Standardising VJing

[Feyd]

Hi everyone,

I'm still new to Vjing, but it's a genuine pleasure to be here at the start of something that will clearly become very mainstreme one day. A lot of people seem to want to push it that way at any rate. It seems to me though, that this is only every going to happen if the format of VJing is standardised to some degree.

Quite what the best way to go about this is really down to the developers putting their heads together and coming up with a standardised form of VJing.

I was wondering how far people would say we are off such a day, and what form a standardised format might take. Once we know what the end goal is, it will undoubtably be easier to get there.

[holly]

Hi there! Welcome:D

There is a discussion of where the "standards" are today (http://www.vjforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=12734) (or should be).

I think for a LONG time to come there will always need to be a way to plug-in your DOOwhitZIS box. There are just so many specialized options, and more on the way.... For VJing to become mainstream, really there will have to be standardized tools. Visuals can be broken down into 2 basic catagories: self-generative and video/sample based (a lot of VJs combine a bit of both...). I can see how DVDs and DVJ-X1s could become the standard for video-based VJing, but there will always be multiple-platforms for generative visual boxes. Mac/PC for instance, or your own novelty knob twiddling device:
http://www.radiolaguy.com/images/radiolaAA485o.jpg

[videobrian]

nice knobs.


but vj-ing.


it's already standardized...

not saying that everything tends to look the same or anything...

just, you know: it tends to come down to what a video projector can see in most cases. pal, nstc, vga, svga. that's about it. (honourable props to the secam crowd though)




(why is the 'new-thread button right next to the 'post-reply' button, i'm dyslectic damit)

[brain]

Originally posted by Feyd
it's a genuine pleasure to be here at the start of something that will clearly become very mainstreme one day.

:confused:

you think its nice to make mainstream entertainment?

to me the most interesting thing about VJing is that there are many different approaches and techniques...
of course technique affects aesthehics, the more standarization, the more similar looks. its a trap we are already caught in, and no one forced us into it!
all vjs using the same standardized tools? :zzz:

[Anyone]

Originally posted by brain

the more standarization, the more similar looks.
all vjs using the same standardized tools? :zzz:

I beg to differ.
once we all use the same tools,
punters will finally focus the "what" question rather than the boring "how"

:zzz: how did you do that? :zzz:

:jump: What meanings and emotions does it give me ? :jump:

PS
When DJs all got to use the same standardized tools
that's when they all started having a solid audience...

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone

When DJs all got to use the same standardized tools
that's when they all started having a solid audience... [/B]

there's a flip side to it as well. DJ'ing now has set formulas and rules and you can't break them unless you are at some kind of experimental ambient noise night.

many vj's are concerned about losing creative freedom as the art becomes more mainstream.

yes there is an advantage to standardising it but you can't ignore that there is also a potential down side.

and sorry sometimes how you do something is interesting.... I don't want my visuals to look the same as all the resolume + freeframe vj's. that's why I make my own custom tools. but I design them to allow me to convey meaning in a way that I can relate to.

[brain]

Originally posted by Anyone

When DJs all got to use the same standardized tools
that's when they all started having a solid audience...

and by now someone who manages to handle three purchased records at the same time is considered to be "cutting edge". how poor is that?

yes, some DJs are brilliant but the whole concept is sooooo boring... even turntablism rarely breaks out of the cage.

sure, content and style is key, but i'm quite sure standardization fuels monoculture.

why aim for less when you can go for diversity?

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by brain
and by now someone who manages to handle three purchased records at the same time is considered to be "cutting edge". how poor is that?


yep... and the other thing is most "VJ's" are closer to live music performers than they are to "DJ's", in that they are using generative techniques and/or rearranging multiple layers on the fly.

how many vj's play six to ten minute set pieces and cross fade the next one in? there is a few but not many.

live electronic music performance is not standardised so why should VJ'ing be?

[Anyone]

Originally posted by brain
how poor is that?

yes, some DJs are brilliant but the whole concept is sooooo boring... even turntablism rarely breaks out of the cage.

why aim for less when you can go for diversity?

because each time you break the cage you have to re-educate your audience
and until your audience catches up and you can get decent fees again,
you'll have to keep your day job.

that's how poor it is.

if you constantly try to cut the edges
you progressively end up with
a smaller and smaller centre...

get it?

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone
because each time you break the cage you have to re-educate your audience
and until your audience catches up and you can get decent fees again,
you'll have to keep your day job.


well at least your're honest about your motivations, but I suspect a lot of us don't share them...

the thing is it's too soon. the technology is still changing too rapidly to standardise vj'ing. the fundamental difference is, the audio mixer and turntables came out what 30-40 years ago and hasn't changed that much since.

HD video technology, mixers, pitch shift dvd players, real time fx boxes, laptops that can do realtime video fx with multiple layers. all these things are still evolving.

you can lock down a standard but then the next generation of vj's using new tools will leapfrog you and make you look silly.

I'd rather be in a rapidly evolving industry that lets me learn and try new things than get good fees but be locked down to a formula. I choose VJ'ing as a creative outlet because it lets me constantly try new things, and I enjoy that. if I had to perform the same set using the same software night after night I'd give up VJ'ing.

I didn't choose it to do a regular but well paid job, there's plenty of other options I could do for that. I suspect there's a lot of people like me out there. Anyone, you've got an uphill battle.

[videobrian]

HD video technology, mixers, pitch shift dvd players, real time fx boxes, laptops that can do realtime video fx with multiple layers. all these things are still evolving.


so are the type of sounds that go onto records, how the sounds are produced, the way plates are made, etc.

we have bnc, y-c, vga, svga, composite, component, rgb, etc.

beamers go 50hz, 60hz, 120hz, whatever.

these are standards. vj is standardized.

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by videobrian
so are the type of sounds that go onto records, how the sounds are produced, the way plates are made, etc.

we have bnc, y-c, vga, svga, composite, component, rgb, etc.

beamers go 50hz, 60hz, 120hz, whatever.

these are standards. vj is standardized.

you and anyone are using "standardized" in a different way.

I think it's a great idea to have a "minimum tech rider" that VJ's get, screens, previews, maybe a v4 and a couple of standard dvd players.

But the level of standardization anyone seems to be suggesting, eg standard vj tools, is something I'm opposed to.

[videobrian]

But the level of standardization anyone seems to be suggesting, eg standard vj tools, is something I'm opposed to.

ditto.

it's like saying, "ALL BASS DRUMS MUST BE AN 808", or something.

[Anyone]

the audio mixer and turntables came out what 30-40 years ago and hasn't changed that much since.


so was vinyl. DJs resisted, and still are resisting, new technology
how many DJs are using MP3, only the ones not afraid of ridicule.


I didn't choose it to do a regular but well paid job

Then isn't that what we call an amateur?

[Anyone]

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by videobrian
so are the type of sounds that go onto records, how the sounds are produced, the way plates are made, etc.

we have bnc, y-c, vga, svga, composite, component, rgb, etc.

beamers go 50hz, 60hz, 120hz, whatever.

these are standards. vj is standardized.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by DrEskaton
you and anyone are using "standardized" in a different way.


no we're not, think about it...

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone

Then isn't that what we call an amateur? [/B]

I don't really care if you call me an amateur. I've been supporting myself working in video and film for almost ten years. And then I VJ as a creative outlet because it affords me the freedom to experiment.

what ever you call me, myself and other people like me will be out there being creative and doing what we love, performing live. I pick and choose the gigs I want to do precisely because I don't need to make a living off vj'ing and I like it that way.

I'm still entitled to my opinion and I don't want VJ'ing to be standardized in the way you seem to be suggesting.

[Anyone]

Originally posted by DrEskaton
I don't really care ... what ever you call me

I didn't call you anything, you called yourself,
I just highlighted it.
BTW, weren't you looking for trouble?

Originally posted by DrEskaton
the next generation of vj's using new tools will leapfrog you and make you look silly.

tsk, tsk...

anyhoo, time for an olive branch now I suppose,
I do value your opinion, and i'm actualy happy you don't agree
otherwise we wouldn't have anything to say!

but:
Originally posted by DrEskaton
I think it's a great idea to have a "minimum tech rider" that VJ's get, screens, previews, maybe a v4 and a couple of standard dvd players.
But the level of standardization anyone seems to be suggesting, eg standard vj tools, is something I'm opposed to.

just a word of advise,
don't assume I'm thinking one thing or another,
ask, keep the conversation open.
BTW, are you not contradicting yourself in this last quote,
are V4s and DVD players not tools?

(notice the interogative tense in my last comment?)

[DrEskaton]

ok fair enough maybe I'm misunderstanding you.... not sure why you think I'm looking for trouble... I just disagree with some of what you're saying. , or least I thought I did.

well.. , please explain what you mean then?

this bit is what I disagree with:
"I beg to differ.
once we all use the same tools,
punters will finally focus the "what" question rather than the boring "how"

I don't want to use the same tools as everyone else and I don't regard the "how" as being boring. Some artists are interested in process and some are not. I regard process as being just as interesting as the end result but I admit I'm probably unusual in that regard.

If a V4 and some other standard equipment are there then I'll use them but I'll bring my own custom stuff as well...

I'm honestly not sure what you are suggesting then anyone. what level of standardization are you wanting?

[Anyone]

Like I said, we don't need to agree...

But I think we both know much has happened over the years
to make our job easier:
I for one don't rig projectors nearly as often as I used to.
the same is getting true for V4s or even DVJs...

but I suppose I'm more of a studio VJ,
much of what I do is content, ideas, style and narrative
when the live element arrives, much of it is about delivery, not process.
even when I do use live effects, I've produced the content
in anticipation of an effect or layering that is added later...

my point is,
if you're (the generic you) using a new piece of equipment
doing a new effect or whatever,
then the attention is on the product, not the content.
if you're always using new tools, this will never change.

if you're using the same product over and over,
the attention will shift on the actual material you're showing
people will look at your screens, not the machines you're using...
this seems more interesting to me.

besides, this way you're not spending as much money
always getting the latest tools.

new tools don't mean you're a new artist.

