Help: Remixed media mayhem

[Lara]

Hello :D ,

Help me please! I am doing my dissertation about the history and future of remixed media, scratch video and 'intermedia' (crossovers art, design, architecture and media).

The Koyaanisquasi thread was great to read, I saw part of it and really enjoyed it. I was having an interesting debate with friends about remixing. What does it mean to you? Is it part of your vj repertoire? Do you enjoy remixes both live non live?

I love it! And to me it seems to be culturally very relevant to people's attitudes to media today. Remixing seems to have crossed over from primarily a guerilla video activist tool to occupy an interesting space between media, art and design.Do you agree? Do you think it is relevant now? Where do you think it will go in the future, and how will that change people's attitudes to media?

I think that there is a bedroom remix culture unfolding through the internet (sited like bt3a and www.rathergood.com). Maybe this will lead to a popularisation of visuals in the same way dj culture developed (although I hate that analogy), especially with the ever greater accessibility of video manipulation tools.

Lots of people are doing quality work that I have much respect for (the aforementioned D-Fuse, Coldcut all those who contributed to Mixmasters and a whole host more . . . Aw bring on that audio-visual mayhem!

May the remix triumph forever!

[holly]

Before everyone starts comparing sampling to murder (* as in various previous threads), lets try to keep this an artistic discussion and pretend there are no legal issues, just for the sake of asthetic arguement. That's why it's here in the Inspiation thread....

I can enjoy "remixed" media when I am familiar with the source material and the remixer has wit and a great sense of rhythm. If it goes on too long and the mix is only made up of common-knowledge media parts I get bored faster than with original material, and the mix runs the risk of becoming a disposable novelty (think: 2ManyDJs). An occaisional sample or reworking of familiar media in an otherwise abstract mix can send you up, but a whole meal made up of leftovers isn't very appetizing.

[Lara]

Thanks for clearing that up Holly, I didn't want to spark another copyright/left debate!

I know what you're saying: sometimes remixing is boooring when its applied the same way in the same tone over and over. I am wondering whether or not it is always essential for the audience to be familiar with the original for the remix to work. In D-Fuse's post about their Koyanisquaasi remix they cited two reasons for the remix as being the fact that they felt the film was badly edited and too long. Is there a difference between reworking and remixing? I don't think so, but sometimes reworking seems to mean a serious re-examination of something, whereas remix is a throwaway tool to make a funny/satirical comment.

In all remixing the original meaning of the media is being changed, and then the piece is being presented again in a different context. I am less interested in the pretentious way I am taught to think about 'new media' at college and more interested in the practical application of remix. How does it work in practise and could it be made more of than a gimmick? To manipulate media and re-present it is a powerful tool of subversion, but maybe it could be applied to work in the same way as the music industry: to have another person's interpretation of what you have created.

Hee hee, just thought of a proper visuals clash where two vjs take the same footage (maybe sampled, maybe your own) and edit/effect it in different ways. Hee hee, wonder what would happen in the mix? :evil:

[holly]

These are some good points!

I think there is maybe a difference between "re-mix" and "re-work". Like two vjs taking the same footage and putting their individual processes on it is "re-working", but I think of a "remix" as like the endless club remixes of Madonna radio hits....

Hopefully, every VJ does some method of re-working her visuals whether they are sampled from tv or original animations or live software. Some aspect of "live" performance is what separates VJ from experimental video.

"Remix" seems like a deliberate reworking of known or recognizable media. For example: someone recently posted a remix of George Bush's state of the union address. It was a remix because the order of his words were edited to say something new (and funny), and it is also a remix because I recognize George Bush and I don't have to know the specific speech to to get the remix.

