sampeld vs self-created visuals discusionm

[unjulation]

right as part of the discusion within avit there's going to be a discusion about self created vs sampeld discusion (see notes) so i need peeps who would be interested in backing the self vreated side, got em=nough peeps who are on the sample tip and out of them thers peeps who do both but realy need some folks that realy belive that the self-created route is the way to go

The overall idea of the discussion is to have a lively, thought provoking and frank talk/discussion upon this aspect of our work and community Including the audience.

I was thinking that there should be 2 or 3 each side at the table and have a host to allow the flow of the discussion.

Below is a set of notes that I have drew up for my own reference and to springboard ideas, feel free to come back with any other ideas these are just my initial ones upon the subject.

Self created material vs. sampled/found material.

There is, on the whole, two major strands running through the vj world, that of the individual using, within there set, either sampled and found images or that of self created visuals.

Theses two stances could be seen as polar opposites of each other as they relies upon different skills and individual beliefs about the nature of what vj?ing means both as an ?artist? per-say and as a vj within the party environment it?s self.

They touch upon different perceptions about the process that an individual vj goes through to get to a common goal, that of the final set played at a party.

They reflect an individual?s stance upon many things that go further then just vj?ing and have implications upon there views within society as whole.

The two stances also cross across several other factors commonly discussed by vj?s, such as whether an individual vj sees themselves as an artist or what type of artist

Ok in a slightly different written style I have just spent the last few hours trawling through the forum stuff about copyright and samperling stuff from the forums a few notes on what was coming up

The artist its self and what that means
Creative plagiarism
The nature of ?public domain?
The nature of communication
The law of the land vs moral law

Self created = artist
Sampled = video pirate

Copyright :- I don?t know whether I would want it to focus to heavily on the copyright stuff I was originally looking at it in a artistic/moral based discussion but it certainly has a place within the whole argument

Originality of both sides of the debate

This also flows into the whole buying footage interconnected with the copyright side of things

The moral ambiguity/double standards of samperling both within the small world of the vj and the larger outside world

[Lucidhouse]

hi unjulation

Interesting discusion, i'm not standing on the fence here but as an artist i've always sampled as well as created stuff from scratch, i've made a rule with myself on sampled stuff...it needs to be altered to an extent where i'm actualy creating something that looks quite different, something new, let's say you use the samples with respect, so much of art is sampling anyway, but it's how you do it that's important.

I find it easy to draw parallels with music, obviously if all a musician does is sample 2 minutes worth of someone elses creation put a few filters on it and use it as their own, they're not actualy creating something that's very new... :zzz:

[pistolpete]

hi unjulation,
I'm always one for creating stuff from scratch and have never sampled. Not that sampling is bad, but seeing club video clips with say things like Akira in it and thinking to yourself, ?oh yeah I recognise that from that Manga film?. I find creating stuff from scratch great as it's so satisfying knowing that all that video work is entirely your own.

Pete

[Rovastar]

/me Throws my hat in ring

:)

[unjulation]

nice one guys i'll be in touch in the next week personaly to discuss the set up etc, once i get confermation from outhers looks like it could be quite an incendery talk/discusion so get you flame-throwers ready

[unjulation]

right just been geting all this stuf together for the discusion and need to ask who, that are going to be part of the panel will be needing acomadation can they go to the acomadation thred hear and repli, not had all conformations yet so not puting any names up yet untill i get conformation one way or anouther would have contacted all pee[ps indervidualy but not got all direct contact mail address yet
chears for your help
unj :)

[unjulation]

right just got of the phone to jj who will be the host fro the discusion and hopefully i will be hooking up with him some time after 10pm at the open jam, as long as i'm not bizzy or the car aint broke down, lol, so any of the participants who are in brighton at that time it might be an idea if we hook up and just have a quick chat f2f, just to touch base and all that :)

[disassembler]

Those that make, create what others sample. Without the makers there are no samplers. It's obvious which deserves the most respect.

[unjulation]

good point but there is the concept that happens natrualy within the world as a whole , that of our childeran just take what we make and expand and develope it into possibly something totaly diferant and perhaps better then the origional, standing on the sholders of gights and all that

[disassembler]

STILL.
The original was the most essential element.