[holly]

:rolleyes: Didn't we just have a lecture on false dichotomies?

I suppose I VJ completely within NTSC video standards. All my signals are NTSC video and that makes each componant of my rig interchangable and modular. I can plug in new (or even old) equipment so long as it also follows video standards, without loosing half the pixels or loading USB/drivers, etc....

In fact so far I'm impressed that staying within standards has never meant running out of new ideas (http://www.wetcircuit.com/SUPSTAH/KORGtrix/index48.html).... But of course all my content is original so that helps.... Adhearing to video standards hasn't limited my creativity in the least. I get the maverick bravado, but a lot of DIY is self-growth, stretching your personal boundries. It is generally much less concerned with universal or mainstream.

The music industry hasn't really been hurt since Bach standardized the diatonic scale.... Besides, we have attempted to create some rule-of-thumb standards regarding codecs, image-size, framerate, etc. Having standards -- even if they are just guidelines and not shackles -- is a good thing.

Although it might be a chicken/egg thing. Do standards create a mainstream VJ or does a mainstream VJ create standards.... I don't know about VJing in general, but working within existing (video) limitations has definitely helped me be more marketable -- maybe because I have more free time..

[akira_k]

Originally posted by DrEskaton
I don't really care if you call me an amateur.
This word always offends people.

You don't do it as your profession, therefore you are not professional. That's what I thikn Anyone meant and I agree with this definition.

Obviously one always tends to call "professional-looking" stuff etc, regarding to its good or bad level of quality. Another way o use the word but in the context of the discussion, I think the previous definition applies.

But I am digressing ;p

I focus on content as well however I pay a lot of attention to the live performance too. The tool of my choice is the one that lets me express live just the way I want to.

Somehow the tool I use conditions me and gives me freedom at the same time. Some content I produce with my tool and live performance in mind, knowing I can do X or Y thing with it. Some content I create limitated by my live performance tool, knowing I can't do X or Y thing with it.

So the "standard rig" would have to be the best balance between limitation and flexibility.

Lots of the most advanced "DJs" nowadays add shit to the rig like notebooks running Live, Final Scratch setups, synths, etc. But I deny to call them Djs, hey have blurred the line between DJing and live performance (read: Richie Hawtin, Chris Liebing)

Nice topic.

[disassembler]

http://www.mbertrand.freeserve.co.uk/dorian.jpg

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone
if you're (the generic you) using a new piece of equipment
doing a new effect or whatever,
then the attention is on the product, not the content.
if you're always using new tools, this will never change.
if you're using the same product over and over,
the attention will shift on the actual material you're showing
people will look at your screens, not the machines you're using...
this seems more interesting to me.
[/B]

I don't really agree with you. most of the time the audience can't tell what tools I am using, they can't tell if have a new version of software or a new midi controller.

they see the output.... I enjoy looking for new better methods of having more live control over my output and being able to create things faster. I believe that the technology is still advancing at such a rate that the new tools are better, objectively better in that they allow new creative possibilities that weren't possable before as well as higher image quality in realtime.

I do a lot of live composition and live manipulation in my vj'ing and the tools and graphics processing power I want doesn't exist yet and won't for another five years or so.

Which is why IMO any attempt to standardize VJ'ing is premature and will fail.

[videobrian]

The music industry hasn't really been hurt since Bach standardized the diatonic scale. --holly

what about equal temperament? 440 standard?
home-taping was supposed to "kill" the music biz.


I beg to differ.
once we all use the same tools,
punters will finally focus the "what" question rather than the boring "how"

how did you do that? --anyone

if you're tired of gear-hounds then do something about it. maybe the reason people are all about the 'how' is because you tend to produce that kind of response.
so your audience bores you. maybe you bore them? i don't know.
maybe you have to retrain them or something.

i think talking about gear is funny, much of the time the tools are a metaphor of the content anyway.

i could take a hardline mcluhanist approach and assert that the content is meaningless.

[xangadix]

i could take a hardline mcluhanist approach and assert that the content is meaningless.


As we read by levinson (a student of mcluhan and author of 'Digital McLuhan' (a rather tedious book, but thats besided the point)


(...) The medium is the message. Intended to call attention to the proposition that mere use of a medium is more profound in impact upon society than what individuals may do specifically with the medium ? the world successively changed when people began talking on the phone, listening to the radio, watching television, logging on to the Web, not usually because of what they said, heard and saw ? it was roundly mangled into a contention that the content was totally unimportant. - Levinson, 1999, P4


Media are only a description of a connection between people, and even as such they are only a description of an underlying language. As we cannot determine wheter language as such is born to us or is tought to us, we must assume that communication or the sharing of information is a natural phenomenon, not a cultural one.

Having said that, I can safely argue that the 'how' is excactly as important as the 'what'. Information without a medium is as hollow as a medium without information.

Let's take another example;

In ancient greece the Sofistoi ( a group of rhetoric philosophers ) searched for a way to 'proove', with words, any argument. They even put up a show, for public, debating that a certain issue was true. The public would then take a brake, drink some wine and argue among each other about the issue presented. Then another debate was given debating against the issue at hand. This was considered high art in greece. It was focused solely on the 'how' of the argument, the 'what' was completely unimportant. We can still see traces of this today; rhetoric and mediated spectacles are changing the minds of millions everyday. Think of the Nixon/Kennedy debate in the sixties, or the lunar landing, or now the protest at the gates of Bush's Palace in Texas.

Try it for a change; especially the 'political' VJs out there. Take an issue ('I'm against the war in Iraque') and try to make a live show, or a clip trying to 'proove' the opposite.

When the greeks brought there debating-spectacle to Rome by the way, the Romans found the argument so convincing that when the Sofist was starting to argue against the issue after the break they killed him. They convinsed and wouldn't hear otherwise.

Well, thats a lot of rant for just one issue, but whenever someone mentions McLuhan I get an itch.

More on topic however; I can see the argument of Anyone that punters might get more interested in the visuals themselves if they weren't distracted by the tech they see with which you do it. On the other hand; most 'live' acts in the electronic scene involve a bunch of computers and midi-gear on stage. Think of acts like Orbital, Underworld, Cult Electronique, Stereo Total, DJ Shadow, Fluke, etc. etc.
I don't see a lot of people asking how they do it; people come for the music, regardless of the tech.
So from a publics point of view I find the argument nonsense.

The tech-head VJ on the other hand is a completely different story. An image isn't 'cool' just because you have looped it through 12 v4s and an Entrancer; An artist, imho, should use his tools to an end, not the other way around. I'm completely with VJ Anybody on this one; I would rather spend my time on producing content and using tools to get a message across then that I would be focussing on getting the last update of my program.
However an important part of veejaying, and of experimental audio is using new gear to produce new visuals or soundscapes, and this too should be an important part of VJ culture. But like with experimental audio, the public for it is rather thin. I would say that VJ gatherings and small experimental nights would be ideal for this kind of thing; not a massive rave with 20.000 or so partypeople.

[DrEskaton]

"you can lock down a standard but then the next generation of vj's using new tools will leapfrog you and make you look silly."

I'm not quite sure why you took so much offense at this anyone?

if you stand still people will overtake you, it happens in many fields.

Sure you can do a good show with older tech you can even choose to use older tech as an artistic decision. Thats fine and dandy, but there's no denying that we can do do a lot more things now using newer mixers, software etc than we could using VHS decks and MX12's.

In video editing and post production world, post houses are constantly forced to upgrade to stay competitive. eg if you don't upgrade your competition will and will do jobs quicker and faster than you. VJ'ing is a competitive field with rapidly evolving equipment, why is it immune to this? why should it be?

for example standardizing on PAL/NTSC would be crazy right now when HDV, VGA, and HD mixers and projectors are all happening.


I agree with you its all about ability to tell a story and connect emotionally, but it's often about how quickly you can produce a ton of custom content, or how can I drive four high res screens with four different sources? and that's where the tech lust comes into play and helps you do the job.

[Anyone]

Yup, I guess this is the conclusion to this thread:

I'm silly and you're an amateur...

fine by me.

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone
Yup, I guess this is the conclusion to this thread:

I'm silly and you're an amateur...

fine by me.

I wasn't calling you silly personally. Please look at the point I'm trying to make.

it's a general thing... I'd be worried if I stopped evolving and trying new things that the "next generation of kids" will surpass me.

I'm surprised you're not concerned about it yourself.

there was not any kind of disrepect implied to you, it's obvious you're a very talented vj who's good at what you do.

can't we discuss the issue, the pros and cons of standardizing without taking offense? I can see the advantages of what your are trying to do, and I'm just trying to express my concerns about it as well.

[RootsDigitalized]

I think the basic standard now like this :

IVJSCC very very basic scenario 1: Basic Silent PC/Mac VJ
-1 Laptop PC/Mac with VJ Software (anything)
-Tonz of contents

That's it... just plug into Projector.

That's the basic with all the risks.

[KillingFrenzy]

I'd rather worry about creating the standards we can all use to share ideas and content, then worry about standardizing the work/working methods themselves.
For example, more standardized communications techniques between various hardware vendors. V-link is just glorified midi -- howzabout a method of sending and receiving the sort of information we want between devices?
Freeframe is good example of an effects standard -- Lets get FreeframeII to destroy any limitations we find in the current system, and get hardware vendors to support it.
Video send/receive between various softwares-- It is there, but certainly not where it needs to be to have 10 VJS connect to a hub and share streams.
Codecs are good -- It would be nice if somebody came up with a "VJ" codec that was opensource and cross-platform that met our nasty little demands for responsiveness, not the demands of a public ripping DVDs.