With Koyanosq... I think there was an assumption when the film was first made that these timelapse images needed to go on and on to have their visual impact. If anything it backfired and gave the film a boring and pretensious feel ? but this is not unlike old silent films where it was thought that the audience would become confused if the perspective changed too rapidly. The Koya film also came out about the time that "MTV-style editing" was thought of as cheap and flashy gimmick to keep the attention of unsophisticated kids. Since Koya was really an extended music video to begin with, a remix seems almost necessary.

But you could say the same about Fritz Lang's Metropolis and the dozens of remixes that were done of it since the film was first released, some clocking in hours shorter than others, some with completely new music scores, and of course the fabulous color-tinted rock-pop version by Georgio Moroder ? which fails only because it was not remixed enough. In the Twenties no one (certainly not the movie studios) thought twice about hacking up films and cutting out scenes that seemed inapropriate for local markets. Many many American movies from the thirties have a musical number by a black singer/performer which was edited out when the film ran in the south. That was remixing too!

[Amukidi]

Its also worth pointing out that taking the remix out of its natural environment (in this case, the cinema) and playing it in a totally different one will alter its "slant". I've just finished a project myself, that involved making a "music video" (for want of a better description) using one of the band member's own footage. It was a really enjoyable experience and quite different from my usual working practice. But I, personally , wouldn't be happy doing it without the blessing of the "owner" - I think it is risky to take a film out of its context and re-furbish it to pander to a different generation's tastes! This happens SOOOO much in music today, that the audience are blissfully unaware of the context. Laras point about two VJs working with the same footage has all sorts of interesting facets - Maybe a great way of selecting a VJ for a project/Gig - Hand out a CD of clips and give the job to whoever comes up with the most interesting mix!

[Lara]

MMMmmm . . . I think that's true about what do we mean by the term 'remix' although I hate getting into all this existential justifying everything bollox.
The $64,000 question then is what do we mean by the word remix?

Is it just different editing, or added/manipulated footage?

Or does nobody care if the narrative/concept and outcome is good?


Hmmmm, beard stroking mayhem. Okay what are people's favourite remixes and why?

[sleepytom]

theres a confusing trend at the moment where people seem to be concerned with the original artists contextual intentions (i have even heard people argue that you shouldn't sample the spiderman film as the 3d animators who did the fx might get annoyed by the new context you show "there work" in ) - this is a foolishly arrogent position to argue from as it assumes that you know what the original artists intentions were when they made the work (you don't - unless you know the artist very well)
so
for me a remix of a work is simply using a substantal part of the original in a new way - by adding your own elements and manipulatiing the original work - sampling is diffrent though - you can take very small samples from a large number of places and make an original piece of work from them - where as a remix will be recognisably that - a new version of an allready existing piece

examples
- EBN's remix of coldcuts timber is definatly a remix
- stienski's rightback is an original work made from samples taken from TV commercials

i guess that the diffrence is easy to see if you look at music - a remix will usually refrence the original work in the title (eg Wildchild - Renegade Master (Fatboy Slim Old Skool Mix))
there are many ways to make records that are not remixes - which include sampling (look at fatboy slim's tunes - a lot of them are largely bassed on one good sample - but they do not refrence the oringinal in ether the name of the track or the music so they are not a remix)

[michaelheap]

i agree totaly with tom's satement is that its entirley about context, a remixed peice is a peice that takes both the context & media of the original and does something with it, a sample is taking the media and doing something out of context with it, ergo, under copyright laws its easier to remix, because your working with the idea etc. of the original artist rather than pitching a new idea,

just my tuppence worth

[Lara]

So the remix must in essence be a new interpretation of the work. Where does this sit then within the media industry?

As remixers of media are we artists, designers or is this a new way in which the public in general will grow to interact with the mass media?