[fluchtpunkt]

Originally posted by disassembler
Those that make, create what others sample. Without the makers there are no samplers. It's obvious which deserves the most respect.

true but that argument is 100% reversible:

without 'sampling' (in its most general sense) there is no art. no human can create something out of nothing.

...

it's a chicken <-> egg thing

[disassembler]

PUKE. :rolleyes:

Ah yes I do sample when I shoot with a video camera. But what I sample became a NEW dimension. If your printing out video stills then I see you as being creating something more original if it becomes a sculpture. Why? Because it became something it wasn't on a extreme level. But if your sampling video and keeping it video I don't see much of a new creation. I can flip through channels on the TV and create a remix allllll day long.

All bow and call me your master. That's what I thought. The reason why nobody is bowing is the reason why making is greater than sampling. Or maybe I'm ahead of my time and people just don't understand me.

Its struggle and suffering levels that determine what level of respect the human race gives to something. The fewer the people doing and the harder something is to do, determines its level of appreciation.

The person that runs into a burning building, rather than sit outside and yell help, gets the credit for saving the person inside. Both were involved in the event but one goes that extra mile.

[holly]

Deon, Stirrin it up!
:scared: :yep: :punch:
The man puts the DIS in Disassembler...

[littlecatalyst]

a) diss i hope your work is good cause with talk like that, you better not have sucky images (even if you made 'em yourself)
b) plattitudes suck ass. no one has to talk about who merits respect and who doesn't. its simple you do or you dont get it. every armchair quarterback plays a perfect game but who actually gives a shit about them???
c) youre argument is not original. it seems to be a stupid filter on an old sample.
d) i would loveto see your stuff. i would love to see what you have actually done that no one has ever done before. i would love to see if your shots are 'inspired' i.e. ripped off from other filmakers, and from other vjs, or if you designed new sets, and did it all in a vaccume ignoring both film and vj history.. love to see that.
e) lastly i really could care less if you respect me or not. i am not in this game to be respected by you. i am gods gift to me, not to humanity. and anyone who is looking for respect from peers is looking in the wrong place. thats not what success is all about.

so if you feel that strongly write an article about it... and ffs make good work because with that diatribe youre just farting out of your mouyth anyway.......... this is a thread about setting up a panel discussion, not a soapbox.

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by disassembler
PUKE. :rolleyes: If your printing out video stills then I see you as being creating something more original if it becomes a sculpture. sure aint english..... what is it youre saying? printed stills are more orriginal if it becomes a sculpture? what ? arent we on a VJ forum?
i wish there were some VJs here who were as much on the other side of the fence (ie sampling rocks diy footage suck) so that all you *****s could see how foolish that shiite sounds
sounds like a dick swinger to me

[fluchtpunkt]

from your response i get the feeling you interpreted something into my post that isn't actually there!

Originally posted by disassembler
The reason why nobody is bowing is the reason why making is greater than sampling.

...the point i was trying to make is that 'making' always involves some form of sampling. ...& in the light of this assumption your statement becomes pretty absurd.


The person that runs into a burning building, rather than sit outside and yell help, gets the credit for saving the person inside.


so the person yelling help had the idea that the person inside had to be rescued first - then the person actually running inside copied that idea.
...the only analogy i can see here (if any) is that the rescuer is the 'sampler'.


...

if you want to be condescending i'd at least get my arguments straight!


edited to ask:
if you don't like sampling then why on earth do you call yourself 'dissassembler' :confused: ?? ;)

[disassembler]

I don't see any risk in playing something with really good production quality and has already proven to be successful. I don't see how that's pushing anything forward.

I admit on a metaphysical level your always sampling something.

I used to sample and use samples but started to realize a flaw in it. I'm trying to become bulletproof. I want to make something as pure as I can.

LittleCatalyst you have alot of guilt, to get so angry. I've seen such intelligent responses from you in the past. I'm surprised to see such an irrational reply from you. Please do justify why and how a sample is greater than someone's 100% efforts. I've explained myself.

All you've done is attack me as a person. Please do tell why sampling is credible.

fluchtpunkt:
One doesn't have to sample someone else to disassemble and reassemble.