Anyway, these are the sort of "standards" I'd like to see appear, as opposed to walking into a club and having someone get angry at me because I don't know how to use Resolume, or don't particularly feel like running things through an Entrancer.
Standards for me are a common ground, not a common methodology.

[videobrian]

some sort of wireless midi-esque standard, like over blue-tooth or wifi would be great...
then when the random powerbook mafia shows up everyone can share a clock.


--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

not to sound like a cheesie artist, but i personally feel as though i'm chasing after something when it comes to tech up-grades. i mean i was really trying to make stuff with 2 vcrs and practically breaking the pause button from over use. access to computers which could do video was such a wicked thing for me at the time, i meant i could hammer out ideas which were sitting around for a while.
i still have ideals about how i think computers or whatever could be used for. for now it's just working with what's out there and seeing what comes up, much of the time the inherent limitations of tech make for the more interesting things than i could imagine anyway.


the mcluhan thing i always found interesting in that:

type-face is a medium for writing, writing is a medium for speach, speach is a medium for thought/concepts, thought/concepts is a medium for experience... taking that further sort of dips into spiritual philisophical questions and everything... and if all these mediums are supposed to be a message, what exactly is the message anyway?

my other fav. canadian theorist is the late glen gould whose highly prophetic writings outlined a certain synergy between culture and technology. that is, the boundries, he predicted, between performer, composer, and audience; producer and listener would essentially disappear. they would become the same person. we can certainly see the effects, instead of listening to records, we perform them, mix them, create new things... listening was never actually passive, but it took a while before we started getting our hands dirty.

but i guess i should just shutup and link an article

http://www.collectionscanada.ca/glenngould/m23-502.1-e.html

[Anyone]

Originally posted by DrEskaton
can't we discuss the issue, the pros and cons of standardizing without taking offense?

Lighten up mate, I'm just sparing with you,
words are just words...:)

I made my point a few times, didn't I?

sorry I have little time to repeat myself :P :cool: :rolleyes:

Oli

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone

sorry I have little time to repeat myself :P :cool: [/B]

fair enough but:

once we all use the same tools,
punters will finally focus the "what" question rather than the boring "how"

I still don't understand what you think is appropriate?

what tools should we standardize on? resolume? two DVJ-X1's? a hippotizer? or should we not standardize yet because the tools are not stable yet?

genuinely curious....

[holly]

http://www.worldfms.com/images/fishing/6645aam.jpg

My tools are stable. Maybe because I've standardized. :rolleyes:

[holly]

Seems the people who are anti-standard (for lack of a better word) are against it more because they feel it will kill innovation, rather than because they don't think we're ready.... There's lots of waffling back and forth, but people who are anti-standard aren't admitting the standards that obviously exist, and I doubt they'd EVER be satisfied. It's not a matter of time, it's never.

I chased my studio for a while, went way into debt, R&D was all I did. Wasn't sure where it was headed. Seemed like a treadmill and a lot of "this isn't ready yet" or something was financially out of reach.... Now, I'm at a point where I'm not looking to upgrade the studio. It's fine, and I've even taken to buying older used computers because I'm doing good work on a stable system. Now my R&D is on the touring rig: slimming down, better cases, faster breakdown....

If I were to play life councellor, I'd say the reason you are not ready to accept standards is because your system does not meet your needs. If you were happier with what you had, standards that would last for the next 5 years or so wouldn't seem so bad. Standards won't last forever. CDs took 20 years to be replaced by MP3, but DVDs are being replaced after only 10....

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by holly
Seems the people who are anti-standard (for lack of a better word) are against it more because they feel it will kill innovation, rather than because they don't think we're ready.... There's lots of waffling back and forth, but people who are anti-standard aren't admitting the standards that obviously exist, and I doubt they'd EVER be satisfied. It's not a matter of time, it's never.


A little of part A, a little of part B.

first yes I'm afraid that standardizing VJ'ing will impinge on my freedom to experiment... But I can see the good practical reasons for doing it in terms of being provided a minimum basic setup at a gig.

second, now is a particularly bad time to try and standardize anything to do with video. The whole Blu-Ray, HD-DVD thing will be decided in the next two years. OSC, software video routing (eg patchbox) and HD/HDV mixers are just becoming avalable and the bugs worked out.

Two years down the line all these things will have settled a bit.

Blu Ray or HD DVD players will be affordable and the format war will have been decided. we should have the HD edirol mixer and hopefully some other solutions.

It makes sens to pick plateaus and draw up standards at those times in tech development but we're currently half way between two plateaus.

for the moment a V4 and NTSC/PAL is the de facto standard, is there any need to go beyond that right now?

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by Anyone

but I suppose I'm more of a studio VJ,
much of what I do is content, ideas, style and narrative
when the live element arrives, much of it is about delivery, not process.
even when I do use live effects, I've produced the content
in anticipation of an effect or layering that is added later...

my point is,
if you're (the generic you) using a new piece of equipment
doing a new effect or whatever,
then the attention is on the product, not the content.
if you're always using new tools, this will never change.



Sometimes the new effect can be the content. That is the difference. If you start creating effects (like DrEm said he did) then you are also creating content.

Also many VJs I see still use mostly stock effects and many don't bother even configuring them to look different.

Take VJo for example (not loaded it up for many years) there is actually a really powerful 3D shapes editor (pdoom's 3ds equations? ).

Now many (obviously not all) only use the stock 'shapes' that come with it.

You can create really different and interesting shapes with this yet I have only seen the stock ones from people.

This is a different form of 'standardization' the tools are similar but (some) people still manage to look the same.

[xangadix]

I tend to agree with novastar; I see a lot of standard 'arkaos' fotage too.
I still don't think that the 'content' and 'form' can be so easily be distingueshed, and therefor it's still to early to set standards.

On the other hand, it would be great if I could go out with only a HD or even a Laptop and plug it in; but I think its still to early

@videobrian

type-face is a medium for writing, writing is a medium for speach, speach is a medium for thought/concepts, thought/concepts is a medium for experience... taking that further sort of dips into spiritual philisophical questions and everything... and if all these mediums are supposed to be a message, what exactly is the message anyway?


thats why modern media theorie stops at the level of thought because there is no more communication and no more information present and thus no 'message' without content there can be no form and vice versa. Now there is a lot of stuff you could bring against that argument (silent communication, spiritual feelings, premenitions etc etc.) but to keep it scientific thats basically where the line is drawn

On the other hand, from a mathematical point of view EVERYTHING is information and ALL information contains static; but that what is static to some, is information to others, and vice versa ;)

thanks for the article, it looks interesting and I never heared of the guy :)

[Rovastar]

As a more general point on standards. I do think that it would help in general VJing if there were some/more standards.

It would IMHO get an improved aura of respectability and professionalism about VJs. Corps might start to look at us in a different light......now I know some here don't want that.

I also don't see it happening there is a pressure need from the electronics companies to standardise things. They all want to be the de facto standard.
Pioneer, Edirol, etc, etc.

But many don't want to use these (well the v4 is probably classed as standard now but it cannot be used to 'create' anything/much by itself). Most standards are hardware driver or try to be.

Software has no such standards here we all use what we want. There is no software that is head and shoulders above the rest they all have their problems/benefits. FOr exampel some are made to craete stuff on teh fly, realtiem effects, etc others just let you play.

We don't know ourselves how to answer 'What is a VJ?'. One of the reasons is that there are no standards.
Now this is not a bad thing we are all individuals.

[seex]

Lets take a standard thats been round for a while, for instance rice has been the standard in asian food for tousends of years, as only rice is prety boring we now have many dishes that go well with rice.

[unjulation]

just me 2 peneth worth after a long weekend and its all just based on the way i'm thinking at the mo -

1) why desire standersation in the first place?

2) the desire for standersiation itialy springs from the fear of the unknown - haveing said on meny ocasion to others "oh i wish "x,y,z" was in place so i could do this - i have found that personaly this has come from fear that i'm not able to give it my best without "x,y,z" being in place - which is basicly a fear that i have of my own performance within the whole rarter then saying "oh i'm now going to have to push my self into space's that i dont know what will happen - it could go tits up or amazingly but there is a risk within doing that

3) the need for audiance education is over hyped i personaly feel that the audiance is far more media savey then ever they were in my day so are more then willing to flow with what looks good/fits within the mood - i dont have the formula for this in fact i dont think there is one but you do something and you know if the audfiance likes it or not you can see/feel it within the party as a whole

4) i serpose a lot comes from the self confidance to know when something is looking good or not if you have that ability then your at least going to be able to stop when its looking s**t

more soon..............................

[sleepytom]

ok this has kind of got out of control and stupid (but hey its vjf so what do you expect??)

standards exist - i can design and sell you an install system that will cope with all of the currently used standards so that there is no limmit on creativity / use of unusual equipment. needless to say this would be very expensive (100,000+)

saying everyone must use resolume + a V4 is like telling a sculpter he can't use a chainsaw because its not an approved chisel!

if we want to ask for standards then lets talk about PAL/NTSC XGA and HDTV with a big table and easy access inputs to installed projectors - not some kind of inforced workflow that will limmit creativity.

i simply do not follow the argument that says "VJs need to use the same tools so the audiance start to care about what is on the screens"

perhapse Oli you should simply interprite the question "how do you do that?" in a different mannor - instaed of answering "i use a laptop and a dvd and video mixer" you should say "i start by building a narrative concept around a theme of movement" or whatever. If more people gave these kind of answers (esp in djmag type interviews) then we might get some progress away from the current idea that all it takes to be a VJ is some computer equipment.

[videobrian]

i agree with whoever said this:

1) why desire standersation in the first place?


and to answer this rhetorical question:

kind of the same reason microsoft would buy up cutting edge startup companies and bury their innovations.

[Anyone]

Originally posted by sleepytom

perhapse Oli you should simply interprite the question "how do you do that?" If more people gave these kind of answers (esp in djmag type interviews) then we might get some progress away from the current idea that all it takes to be a VJ is some computer equipment.