[michaelheap]

my personal therory (and its my own) is that we belong to a long line of 'unrecognised' artisans including and dont laugh, Chef's (think about it here a chef takes ingredients (samples them) modify's them (cook blend mix etc.) and serves them.) scratch Dj's collage artists.

what im saying is there is a link between the blending and mixing & recreation seen by remixers (hiphop scratch dj's & remixers, chef's and some VJ's). its a special quality that some people have to see things in the old and create new out of them.

anyway thats my thaught for the day

[unjulation]

my own personal slat on it all is re-mix/sample is all the same thing you are basicly useing someone elses imagery takeing it away from the intended use, changeing it or not changeing it and playing in a seting that it was not origanly ment for

i personaly work this way, i've played with makeing my own stuf and it just bores me the prrocess that the indervidual has to go through i just find very tedious, out of the thousends of d.j's that are out there playing what actualy is the % of them that are makeing there own music?

so what i actualy like with v.j'ing is the actual playing live aspect, must be my therater background comeing out, working with the music and the crowed

the outher aspect that i like is hunting down diferant images from any and every sorce posible wether that be from a recent film, one that hasent been seen for years, whatever, it can all have its place within a night

so from this i'm happy to accept that i would not be seen as a artist per say i would be clased more as a visual dj, or you could say the space i'm at would be simmiler to the late 80's early 90's when all the d.j's started to go on about being artists rarther then just a d.j., which personaly i thought was just a bunch of pretentious people moaning about there hiaracihy which is why i dont call myself an artist

mind us samperlers are genraly seen as worse then winamp useers within the v.j. world which has started me thinking about the hiarichy within the v.j. world but thats anouther thred in it's self

[holly]

I'm thinking there are three VJ camps which reflect how VJing is the merging of several artforms. There are the VJs with "new media" computer backgrounds who focus on original software and custom fx, there are VJs with film/animation/design media backgrounds who focus on original content, and there are VJs who come from the dj/club scene who focus on sampling and live performance. I'm not saying this is 100% across the board, and this observation may be flawed, but this is what I get fom being here and participating in the forums. I don't think it necessarily creates a "heirarchy" of VJs with the softies at the top and the samplers at the bottom, and the cammies having contempt for everyone without original content, but it certainly creates friction between the various camps.

unj sez
i've played with makeing my own stuf and it just bores me the prrocess that the indervidual has to go through i just find very tedious

It's so funny that you say this because this is exactly how I feel about trolling through movies looking for clips. As a cammie who only plays my own content and animations I'm not a huge fan of sampling. I find the process tedious, ripping dvds is boring, and it takes (me) longer than creating something new. It's great to hear Unj saying this because it's such a different perspective from mine! I do call myself a video artist, and I don't compare myself to a dj (that analogy only goes so far ? for my method at least). The funniest is the chef comparison because you would never pay a master chef to create a delicious meal out of leftovers! That's only something a bachelor would do!

I think I'm the guilty one who first mentioned the Spiderman opening credit animation, so I'll comment on that here too. If I worked for an animation house and I created animation good enough to open a blockbuster movie, I'd be flattered to know some VJs were sampling it and showing it in their shows, but the movie studio would be right to sue if someone started selling it in a dvd mix. No matter what I thought, that animation is the property of Columbia Pictures. Maybe I pity the poor vj and create another spectacular animation to give for free to the little vj, but probably not. Animation is a business, and I'm going to assume the original artist's intentions were to get paid. Personally, to get paid is the only reason I'd "remix" someone else's work, but big big props to those who feel a calling to do it! There's plenty of DJs who've made a media career through remixing bland corporate radio play into something fresh and grooovable!

Lastly, I think the WinAmp users are only at the bottom of the softies camp (probly the dominant camp here at VJF). I've got no problem with audiovisualizers and I don't really give much credit to one software being "better" than another. They're all just tools to create visuals. All software has limitations and gets routine once you've exausted its tricks. (I'm sure a softie would disagree ? yay! Glad to disagree!)

