20 January 2017].
Jackson Pollock, (1959), Herbert Orth [ONLINE]. Available at: https://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/beta/u/0/asset/-/DQGW2PNdsE7pyQ [Accessed 20 January 2017].
Man Ray, (1922), Rayography [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.manray-photo.com/catalog/popup_image.php?pID=1607&image=0&osCsid=f58ffa0eb0fdfb2bf1118bb0e73db1c4 [Accessed 20 January 2017].