Next Def Leppard gig, bring a Hippo,
it'll save you a lot of trouble...

while we're at it, let's all speak different languages, shall we?

nihon go ga wakattaho ga ii?



.

[videoteque]

then we might get some progress away from the current idea that all it takes to be a VJ is some computer equipment.

This is the misconception #1 from the punters pov.

About the DJ they think how good he is at mixing records (s/he 95% of the times never produced a single one). About the VJ they come and ask "what program do you use??". And maybe you just play self made content....

:confused: :confused:

[DrEskaton]

quote:then we might get some progress away from the current idea that all it takes to be a VJ is some computer equipment.


Radical statement for contention:

They're right. Anyone can be a VJ. Anyone can be a DJ. Mixing other peoples content is a skill that anyone can aquire with a bit of practise.

Success as a DJ is almost entirely due to being in the right place at the right time (at the moment a subculture becomes mainstream) and making the right contacts. Sure beatmatching takes practise but it's a craft, a technical craft, that's all.

Same for most VJ's. Technical know how and practise and bit of kit and anyone can be a VJ.

It's not rocket science.

[robotfunk]

Originally posted by videoteque

About the DJ they think how good he is at mixing records (s/he 95% of the times never produced a single one)

Bollocks. These days the only way to break as a DJ is by releasing good records. And the only way of profiting from releasing records is by DJing a lot.

[littlecatalyst]

a hippo wouldn't really help Tom at Def Leppard


heh heh

[Anyone]

Originally posted by DrEskaton
They're right. Anyone can be a VJ. Anyone can be a DJ. Mixing other peoples content is a skill that anyone can aquire with a bit of practise.


yes arguably anybody can learn this.
then comes the hard part:

learning in what sequence to put 50 track together,
reading the audience, tweaking your track list to their taste,
doing this again successfully the next day
with a completely new audience and set of records,
only a handful of peeps on the planet can do this properly.

focus (too much) on gear and I can never say to you:
welcome to the next level

NE1

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone


focus (too much) on gear and I can never say to you:
welcome to the next level

NE1

Of course.... no argument....

Anyone can be a DJ or a VJ. Very few people can be very good and or commercially successful VJ/DJ's.

I disagree with you that an obsession with gear or a lack of it has anything to do with your success or your skill.

There are many paths and varieties of talent.

There are commercially successful DJ/Artist's who are obsessed with new gear, with building their own tools and then crafting them for emotional impact. Aphex Twin for example writes his own software but does so with emphasis on the artistic and emotional abilities.

Some other DJ's are using Ableton live and other live performance tools in their sets and some will never change from Vinyl. And that's fine...

We don't all have to be the same.

[littlecatalyst]

....cause Tom is the cameraman
ha ha ha ha ha

[holly]

Originally posted by Anyone
yes arguably anybody can learn this.
then comes the hard part:
This is interesting seeing as how you are teaching a workshop in VJing, and I know you've trained a few assistants.... How IS it teaching new VJs? I'm guessing you aren't overly gear or app specific (maybe I'm wrong?) so how do you gloss over the tech and focus on the style?
Forgive if I sound flippant with some of the terms, workshop, style, etc. I don't mean to put words in your mouth, NE1....

[Anyone]

I'm not upset at anybody, just sparring :)

yes Holly, it is easyier to teach things on a technical level,
probably bacause there are standards to technical things
but not so much standards are locked down for style or emotions...

(oh no, did I just fall into a rethorical mine field?)

Oli

[holly]

Hmmm. Hoping for more of an answer than that.... I guess I was asking if that is a goal of the course you are teaching, or would that be more of a Round2, advanced sort of topic.... Or do you leave it for the VJ to evolve themselves? Maybe offering guidance sometimes where a teacher feels it is warrented....

There was talk in the local scene of "certification". I had mixed feelings about it, and thought it might become eletist and academic. I got the feeling there were at least 2 hidden motives besides just sharing knowledge or making better VJs: one was to have some clout as an "authority" (?... This aspect wasn't really explained), the other was to have more control over new VJs and that certification would hopefully lead to price-fixing and a level of standardization that could be expected from NYC clubs (sort of a "philosophical" school, if not an outright Union).

There were certainly altruistic motives too, and it was mostly just talk at this point, but there aren't enough VJ jobs in the local scene to go around now.... I couldn't help but think there was a motive to prevent "bottomfeeding", but I don't think certification could really combat that....

Meanwhile I see many successful VJs get approached by would-be apprentices who just want to work on some bigger gigs. Usually these people hang out for a while in the scene and already have some VJ skills and a few gigs, maybe. I basicly learned by doing (and couldn't afford artschool), so creating a curriculum seems a little foriegn to me. The people here who were discussing certification weren't "locked in" to any regular or big gigs to allow for any hands-on experience, so it doesn't reflect on what you're doing, Ollie, and it was just a casual discussion. That's why I wanted to hear a bit from someone who is already successful and putting the teaching thing together in an organized way....

[holly]

Come to think of it, teaching is probably the way standards become de facto..., aside from the "that's the plug that goes in the wall socket" type of standard....

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by DrEskaton
Radical statement for contention:

They're right. Anyone can be a VJ. Anyone can be a DJ. Mixing other peoples content is a skill that anyone can aquire with a bit of practise.
...
Same for most VJ's. Technical know how and practise and bit of kit and anyone can be a VJ.

It's not rocket science.

It depend I suppose if we are again going into the 'What is a VJ' thing. When you are creating your own content and writing your own software it steps outside the 'anyone can do it' camp.


Originally posted by Anyone
yes arguably anybody can learn this.
then comes the hard part:

learning in what sequence to put 50 track together,
reading the audience, tweaking your track list to their taste,
doing this again successfully the next day
with a completely new audience and set of records,
only a handful of peeps on the planet can do this properly.
NE1

Was this in relation to VJing?
Clips=records.....
If so don't agree with any/much of what you said.

Originally posted by Anyone

focus (too much) on gear and I can never say to you:
welcome to the next level

ignore (too much) gear and technology and I can never say to you:
welcome to the next level

It also depends on what you do.

Give me a 2xnvidia 7800 Graphics cards with a ultra fast dual core CPU and a few hours and much of my work will look much better, quality wise. Richer detail. Get me an old GF2 in an old 800Mhz CPU and I can only show at lower detail so much in a rather embarrassed way.

Some aspects of VJ are technology driven. More like special effects in the movies or computer games. If someone put out something that looks outdated then it can work against them in many ways.

[Anyone]

Originally posted by Rovastar
When you are creating your own content and writing your own software it steps outside the 'anyone can do it' camp.


then you haven't heard of Eclectic Method?

don't do any original content,
use VJamm and DVJs, hardly unique

best VJs I know...

[joeproper]

I keep reading people downplay djing from its lowest form ,playing other peoples music,selling out to a crowd,which i share the same feelings,its not nearly as rewarding or interesting if your not playing your own work. vj's on this board seem to recognize the distinction. So shouldnt vj's apply the same logic to vjing? Would you moreso respect a vj which does make their own content over a vj which doesnt?

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by joeproper
Would you moreso respect a vj which does make their own content over a vj which doesnt? [/B]

I would personally but I suspect that sentiment is not shared by everyone.

I haven't seen Eclectic Method but according to their own website "we aren't vj's"....

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by Anyone
then you haven't heard of Eclectic Method?

don't do any original content,
use VJamm and DVJs, hardly unique

best VJs I know...

You need to get out more then......................;):P


They seemed ok guys when I meet them many moons ago. To be fair what they do is ok for the sampling lark but using popular film clips and popular music videos. Ask them to make something original and............well I don't know what MTV would spoon feed. :)

[Anyone]

Originally posted by joeproper
Would you moreso respect a vj which does make their own content over a vj which doesnt?

the UK VJ scene is amongst the best,
all leading VJs sample here:

AddictiveTV
Light Surgeons
Coldcut
Eclectic Method
Hexstatic

I more respect a VJ that VJ's well. all other details are details.
Ne1

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by Anyone
the UK VJ scene is amongst the best,
all leading VJs sample here:

AddictiveTV
Light Surgeons
Coldcut
Eclectic Method
Hexstatic

I more respect a VJ that VJ's well. all other details are details.
Ne1

I honestly don't know what to say to that, Oli.

It implies that only the best VJs have to sample. Plenty don?t and I have more respect for them ones with more talent then selecting a few music video clips.

Yeah they are some of the 'popular' names yeah they were at the top of the Top20 VJs in DJ Mag last year (of which they were the judges ? Next year maybe a people?s vote might sort the men from the boys ;):P)

I don?t know about the best though. I still have yet to be really impressed by those names. Some of Hexstatic ?music videos? are nice but apart from that??..

Sorry if that sounds bitchy it is not meant to be. I know some of those mentioned do orgianl content too and I respect them more for that.

[joeproper]

Well this thread is about standardizing vjing, and a discussion on the benefit, I had the chance to hire another designer this year, I wanted someone with a VJ sensibility, since i place value in that. Well the hardest part was finding a VJ that can design. IMHO if vjing is to be respected [benefit] through standardization, The sampling bit should be swept under the rug.I know lots of people who can produce which can sample also, but not many samplers that can produce.Standardize people not gear , From a business standpoint Its very hard to find that kinda VJ. I think its a important part of the equation for Vjing to branch out.

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone
the UK VJ scene is amongst the best,
I more respect a VJ that VJ's well. all other details are details.
Ne1

Playing devils advocate. Translation "it's ok to steal other people's work as long as it makes you popular and you do it in an entertaining way"....

ok fine I do it to. Most of us here do. But I still respect someone who puts in the work to create all original content because I know exactly how much effort that is and how much time it takes.

When watch a Vj who uses no samples, all shot footage or created content and it's all seamless and well thought out and has a coherent theme then I feel I am really seeing an artist at work.