[michaelheap]

no one asked the chef to make it out of the unused rushes ~(ie the left overs) just the prime cuts that made it to the final peice

[holly]

A "real" chef takes raw ingredients (flour, butter, chocolate) and makes a confection from scratch. A stoner takes ice cream and a chocolate cookie and little candies and makes dessert from samples! Which one tastes better...? Depends on how much you have smoked. :D

[Amukidi]

I think that the common key to all of this is visual awareness. Without it you are shafted! A vj with a well developed visual awareness will have no trouble putting together a wicked set from even hum-drum found footage, conversely, a vj with no visual awareness will produce shite - however good they are at coding/manipulating software. Take this a step further - You will NEED visual awareness to create your own footage/content. Sure, there are some awsome tunes out there created purely by re-mixing, but remember also - there are thousands of totally bland and shite tunes produced by those who thought that all you needed was the kit.

[Amukidi]

Err ... Hats off to Holly, much more eloquent than moi!

[loboy]

I find it so inspirational to read these threads and hear all the different opinions being discussed. It is these threads that help build and shape the vj culture around the globe. Terms and words are redefined here on a daily basis, thus we remix the entire culture.

Taking the remix out of purely entertainment forms and applying them across cultural contexts and historical perspectives, we have the abilitly to re-write and re-interpret all the media that is shoved down our throats. This may be our generation's way of dealing with media saturation.

VJ culture is essential liquid in form. We have a huge digital pool to sample from, beginning from the birth of television in the 40s to the live feed DV cams of today.

Once wireless phones with internet connections and miniature DV cams become widespread, we will be swimming in media. Once the age of Digital Conversion ends and the era of Full Digital Immersion begins, context will become almost irrelevant, we will one day forget about history and what is actually real. The remixing of George Bush's speech will be found years later and have to be heavily cross referenced in order to understand where the truth lies.

Think 50 years from now. Heavily immersive visual environments (I think this is what most VJs are looking and striving for) will be the norm. We can already see this beginning to happen on broadcast television. A perfect example are expensive award shows or concerts with huge video backdrops and video matrices that are only to be dreamt of.

Libraries of footage from this decade will be studied and our culture will be understood very differently. What we do now is cave painting.

Kids will be remixing their DNA and splicing it with moonlight to recreate themselves twice in two different times.

Remix the remix and you introduce noise. Wow, avant garde noise artists hold on to your seats and prepare for the children of visual noise. The plethora of noise references is boundless, feedback, static, scrambled signals, unsynced sources, flicker, digital encryption algorithms to be discovered.

Video is in the air.

L0

[Lara]

Wow, loboy, inspirational stuff. Have to say I agree with you- I think that perhaps the remix will take on a special significance within our generation or the next, and that it will be a common way of interacting with the media around us.

At the minute we are seeing the term "remix" which traditionally only applies to music, being applied to various "formats" within areas such as design for print and architecture. Within moving image we've had the revolutions of deconstruction and really messing with narrative structure: maybe that made visuals as an art form possible. I think though, remixing will extend these visual concerns for a long time yet . . .

[loboy]

Still waiting for when graffiti art merges with vj culture, and vjs have a more proactive political stance against the eyesore that is the advertising landscape. This becomes more relevant to anyone living in the urban architecture of today.

When vj hackers crack the access to digital billboards, we will be able to mutate our surroundings at will and remix in a more political nature. I think the remix is somewhat of a political stance.

Check out the Kid 606 album, on the track "Never Underestimate the Value of a Holler". He takes Missy Elliot's lyric 'don't copy me', remixes it to say 'copy me' . All the while it is clear that this entire album is about copyright issues and how media is so easily manipulated and redistributed in different forms. This is politics at work. Instead of voicing his opinions verbally, Kid 606 speaks most eloquently through his laptop.

As for my nanotech live feed spray paint, I'll wait patiently.