[unjulation]

ah..this is great guys keep it up loads of ideas and indervidual focus for myself on the whole issue comeing out, but i'm going to keep the responses for the discusion and i'll put them up after also i would like to remind peeps that the actual discuysion will be streemd over the web, so you will be able to see us all argueing (not) about it and as vj forums will be on line you may be able to put forward any ideas you have, tho dont quote me on this one as i'm not exactly sure whats the tech side of it all, the discusion its self is runing from 10am-12.15gmt

[fluchtpunkt]

Originally posted by disassembler

I admit on a metaphysical level your always sampling something.

...then why should it be a taboo to sample anything that has been 'created' by other humans (i.e. -civilization-)? that seems a bit an autistic point of view to me.


Please do justify why and how a sample is greater than someone's 100% efforts..

why do you automatically assume that if someone samples he/she does not put their 100% effort into the final piece?


Please do tell why sampling is credible.

why?
i have to date not seen a single convincing argument why it should generally be considered not credible.

...yes untalented people can do uninspired work by sampling jewels of other peoples making & it will still look pretty good. but one can also take uninspired 'amateur' pictures of rocks & if the rocks are really beautiful the pictures will still look pretty damn good.
it's what you make of -it- that counts!


One doesn't have to sample someone else to disassemble and reassemble.
...of course, but if one likes disassembling how can one not enjoy doing it with other peoples work? ;) :D


...

did you really build all that (http://www.dis-assembly.com/) furniture you sampled yourself? if not, please explain the fundamental difference - 'cause i can't see it! where do you draw the line?!

[disassembler]

did you really build all that (http://www.dis-assembly.com/) furniture you sampled yourself? if not, please explain the fundamental difference - 'cause i can't see it! where do you draw the line?!

Bustedd.... Ha! got me on that one. That was the old me. I haven't a chance to change. Here's what the new me looks like some day when I get a chance to make the change.

http://www.dis-assembly.com/n3w.jpg

[holly]

Ha ha ha. This little Punch and Judy session was brought to you by VJ Playhouse. Tune in next week when we hear our VJs say....

But Unj, this brings up a good point. I can't sit here and agree that living is the same as sampling. That's just new age post-mod gobbledy-gook. Clearly there is sampling (using video that was intended for another purpose) and there is using original footage ? and here I say the word "original" in the sense that it is the first use, NOT in the dubious Sampler defense that "original" means in no way similar to anything else on the planet that ever existed.... That's a total cop out response! The line has to be drawn somewhere or Samplers will use any silly old excuse to "justify" based on the most esoteric of definitions. Maybe another word can be used other than "original", but I can't think of a word that more closely means "of the original source", can you? That's why I say Samplers and Cammies, although that leaves out CG animators, etc. Your term "self-made footage" is most appropriate.

But you can't let Samplers get away with going all frilly and esoteric. It is what it is. Found footage in NO WAY is the same as self-made footage. Yes I breath air. My god, I must be sampling...! Uh-uh. That doesn't cut it. I say both are legitimate, but toying with the definitions of words doesn't change what is being created or the methods being used.

Simple definition:
Sampling is the use of "found footage".
Self-created footage is not "found footage".
Artistic validity is NOT implied by either one, nor are either, by definition, attempting to say something which has never been said before.

Another ridiculous arguement presented by samplers is that they "deserve" to use found footage because there is so much of it, or because media corps make so much money off it. That analogy falls apart the second you replace "video footage" with any other object that can be created or sold. "A fisherman had many fish and I had none, so I deserved to use his fish for my own meal." Uh-uh. You might as well say, "That artist had talent and I had none, so I deserved to use his art as my own." No, the world will simply never accept that as valid no matter how many times you say it.

I think Samplers should be more ballsy and just say "I used it because I could! It was there, I took it and used it for my own purpose, so what?!" Don't try to degrade self-made footage because it seems similar to something else that came before. Sample with pride and sample at will, but don't pretend someone else's self-made footage is derivitive, and that's an excuse for you to use the actual source. That's the Pot calling the Kettle that certain color word which we are forbidden from using around here because some people imagine it is offensive.