I don't feel that when I watch a sample manipulator play, no matter how clever their samples are or how good their AV sync is.

[bertranol]

I hope that the VJ work is more interresting than the false analogy with the DJ work, I mean : video samples (songs or soundtracks), that are composited (mixing) with tools (MKII).

If not, It means that VJs are a bit stuck in the 70's, playing with the first video compositing tools the digital way.

but maybe it's easier to understand and market for people who works for the mainstream entertainment.

But according to what happen within the computer graphic field (GPU, HD, textures & shaders, OpenGL, displays & beamers) and the interfaces & protocols fields (AI, body sensors, wireless, webcam, OSC...), I'm sure that new and innovative tools (yes! using norms and standards!) will emerge, alongside artists and emotions.

:cheers:

Bertrand

--
http://mjukma.free.fr

[Anyone]

So Rova, Am I right to think you don't use samples?
shame for you to limit yourself like that... :P



Originality is not the only criterion
audiences use to appreciate music or visuals

Familiarity is another, any more?

[videobrian]

I know some of those mentioned do orgianl content too and I respect them more for that. --rove

a yes, the myth of originality pervades.

and why does it always seem to go hand in hand with those who appear to value business above creativity?

be warned yee folk who have a photographic memory, forget what you've seen or the lawyers will get ya... (happened to mozart apparently)

but that's another discussion which i'm sure will be lively when it happens.


but for now. standards:

what about battle standards like in the dj world?

for vj battles, instead of people having to use identical equipment and bringing their own records and skills

vj's will all have to use identical footage and music (interpreted by the in-house dj) and use their own gear and skills to give it the shape of a set.

by keeping all the content the same we'll be able to properly asses their mixing skills and level of creativity.

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by videobrian
a yes, the myth of originality pervades.

and why does it always seem to go hand in hand with those who appear to value business above creativity?



um which is harder... which is more worthy of respect?

a) ripping 10 hours of footage from DVD's and remixing it live?

b) creating 10 hours of original content and performing using that.

yes of course copyright laws need to be reformed, of course nothing is original, all art is influenced. Of course the copyright laws are in favour of the megacorps, I'm in favour of creative reuse which is why I release my own software under creative commons yadda yada yadda...

but I still respect B more....

[joeproper]

well in a world where everyone is a hack ,and video itself has no value[generally speaking], People pay to Have YOU wrap your mind around something. THE MORE ORIGINAL AND RARE/SPECIAL YOUR WORK and YOU ARE , THE BETTER. and that goes both ways, commercially and the artistic creative side. Ironically the commercial entities seek you out and pay you very well to do it on your own terms.When you have established yourself in such a way, MUCH DIFFERENT THEN SELLING OUT. Dont you respect a artist with uncommpromised artistic integrity, it just so happens what they were doing became ripe and is currently being perceived as popular?

[holly]

Originally posted by videobrian
vj's will all have to use identical footage and music (interpreted by the in-house dj) and use their own gear and skills to give it the shape of a set.

by keeping all the content the same we'll be able to properly asses their mixing skills and level of creativity.

Wasn't there a BMW contest where VJs remixed commercials? Bleh. I'll stick with my own content.

I charge extra to mix someone else's stuff..., or just pass on the job.

[Anyone]

BTW,

you can remix MY content for just ?25.

www.mixmash.com

VJ Anyone

[videobrian]

um which is harder... which is more worthy of respect?

a) ripping 10 hours of footage from DVD's and remixing it live?

b) creating 10 hours of original content and performing using that.

sort of depends if it sucks or not.
i see what you're saying there... but...

it's not very specific. one could produce 10 hours of crap original footage in a 1/4 the time it takes to actually watch it. finding 2 hours of great samples can take months of digging...

imho, sampling is a far far lesser crime than aping someone else's style, or just sucking in general.

yeah, i know, you're probably talking about people who show up and just play prefab dvds or something... i'm not sure what you want to call it but that's not "sampling" ... in fact, i think the correct term is 'vj-ing' or video-mixing or something like that.

but these people, according to this thread are less worthy of respect, even when they are shelling out money to buy your content... okay i see...

humans copy each other, it's called culture.

maybe this all comes down difficulty in defining aesthetic criteria and terminology, i don't know.


my vj-battle comments were half joking btw.

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by Anyone
the UK VJ scene is amongst the best,
all leading VJs sample here


I just want to point something out.

oli your stated motivation for wanting to "standardize vj'ing" is:

"When DJs all got to use the same standardized tools
that's when they all started having a solid audience..."
"because each time you break the cage you have to re-educate your audience
and until your audience catches up and you can get decent fees again,
you'll have to keep your day job."

so it's about drawing the mainstream circuit crowd that DJ's do and commanding higher fees right?

wel if that's what you want you have to be against unauthorised sampling. Mainstream DJ's pay for copyright clearance on all the samples they use in released tracks. Clubs also pay a fee to the recording industry association of the country they are in which is supposed to be pay for playing copyrighted material. For a big club like Ministry of Sound that's a big payment they make for every event they do.

either you're for artistic freedom, you're underground and you don't give a shit about paying clearance, which means you shouldn't want to standardize vj'ing.

or if you want to standardize vj'ing and take to a mainstream audience you have to pay clearance on copyright, clubs will have to pay fees to the movie industry associations to play copyrighted material just like they do for audio...

you can't have it both ways... if you want to command the mainstream crowd and take vj'ing mainstream then you have to play by the rules, which means no unauthorized samples....

as well as that, if VJ'ing as an industry holds up sampling artists as our rolemodels we're hardly going to be taken seriously by any other creative industry....

as joeproper said, that side should be swept under the carpet, it shouldn't be something we're proud of...

as I said I use samples myself but I'm not proud of it, I regard it as filler. Personally I'm happy to argue in favour of creative reuse and artistic freedom but I'm happy with the niche VJ'ing is in. I find it hypocritical to want to take VJ'ing mainstream but to still be in favour of unauthorised sample use.

[sleepytom]

err tell that to eclectic method... (only vjs i know who have a series on mainstream TV - never paid for a sample in their lives)

its also incorrect to state that "Mainstream DJ's pay for copyright clearance on all the samples they use in released tracks" - perhapse it should read:- PRODUCERS pay for the RECOGNISABLE samples they use in RELEASED tracks. they do not pay for the samples they use live nor do they pay for anything they think they will get away with on a released record.

anyway we are falling into talking legalitys which have got shit all to do with creativity.

VJs are (should be) entertainers - the best VJs are the ones that entertain a croud most - ask the punters about VJs and they will genrally refer back to classic recognisable samples (eg "the way he had the clips of C-3PO dancing in time to the beat was great")

i'm sorry but i've seldom heard anyone but VJs go on about the great design style of a VJ - punters want fun and recognisable samples give them this - "self created" visuals are at best moving wallpaper which provides an attractive background to the audio.

i'd much rather see a good show thats funny and entertaining than some Art dressed up as entertainment - maybe thats why the VJs that consitently get the most press / attention are the ones who are creating entertaining AV performancesrather than the ones squabbling about how they are better because they "make all their own stuff".

to claim that selfcreated is better than sampled is stupid - a good show is a good show no matter how it is produced.

[joeproper]

Clearly sleepytom you must place value in original content producers, Didnt you guys pay people on this board for the loops your doing the tour with? I mean are you showing uncleared video samples? Whats wrong if some like minded people in the community want to support original content producers ,vj's? Is there not room in the scene?

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by sleepytom
err tell that to eclectic method... (only vjs i know who have a series on mainstream TV - never paid for a sample in their lives)

If it's on TV i'd bet that some producer somewhere has had the job of tracking down clearance for it...

maybe eclectic don't worry about it but that just means someone else is doing it for them...

Originally posted by sleepytom
i'd much rather see a good show thats funny and entertaining than some Art dressed up as entertainment -
to claim that selfcreated is better than sampled is stupid - a good show is a good show no matter how it is produced.

I agree with you. Sampled shows are often great to watch.

But you won't get taken seriously or command mainstream respect as as industry with that attitude. I work in content creation in tv, commercials and film. Copyright is taken seriously and if you want to taken seriously as a content creator yourself you have to play by their rules.

of course people get away with stuff live or unrecognisable but that's different. I know many DJ's who have tracks they can only play live and can never release, even thought they are the most popular ones, exactly because they don't have clearance on them..

I'm not making any judgement of it, I'm just pointing out that that's the way it is.

[videobrian]

anyway we are falling into talking legalitys which have got shit all to do with creativity.

if you've seen "the ruttles", it's so rad how neil innes's music poked fun at and paid homage to the music of the beatles... and all without technically stepping over the copywrite limits. working within a set of, essentially arbitrary, legal limitations.
great stuff..

real or imagined boundaries or limitations, whether external or self imposed have quite a lot to do creativity ... event legal ones.

but yeah, i see what you're saying and agree with the comment and your whole post actually.



the vj-ing phenomena tends to enjoy a nice level of diversity as far as i've seen. this is a good thing, i think, because it leads to survival and quality.

if you look at how the major record biz tries to limit diversity in favour of profits... it's true, they do make way more money from selling millions of copies of 1 crap artist than selling thousands of copies of many different quality artists... but the trend turns the major into a big dumb (not to mention vicious) dinosaur destined for extinction.

diversity is part of the reason they aggressively go after the napster type stuff and the sampling type stuff. diversity and quality are seen as threats to their monopolies. so they defend their "rights" to make as much dosh as possible through saturation and thus pollution of the mental environment with genetically modified mono-bot meme-clones.
bla bla rant etc



http://www.scribble.clara.net/assets/images/notmickey.gif

[joeproper]

Create your own content then you can be in sole control of that commodity. Until then dont disrespect others.