[unjulation]

a few points:-

1) i would agree with jaffa that you do have to have some kind of visual eye to be able to create stuf out of samples, wether its artistic is anouther debate, but ware that comes from and how it then is reflected through you is, again, anouther question

2) what interests me is the fact that its only within the last few years that the ability to sample movies and use them within this seting in the way that we can now do has only been avalible to the massas for a little unlike music techknowlagy which has been about for years-and we are not talking about video/mixer set up which to me seemed a bit of a drag when knowing how a night can work and you what that sample now, when it's needed

3) this touches on something i was thinking about after i put up my last coment which was about old school vj'ing ie:- two vidieos and a mixer which is what i was into, now computers/software can do that so much better ie:- have a rack of images that can be drawn upon at anyone time rarther then trawl through videos

[Rovastar]

I couldn't see this thread without a reply could I. :)

Originally posted by sleepytom
theres a confusing trend at the moment where people seem to be concerned with the original artists contextual intentions (i have even heard people argue that you shouldn't sample the spiderman film as the 3d animators who did the fx might get annoyed by the new context you show "there work" in ) - this is a foolishly arrogent position to argue from as it assumes that you know what the original artists intentions were when they made the work (you don't - unless you know the artist very well)



(devil advocate mode = ON) Ummh So Tom you assume that because the 'art' is out there then the authors have even permission. (/off) :)

Originally posted by unjulation
mind us samperlers are genraly seen as worse then winamp useers within the v.j. world which has started me thinking about the hiarichy within the v.j. world but thats anouther thred in it's self

You think. :)

Originally posted by holly
Lastly, I think the WinAmp users are only at the bottom of the softies camp (probly the dominant camp here at VJF). I've got no problem with audiovisualizers and I don't really give much credit to one software being "better" than another. They're all just tools to create visuals. All software has limitations and gets routine once you've exausted its tricks. (I'm sure a softie would disagree ? yay! Glad to disagree!)

I must say that I agree with winamp users being bottom of the pile. Most of the time they are getting someone elses work without permission and not even changing anything (how many 'remix' these :) )and taking credit for it being there own and getting paid. ALso has the effect of stopping the people that make them for free personal use (how nice is that in this day and age) by demotivating them. Sadly lost too many for reasons like this. :(

Ummmhhhh.

Yeap pretty much bottom of the ladder to me. :);)

Software is all about what is 'better' then another in a devolpers mind. :);) hahaha I laugh at you (insert devolpers visualizer sub-product here) :)

Anyways about the remixing...........

Dispite what mouthy eyecandy members my think I have no problem with people remixing stuff. Just give the orginal person credit (and permission :) ) when doing this. Hell I do this myself when doing visualization stuff all credit is there. A joining of minds is often better then my soul one here. New ideas explored.

What is a remix and what is your own work?

Around the loop again. Remix....original.....remix....etc. Most people will know themselves what is a 'remix' and what is not.

If you play 20 secs of one hollywood film followed by 20 secs of another with invert on sorry but no it is not a 'remix'.

If it is changed beyond normal recognition then general it is a remix and is ok.

See not one mention of copyright. :)

That is the problem. Honesty is not always there.

[unjulation]

ha ha

you see this is what i'm talking about

If you play 20 secs of one hollywood film followed by 20 secs of another with invert on sorry but no it is not a 'remix'.

to me if the situation dictaes that that is the best way to play within that perticular situation then thats what i'll do, same goes for the situation when all you need are words, or when you need to show the most complex political statement, or when winamp will wow the crowed it's kinda a castanada thing ;)

and yes rova your are being far more comunity based open by doing what you do i.e. create software and give it away for free then most, how meny outhers do free parties or slash your prices because you whant to or think it would be a nice thing to do

on of the things is if you grab a iconic loop from someware and change it you lose the power that it had, now this iconicness is part and parcel of what i like playing with or is part6 of what i do, within self imposed limatitions, if you change it and lose ware and what it is, it will therefore lose it's own internal integrity