[videobrian]

Originally posted by joeproper
Create your own content then you can be in sole control of that commodity. Until then dont disrespect others.

i create my own content. doing so is the bulk of my work. am i to infer from your comments that i somehow have the right to disrespect others because of that?

i also have a modest collection of rare samples. i've also got boxes and boxes of 3/4 inch tape, beta, vhs, and 16mm which i haven't even had the chance to look at.

without getting into what particular styles i enjoy or what i personally deem to be good or bad video work, i merely wish to point out that regarding sample-based workers to be less worthy of respect than content creators is rather shameful.

like as if sampling is inherently lazy whilst creating content is industrious and non-lazy by nature.

and considering, as has been pointed out above, a lot of original content tends to just end up looking like whatever gear is being used... the sort of "use all the default patches" syndrome... it's unfair to look down on the sampler for what they do, especially if it happens to be rather good.

the argument that mtv (or whatever) isn't going to take you seriously is a bit flawed if pandering to their very special needs doesn't happen to be on your agenda. i happen to know at least one vj who uses samples to scare mtv off of showing their stuff.

my main problem with mtv is that they somehow manage to take some really really great music and great videos and put it in a mega awful format which totally under cuts the quality of the artists.

[brain]

back from the old copyright discussion to the topic: technical standards.

there is a VJ battle in berlin in september:inframebattle.com (http://www.inframebattle.com/index_en.htm). very nice event and idea, but:
they standardize the technical setup for all VJs to make "better comparison" possible. each VJ plays 15 or 30 minutes on a standard setup (whatever that will be).

you know what? i can't and won't take part because i use my own configuration of tools. they will be successful to find out the "best" VJ on a single, standardized setup they have defined. whats the use of that?

if they use a hardware setup (say DVJs, mixer, effects unit), the lappie VJs are out. if they use a specific software, all are out who don't like or know that standard soft. everyone who is completety off the tracks with custom build hard/software is out. here, technical standardization equals artistic limitation.

you think this is good for creativity in the scene? you think establishing a standard like that should be a model for promoters to follow?

:rolleyes:

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by videobrian

like as if sampling is inherently lazy whilst creating content is industrious and non-lazy by nature.


creating good quality original content (I mean original as in shot or generated, something I own copyright on, not original in an artistic sense) is always more work than ripping and editing samples.

plus you own it, you can sell it, use it in high end design work, give it away do what you want with it. if something I create as original work becomes popular (a meme) that's a very valuable thing for me.

sampled work I can only ever use in limited circumstances, it's not mine, it's borrowed and even if it looks great, even if it's popular, its never mine.

to me it's clear which is more worthwhile.

[videobrian]

esk,

i agree with what you are saying particularly in how these things must apply to you. much of what you're saying applies to me also.
it's useful to me to produce my own content because it's more exploitable and so on.


creating good quality original content (I mean original as in shot or generated, something I own copyright on, not original in an artistic sense) is always more work than ripping and editing samples.

that's just an absolutely false statement. it's maybe true for you in your particular niche.

i saw a piece (by candice breitz) in venice this year which was a 100% sample based video work. it must have taken really a lot of really intensive work to pull off.
and it happened to be really really great as well also.

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by videobrian

i saw a piece (by candice breitz) in venice this year which was a 100% sample based video work. it must have taken really a lot of really intensive work to pull off.
and it happened to be really really great as well also.

I don't doubt it was impressive and a lot of work....

but if she was to create an equivalent piece with just as many clips and equivalent content but all shot herself instead of sampled it would have taken her even longer.

and she would have owned it entirely...

for any one single clip, eg a shot of driving through a night time city... to go out and shoot it yourself is always many times more work than sampling the same content... that's just obvious, you can't argue with that.

[Amukidi]

a good show is a good show no matter how it is produced

Ain't that the truth! But what an extraordinary thread - standardisng VJing? Huh? We are, as usual, alluding to the equipment, why not go the whole hog and standardise content too? Sigh......you couldn't make this up:zzz:

[cat]

http://uk.music.yahoo.com/ar-313216-videos--EBN

This is a link to EBN videos, the earliest piece is from 1992, this is for those who arnt familiar with them. They used smapling to create some amazing videos, however the were
1 among the pioneers of cuttup AV
2 put much more work into than most sample heavy vj's Ive seen
3 did this 13 years ago.

Its 2005, computers are THOUSANDS of times faster, sampling is just a matter of pushing record and there you have it.
If you cant produce something better than EBN then why bother?

Im afraid I agree with DrEskaton, you should always try and create original pieces, only if you cant or the subject really requires samples should you go down that route (and there will always be times!)
I also licence work for broadcast, if you dont own it , you cant do that, if your going to spend hours working on a loop, you might as well own it at the end of the day!

If you want professional standards, there has got to be one, try not to sample except when the job absolutely depends on it, and try to make it your own if you do!
If you dont, all the big gigs will go to lampies who get all their stock from Artbeats and the like, ie its cleared, its broadcast quality, and it is created to a very high standard.
Or stay in some tiny club and get paid less per hour than the glass collector, just dont moan about it afterwards!

[dansmachine]

Originally posted by DrEskaton
if she was to create an equivalent piece with just as many clips and equivalent content but all shot herself instead of sampled it would have taken her even longer.

and she would have owned it entirely...

for any one single clip, eg a shot of driving through a night time city... to go out and shoot it yourself is always many times more work than sampling the same content... that's just obvious, you can't argue with that.

I can't argue with that but it seems to me that you consider every sample reproducable. When I choose to make use of samples most of the times it's quite historical material, which is impossible to DIY. That is for autonomous and artworks. Besides that I like to shake out forgotten B-movies of all content I enjoy working with. Besides I never use samples 'as is' but all goes into complex visulaJockey-compositions. They remain recognizable yet turn into something completely different and I call it MY remix.

Your example is too obvious, what if a vj would like to work with a theme like the four elements where within the theme scale and size of each element would increase during the show. Fire: The vj can start with filming matches, a paper burning, but you wouldn't want to send that vj out to become an arsonist? So if some material was taken from, say, Backdraft or Ladder49 it would violate copyright but makes the vj's show stronger.

Sample-clearance: I tried to clear samples from my latest work-in-progress Cinema Oblivion but you really don't want to know what kinds of hassle this would take, in fact noone knows where to start. It would probably take more time to investigate who's owning rights here and now than it takes to finish the installation. The downside is (and here you are absolutely right Eskaton) is that I don't OWN the rights for the samples so if I want to take my installation to the next level it's practically impossible. Anyway: I felt the urge to do something with the material and therefore I did it. I'm an artist and this is how artists work. Urge -> work.

This discussion is ongoing and it makes no sense to polarize, too many greyscales.

J.

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by sleepytom

VJs are (should be) entertainers - the best VJs are the ones that entertain a croud most - ask the punters about VJs and they will genrally refer back to classic recognisable samples (eg "the way he had the clips of C-3PO dancing in time to the beat was great")


That is unfair obviously people are going to refer back to samples and instantly recognisable bits.

They are never going to say ?Oh I like that 3D blob thing that bounced around the screen?

No sensible judgement can be made as to which one the punters thought was better by that measure.

Originally posted by sleepytom

maybe thats why the VJs that consitently get the most press / attention are the ones who are creating entertaining AV performancesrather than the ones squabbling about how they are better because they "make all their own stuff".


I have other theories as to way they get attention???..

Originally posted by brain
there is a VJ battle in berlin in september:inframebattle.com (http://www.inframebattle.com/index_en.htm). very nice event and idea, but:
they standardize the technical setup for all VJs to make "better comparison" possible. each VJ plays 15 or 30 minutes on a standard setup (whatever that will be).

Ummh. I do admire their attempt at this but it is so prohibitive.

?To ensure equal opportunity the equipment is provided from Inframe 2005. That means every participant has just to bring along his/her external hardware or a DVD with his/her own material. The material is loaded on the spot, onto the Inframe computer. ?

This obviously would be a nightmare for me as I have no clips only realtime stuff but even if I could enter this comp I would feel *very* uneasy about uploading my content onto someone else?s media server. ?Standards? like this can cause many problems.

Originally posted by DrEskaton
I don't doubt it was impressive and a lot of work....

but if she was to create an equivalent piece with just as many clips and equivalent content but all shot herself instead of sampled it would have taken her even longer.


Totally agree

[DrEskaton]

Originally posted by dansmachine
I can't argue with that but it seems to me that you consider every sample reproducable. what if a vj would like to work with a theme like the four elements where within the theme scale and size of each element would increase during the show. Fire: The vj can start with filming matches, a paper burning, but you wouldn't want to send that vj out to become an arsonist? So if some material was taken from, say, Backdraft or Ladder49 it would violate copyright but makes the vj's show stronger.

J.

No you can go buy Artbeats pyro footage or stock footage of building fires from news sources.

Your argument would be fine except that short film makers manage to create strong original pieces sometimes on very low budgets (or no budget) without having to violate copyright. Why should VJ's have a different standard applied to them than short film makers?

[videobrian]

but if she was to create an equivalent piece with just as many clips and equivalent content but all shot herself instead of sampled it would have taken her even longer.


i'll bet! and expensive too!
getting Faye Dunaway, Susan Sarandon, Meryl Streep, Diane Keaton, Julia Roberts, Shirley MacLaine, Tony Danza, Dustin Hoffman, Harvey Keitel, Steve Martin, Donald Sutherland, and Jon Voight to come in and express the full range of human emotion in front of a black background for you might go a bit over budget. not to mention being totally pointless.

and she would have owned it entirely..

well yeah, cause when you take a picture of someone, you steal a bit of their soul. ooooo





to go out and shoot it yourself is always many times more work than sampling the same content...

that's not the point.
there are many important reasons for going and getting authentic samples. maybe you want to sample "rock-it" to illustrate where video-scratching came from.
maybe you want to do a piece about hair-style (r)evolution in rock-videos... maybe to make it really great you need just the right shot of gary glitter, you could be lazy and just dress some one up and shoot them in the right position you need or you could do some real work and really dig for the sample you need.

yeah, well. bla bla.

i guess people here saw those g.i.joe psa videos?
they were really nice. too funny.

but i just noticed the guy posted some new, 'legal' work. rad.
http://www.fenslerfilm.com/movies/sealab/SEALAB2021_1.mpg

[DrEskaton]

sample based VJ'ing is a dead end....

the key to making a decent living out of this field is owning your own content and being able to exploit that.

the widespread acceptance of sampling in VJ'ing by promoters, punters and other VJ's does more far more to prevent mainstream acceptance and decent fees than the fact we all use different software....

discuss...

[videobrian]

This is a link to EBN videos, the earliest piece is from 1992, this is for those who arnt familiar with them. They used smapling to create some amazing videos, however the were
1 among the pioneers of cuttup AV
2 put much more work into than most sample heavy vj's Ive seen
3 did this 13 years ago.

looks like that web site's from '92:

We're sorry, but you must use Netscape 4.7x to use this application on a Macintosh. Download NOW.
Please use the following error code when writing to Yahoo! Help. (Error Code: 4)



If you cant produce something better than EBN then why bother?

yeah, i kind of figured the same about toy-story 2, i mean, if you can't do better than that, just give up, you know. what with 3d being all played out now and everything. why can't people get the message that inspiring art is THE FINAL WORD.

-=-=--=-=--=-=-=-==-=--==-

btw i see the point about making a living and adapting to the rigid set of guidelines which govern intellectual commerce in our societies at large... regardless of how arbitrary or absurd these legal guidelines may sometimes be.
might be better to adapt the rules to foster creative experimentation.

[holly]

:argue:
This thread makes very interesting points but now it's being shutdown by the Esk and Vbrian show.
:punch:

It's fine that you don't acknowledge anyone else's posts, but could you two delay an hour or so before flaming? Or at least argue about something that happened THIS decade?
:love2:

[InsideUsAll]

Originally posted by DrEskaton
sample based VJ'ing is a dead end....

the key to making a decent living out of this field is owning your own content and being able to exploit that.


jeeze roger u really have a bee in your bonnet about this one huh, I remember starting a conversation with you in italy on this subject and quickly realising there was no way your opinion was going to change on the subject...

inside-us-all for the first 4 years or so virtually never sampled anything, then in the last year or so I've really got into it, I now think its good fun to re-interpret someone elses work, admittedly it is probably easier than generating your entire show from scratch, but that doesn't make it an awful thing to do!?

At some level I don't think anyone owns art, its kinda like freedom of speech to me, ie I can repeat something i heard somebody famous say, i can even do an impression of their accent, i can even put on a latex mask and matching clothes, and i would probably have fun doing it, and could potentially entertain others with an act around the idea.

the point is that people like to see something familiar, of course they like to be shocked and impressed with something new too, but theres a time and a place for everything & sometimes people like to feel nostalgic and see something they relate too, especially if its re-interpreted.

your background is in film & broadcast, which you'll no doubt hate me for saying, is all about money. VJ'ing is different. If I was to take a sample off a TV show package it in my own wrapper and re-sell or profit from broadcast then that is clearly wrong by the eyes of those relying on that money making industry... but thats not whats happening here in VJ sampling. Nobody is making much money from it at all, for most people thats nothing to do with why they do the job.

When a VJ re-uses a sample its for entertainment in real time, quick easy laughs where nobody's really profiting from it, except arguably those who hold the real licences to the footage, who are getting free advertising in the form of a very cool new medium.

sampling is fun, so is making your own content. each to their own man :)

[DrEskaton]

I'll bow out for a while.... I'm not as full on about this as I seem.... I'm playing devils advocate....As I said I use samples myself...

what does frustrate me is a point dave was kind of hinting at. why go to the bother of making original work when it's so much easier to sample and you're so much more likely to get quick success and attention that way?

i can see how and why the familiarity and power of sampling clips that people are famliar with works, I just kind of wish it wasn't that way.

sorry for being full on about it... I'll shut up now...

[dansmachine]

It was an interesting discussion anyway but most points have been made already so from now on it will go round and round again.

Btw this isn't the first thread about sampling...

Back to discussing standard-setups?

[vjpixylight]

Sampling is always going to be a contentious discussion, and can't be won or lost in a thread..best back to the topic tho lads;)

it seems that standardization of an industry, requires a membership of 'agreeing to thr terms' members, (a union as it were), which has not, and may never happen with VJing..
I have been for years in favor of a union-style org that could administer the overall process, which would all be agree'd to by the VJ membership...

I don't see why this would be so dificult if peeps here were serious about standardizing VJing..

[disassembler]

Originally posted by InsideUsAll
inside-us-all for the first 4 years or so virtually never sampled anything, then in the last year or so I've really got into it, I now think its good fun to re-interpret someone elses work, admittedly it is probably easier than generating your entire show from scratch, but that doesn't make it an awful thing to do!?


I believe history shows that until you used samples you didn't win the diesel VJ contest.

[holly]

Originally posted by disassembler
I believe history shows that until you used samples you didn't win the diesel VJ contest.
Hmmm. Interesting, but could that happen in the USA where sampler culture isn't as strong, and contests like FutureMusic's experiments in sound (http://www.experimentsinsound.com/rules.html) contest insist that you document EVERY sample used...?
All submissions must be on a DVD ....
and must include the sources of all non-original work and creative commons licenses. It would be a burden to maintain those records.

It was brought up before that there is no way to clear licenses with Hollywood movies etc, meanwhile clubs pay generic royalties to ASCAP et al.... One solution would be to create a pool of sample-visuals that ARE cleared or created specificly for VJing (like NE1's city footage)... Another would be to create an organization that is able to negotiate with large companies that hold film libraries (TimeWarner, Sony, etc). Membership with the organization means you are cleared to use the licensed works.

[joeproper]

A job is getting payed for your efforts,
The effort goes into YOUR WORK.
The more effort ,the less of a job it is to get payed.

sampling is played out.
But If you want to pretend to be superman,
and avoid learning new skills like kryptonite,
YOUR ice lair is only hot to you.

From the Joe's Words To Live by collection.

[dansmachine]

Originally posted by holly
One solution would be to create a pool of sample-visuals that ARE cleared or created specificly for VJing (like NE1's city footage)... Another would be to create an organization that is able to negotiate with large companies that hold film libraries (TimeWarner, Sony, etc). Membership with the organization means you are cleared to use the licensed works.

Actually a very good idea, but who's willing to give up his/her life to get this accomplished...

Sampling VJ's unite! :grrr:

[sleepytom]

err actually it is being sorted out slowly by VJs.net amongst other people - progress in this area can been seen in the form of www.channel4.com/pixnmix/ and http://creativearchive.bbc.co.uk/

i would like to take issue with the concept of sample based work being unoriginal - this is not the case, sample based work can be as original and inventive as self created works - it is the ideas and concepts that make something original not the constituent parts.

too often people seem to equate sampling with piracy - piracy is the wholesale copying of anothers work for profit where as sampling is the recontextualisation of anothers work.

EBN are a very good example of some highly skilled sampling folks - the fact that few people today come close to the quality of their work is testament to the fact that despite sampling now being "easy" (computers a zillion times faster etc etc ) creating good works from samples is actually as hard as creating good non-sample based work.

[KillingFrenzy]

Clever use of eclectic samples achieves a very different end then one's own footage. Historical reference, political commentary, satirical use of entertainment industry reference. All of these were used heavily in Shakespeares plays, by verbal reference and essentially quoting from the above topics. A DJ/VJ set has elements of this live theater and serves many of the same functions. Someone who thrives at this art is constantly searching for material to appropriate, screening that material, preparing it, and often biding their time for months for an appropriate time to use it. This process can easily be as time consuming and involved as shooting some footage and preparing it.
To me, the two go hand in hand. The hours I've spent researching filmmakers , hunting down their films, and examining their art under the scrutiny of the editing cursor just adds to my own opinions and aesthetic of film. Having this dialog with the past is the equivalent of "woodshedding" for jazz musicians.

The obvious thing to tie back around to the original topic is who is setting standards for how footage and the attendant rights are gleaned, and how can we as a group get this process streamlined to benefit all parties concerned? Getting some standards/resources/intermediaries set up to figure out where to clear footage, and clarify to owners what purpose it would be used for would be more useful to me then having someone define how I should perform with that footage.
I look at this standards issue as how a community can provide resources and empowerment, not restrictions and red tape.

[elbows]

From a legal & moral point of view the potential for sampling based vjs to no longer be on shaky ground is getting stronger. As well as the examples Tom mentioned, the general trickledown of video technology & the internet are creating new potential sources for samples. As soon as the creator actually wants people to sample their work, many of the negative arguments about sampling can be thrown away.

An example would be videobloggers. Whilst I havnt asked any of them if theyd considered bits of their videoblogs could end up projected in clubs in a very different context, there has so far been a pretty excited response to people recycling bits of videoblogs into other videoblogs, and creative commons stuff. Im not saying theres necessarily that much people would want to sample for VJing purposes from videoblogs yet, that moves onto a seperate issue about content and style etc.

I cant say I can make true sense of statements about what kind & style of vjing is better anymore than I can say one genre of music is superior to another. Its personal taste.

[DrEskaton]

I fully support efforts to build a pool of creative commons or other consensually licensed samples for VJ's and others.

Another area I think that an organisation of VJ's could be helpful is trying to negotiate a cheaper "VJ license" with large stock libraries like Artbeats.

Their current license allows unlimited royalty free broadcast but is too expensive for most VJ's.

It would be a great thing to have them offer a special license that allows live performance only but no broadcast or redistribution. That and a common policy which we encourage promoters to adopt (even if only a defacto one) on what is and what is not acceptable sample usage is the sort of standardisation I would love to see.

and for the record my statement that sample based vj'ing is a dead end was not supposed to be a judgement of it's artistic merits. It was meant to be questioning the wisdom of creating something that takes long long hours of work but which you don't then technically own....