[sleepytom]

i think you've missed the point rova - to do a remix should mean that the source matireal is easaly spotted as the remix has coherant refrences to the original (in style as well as content). To use samples outside of a remix is a diffrent matter, here there is no need for a refrence to the original (an obscure sample from a 50's advert will not be recognised and can be given a total difrent meaning from its first use)

as for copyright - pah! use whatever the fuck you like - if your good and people notice what you can do with video samples there far more likely to give you a job than sue you
see http://www.cartelcommunique.co.uk/ recent work on C4's born sloppy for example

[Rovastar]

-----The above views are of Sleepy Tom and are no way the feeling of VJCentral, VJFOrums and it affilated partners-- :);)

But I do agree it will probably/sadly get you more bookings.........

Ummh easily spotted. Not the whole thing no doubt.

So Unj and Tom
Ummh what is teh minimum you will change in a clip for it to be a remix? Invert = on and leave a DVD playing the background for an hour (I know you will not do this for your artistic style but humour me. :) )

FROM UNJ:
and yes rova your are being far more comunity based open by doing what you do i.e. create software and give it away for free then most, how meny outhers do free parties or slash your prices because you whant to or think it would be a nice thing to do

? I don't understand what you mean.?

[unjulation]

I don't understand what you mean

you been n the pub again, i was complamenting you on the fact that you create free software for people to use i.e.winamp plug-ins

i'm happy to use a clip with no change to it whatsoever if i think that will work best in that situation

just had a thought though after spending the last hour spliceing and the factors involved with relatiion to this subject

"it feels like your takeing controle of the media that you have no controle over and yet afects allmost every part of our lives"

and you can quote me on that one

unj :)

[Lara]

Hee hee: I will in my dissertation ;)

[sleepytom]

i don't see it as sad that people get more work and become known about through the production of sample based av (remixes or not) -- a lot of this sample based work is far more entertaining and a darn site more conceptualy original and creative than a lot of the self shot stuff we see in clubs today

[wellREDman]

lol

"the revolution will not be televised"

"the revolution will be projected"

"the revolution will be remixed"

[Amukidi]

Originally posted by sleepytom
i don't see it as sad that people get more work and become known about through the production of sample based av (remixes or not) -- a lot of this sample based work is far more entertaining and a darn site more conceptualy original and creative than a lot of the self shot stuff we see in clubs today

I'm glad to hear that someone has seen some self shot stuff recently! For my money its as rare as rocking-horse shit. Second point Tom, of course sample based stuff is "more entertaining" - most of it was shot by a trained professional camera man/woman, with that "visual awareness" I aluded to earlier! The "re-mixer" will enjoy the benefits of footage that has, in essence, been professionally produced and directed - this will give the VJ an edge over some bozo who just points his/her camera at any thing. Please don't misunderstand me - I rejoice at the democratic nature if the media today. Its truly great that an artist can express themselves without resorting to spending thousands a day in an editing suite, BUT (and this is a really big BUT) this democracy also paves the way for the gear-whore with no real visual awareness, but a lappy and some cracked software to call themselves VJs, artists, whatever. Someone else mentioned Graffiti artists, I think this is very true with them - Buy yourself 30 cans of paint - this does NOT make you a Graffiti artist! Consequently, 90% of Graffiti is derivative shite (IMO) but when I see good stuff (Try Bristol) it really has an impact and is really thought provoking. Urm, that'll do for now!

[michaelheap]

by me!

whoops im already doing it!

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by unjulation


you been n the pub again, i was complamenting you on the fact that you create free software for people to use i.e.winamp plug-ins

i'm happy to use a clip with no change to it whatsoever if i think that will work best in that situation

just had a thought though after spending the last hour spliceing and the factors involved with relatiion to this subject

"it feels like your takeing controle of the media that you have no controle over and yet afects allmost every part of our lives"

and you can quote me on that one

unj :)

:) I wasn't in that pub yesterday. :) Why do people always assume the worse (best) from me.....:) OK understand more now i was just assuming the worst. :)