[joeproper]

Sampling is one technique.

On a large scale people dont put their best work up for download with the purpose of being regurgitated.
When it is their best stuff its for publicity.
Usually when talented they get snatched up,never to be downloaded again. You want half steps to represent the vj scene?Thats whats happening.

I have explored sampling what became obvious is the inherent disconnect between trying to realize my mind's eye through someone elses.

Sampling good learning tool.
But IMHO limited.

[videobrian]

Originally posted by joeproper

Sampling good learning tool.



yes. it's great for education.
media is so everywhere, the natural thing to do is take it apart and see what makes it tick.

my fav sampling analogy is about when someone covers your garden with masses of garbage, they shouldn't be complaining when you decided to turn the garbage into some beautiful sculpture.

[Anyone]

Originally posted by videobrian
when someone covers your garden with masses of garbage

you mean compost? yes you could call it a fertiliser...

[joeproper]

"media is so everywhere, the natural thing to do is take it apart and see what makes it tick."

Thats kinda vague. I mean ,Do your samples come with all the elements. How can you really get to what honed it into interesting?


I think theres strong points on both sides regardless of the grey areas.What i think should come out of this is distinctions like. vj,sampler : vj,producer : A/V sampler : A/V producer :
A,sampler V,producer. ETC.

To use familar references Djs did it : battle dj, club dj. ETC.

[videobrian]

you mean compost? yes you could call it a fertiliser...

heh.
i guess i was thinking more along the lines of the type of garbage which doesn't decompose.

[joeproper]

Why cant the community write descriptions compile the redundant sentiments , publish them on this website?
This is an easy realistic first step,It doesnt have to be like the VJ magazine people on this board volunteered for then when the due date came nothing but excuses.

[Anyone]

Originally posted by videobrian
i was thinking more along the lines of the type of garbage which doesn't decompose.

I know. I was trying to lighten up the conversation.
did it work?

:) Oli / Ne1

[joeproper]

It wouldnt be the first thing to fly over his head.

[sleepytom]

Originally posted by DrEskaton
<snip> It was meant to be questioning the wisdom of creating something that takes long long hours of work but which you don't then technically own.... yeah that explains your standpoint - you cannot understand that some people do not seek to own / sell the art they create.

i have had loads of fun creating "art" that is not sellable and often is not even recognisable as being done by me - i seek no credit for this work nor do i expect anyone else to even recognise its existence. - take for example my supermarket juxtapositions, these are simply done by taking products from one area of the store and moving them to another area (eg small fluffy mouse from cats toys section deposited in cheese section). i guess you will think that this kind of stuff is worthless childish nonsense? i kind of agree! but it makes me smile and i hope sometimes that someone else gets a laugh out of it too.

[joeproper]

"i guess you will think that this kind of stuff is worthless childish nonsense? i kind of agree!"

Not your best stuff?

I dont sell stuff thats not my best.
I mean if i wouldnt buy it myself why would i expect someone else.

[DrEskaton]

no sleepy...

i think that kind of stuff is great too... art terrorism in public spaces is great....

i think banksy's stuff is great, I do lots of work for which I get or expect no gain...

still I would personally prefer if the VJ scene was not so sample heavy but let's face it what I think has got bugger all chance of effecting what people do does it?

:)

[joeproper]

Not true, I know if the situation is right ,i would offer you work.

[videobrian]

It wouldn't be the first thing to fly over his head.


well i guess i'll not bother translating what my response was into your language for you.
but i'll take your comment as an invitation to randomly flame you for no reason some time.

(hmm. maybe my bad use of sarcasm is seen as flaming already. i guess it's hard to use sarcasm without there being overtones of implied ridicule as a side effect)

Thats kinda vague. I mean ,Do your samples come with all the elements. How can you really get to what honed it into interesting? --joe

i don't understand your question.


i think that kind of stuff is great too... art terrorism in public spaces is great....

yeah. it's great to discover interventions in public spaces and be all, "wtf?" and stuff.

on a side note, that terminology makes me a bit uneasy these days, what with that steven kurtz fiasco in the states and everything.

[joeproper]

"hmm. maybe my bad use of sarcasm is seen as flaming already. i guess it's hard to use sarcasm without there being overtones of implied ridicule as a side effect"

Yup, esp the MTV reference, They are the design joke of the year.


"i don't understand your question"

exactly

[videobrian]

Originally posted by joeproper

Yup, esp the MTV reference, They are the design joke of the year.

no, see, that wasn't sarcasm, i was being serious.


"i don't understand your question"

exactly

yeah why don't you dumb it down for the rest of us who don't live at such an intellectual altitude.

[Anyone]

true. not everyone here's native tongue is english.
please be careful. some colloquial slang will get lost in translation...

[littlecatalyst]

many things seem to get lost in the translation between english>english here too ;)

and while i want to see more about standardization (of gear, or rules & regs...) it seems to be more about how smapling is a this or sampling is a that and of course that sampling is limited and limiting.... :zzz:

WHEN ARE PEOPLE GOING TO DEFINE TECHNIQUE??? sampling is a palette choice. you choose to have clip a or loop b playing that is a choice in your palette (limited or not... and BTW EVERYTHING has its limits, working within them is what u do).

but do you pop? lock? scratch? beatmatch (shapematch?) or juggle? flare scratch? lockgroove? how many kinds of loops are there?? anyone spinback in transitions? Do you break down your loops into buildup-body-breaks? do you mash shit up (and i gather in this case it is EXCLUSIVELEY for samplers)

Do we have a lixicon of our own? obviously not every dj term will fit... but at least there's a model. and we're pretty closeley related dontchathink?

LC

BTW with the sample/antisampl dizzzcourse all i'm hearing is I'm great because i don't sample, or hey i'm not a piece of shit because i do.. blah blah blah

[joeproper]

OH look who it is the most miserable person i know of.
LiLconsequence
I HATE THE UNITED STATES EH
NEXT BREATH
HEY GUYS IM MOVING TO NYC EH

Go away who cares what you think, You dont even believe what you think.

[Anyone]

em, is there a moderator in the house?

[videobrian]

Originally posted by littlecatalyst
and while i want to see more about standardization (of gear, or rules & regs...) it seems to be more about how smapling is a this or sampling is a that and of course that sampling is limited and limiting....

the ongoing sample-based discussion (thankyou) is because "no sampling" is the primary standard of choice which has been suggested. at least the only one that makes any sense so far. trying to push software standards seems basically pointless, prohibitive, and counter productive.
pushing 'no sampling' policies? it's a powerful argument but the hard-line banning or "only from certain libraries" approaches would undoubtedly alienate a whole whack of people.

the best thing i can think of at the minute is to handle any actual legal issues of sampling on a specific, per complaint basis and avoid the pre-emptive exclusion of sampling. guidelines of what can be considered fair-use in the specific realm of vj performance and documentation could be drafted to help artists and promoters who may be playing on the bigtime side.
the idea would be to offer some level of legal protection and information to creative workers and those who promote them. also to influence copywrite law in a way which has positive affect on creative work and workers.

it's not an issue which will disappear anytime soon and i'll agree with the idea of classification of specific types of vj work. i'm not talking about the sub-micro-franken-genre system of classification, ala "salsa-dub-trance-polka-ambio-house" and the like, just basic general descriptions. i usually prefer the "crap, okay, great" classification method myself but that's different also of course.

imagining some sort of standards collective, it could be useful to draft fee-scheduals so that artists and promoters have a standard of basic minimum rates for vj work. i think this might have been mentioned above. holding established clubs and big events to such standards though the visibility of standards, word of mouth, etc... helping start up club and events get an idea of what the norms are.

for every art show or screening i've done in canada, the venue has always referenced carfac (Canadian Artists Representation) fee scheduals.

[DrEskaton]

I don't anyone has said "no sampling" should be the rule.... that's not what I'm saying at all....

but there's certainly a case to be made that successful commercial vj's who are getting paid serious amounts per gig should obey the copyright laws like other successful commercial artists have to.

if you're having fun at a small dance party vj'ing for pennys and playing ripped samples certainly no one is going to care, not even the copyright holder.

but if you're getting paid 1000 euro a night for a VJ gig you can hardly make the case that your use of unauthorised samples is some kind of anti corporate artistic statement can you?

How much do Hexstatic, Addictive TV or Eclectic Method charge for a gig?

[seex]

Do we have a lixicon of our own?

culd use one right now. Im working on a show that will take place at two venues as the same time. I working on the materials, but ill need a nother vj to perform with them at the second venue. As it is the only way to explain what i have in mind is to show him.

A few standard frazes wuld be nice here, being that we use diferent softweres all i can do is show him what the result shuld look like in the end.

BTW joe, wse the PM function for personal attacks.

[hamageddon]

i see no point in continuing this thread anymore.
neither the sampling debate nor bashings belongs here.
thread closed. thanks for the heads up, Anyone.

[vjpixylight]

thats what the PM is for..
Noone here wants to hear you slag other VJ's with OT posts..
nuf said on that..

and sampling /nonsampling really hasn't a place in the standards discussion. it is and will remain an unsolvable consequence of mixing live media..

What about the real issues we can decide on when it comes to standardizing this VJ industry?

I have been working for a few years now, on what might be considered the opposit of commercializing the VJ industry, by promoting non-corp. events, promoting freeware VJ apps, and trying to keep VJing non corporate and artistically uncompromised by selling out to big money..

If you look, you can see how the big record companies have mainstreamed, and commerialized the audio recording industry, putting together their own "beautiful people that they train to make music", and IMHO, has made whole genre related music(like country music) just another pretty face, without much talent(exept the talent audio engineers, that can make anyone sound good)..

Do we really want MTV VJ's(and I mean the ones that mix video)?