[unjulation]

dam you holly you nicked my best line - that of "do you need to justifiy your self in the first place? - fundermentaly no" ;)

[littlecatalyst]

sorry diss if that did seem like a personnal attack--
i would like to chalk it up to jetlag, i am in no way guilty about what i do... spent a load of time shooting before i became much more inclined to use stuff made by others and rarely (IF EVER) from other VJs... I am in no way saying it's more legit, i dont ewven want toget into that that is what i mean by dick swinging my dad is bigger than your dad BS. like the kids (almost) say, it's all god.
but when you get up and start sayiong what is legit and what deserves respect. sheesh yeah i may come out swinging because that is not what we are about.... as VJs we arent about cutting down culture as to what is respectful, if thats your bag then write about it, seriously, the medium could use some more critics (and even if you say i am not worthy of anyones respect cause i dont shoot everything myslef, that's fine, just publish it in an art mag or dj mag... get the word out, that woudl be way cooler than coming out with these all encompassing statements) anbd really i want tosave all my kicks on teh dead horse for the avit, but oncxe again, are you telling me that all teh collage artists on this planet are somehow not worthy of any attention? IM notr talking about video collage, but of 2D collage I have seen some KILLER STUFF (actually use some in some sets, after they have been videotaped) and none of that could have been done without teh ol scissors tape and magazines... so do they sick ass and are they bums because they dont go out and shoot teh poictures that they collage (not to mention um, reviving dead politicians to snap their photos to then put into the said collages??)
while were at it, i think teh thing that really pissed me off about what you wrere saying is that it could lead to many more stratas of heirarchies that are arbitrary, i.e. painting is less respectful than dance because the dancers work harder, or accoustic musicians are more respectful than electronica artsist.... the list goes on and what is that for? if that is what you want to do then a) be a critic or b) be a businessman or c) be a politician, but i just see no point in that argument.....
there's pumping onceself up by believving in what you do and then theres pumping onself up by cutting others down. much like the grade school bully...... and i guess my knee jerk reaction is to throw sand in the bullies face and stop him from bullying oither kids. i want to see more sampling as well as more hybrids and more VJing in general, so the idea of cutting anyone down as not worthy of respect really gets my goat.
i am definitley not feeling guit for what i do Diss, i think i woudl feel more guilty if i pranced around saying my shit dont stink becauswe of my brakhage & nam jun paik ripoffs (DIY of course) and teh style i copied from other VJs.... not saying thats what you do, but i seen a lot of uninspired i-did-it-myself-therfore-i-rock crap, and i still act respectful to them, say nice set, find something i liked to pumpo and then try to suggest in positive ways things i saw that could be better
i would love that same treatment from teh smaplers-suck camp, thats all.....
once again, i meant no personal offence Diss, in the words of the (um,) great Rodney King; can't we all just get along??

...an maybe this rant is not clear so ill try once more, i dont want tohave to justify, and dont at all feel that one is better than teh other. though for some individuals it may be. and let them be that way....

[mondo]

LOL

holly - can you have my babies!!
(they need a good home and yours just about fits!!)

:heart:

[disassembler]

Originally posted by littlecatalyst
i am in no way guilty about what i do... spent a load of time shooting before i became much more inclined to use stuff made by others and rarely (IF EVER) from other VJs...

So its ok to sample other artists work as long as they aren't VJ's?
What if the person whos work you sampled becomes a VJ?



As VJs we arent about cutting down culture as to what is respectful.


Then anything goes? Why you do you never (IF EVER) sample from other VJ's then? Aren't you creating another level of respect by implying that sampling another VJ is dirty?


if thats your bag then write about it, seriously, the medium could use some more critics (and even if you say i am not worthy of anyones respect cause i dont shoot everything myslef, that's fine, just publish it in an art mag or dj mag...



I've never said sampling is not worthy of anyone's respect. Weeks back during another "sampled vs. self created" I posted a link to a ninjatune video that I used as an example of what I see as respectable sampling. I respect the hell out of someone with madd mixing skills. But in a VJ Battle where there's a tie and one VJ makes all their own shit and the other is the madd sampler what would be the tie breaker?


Are you telling me that all teh collage artists on this planet are somehow not worthy of any attention? IM notr talking about video collage, but of 2D collage I have seen some KILLER STUFF (actually use some in some sets, after they have been videotaped) and none of that could have been done without teh ol scissors tape and magazines... so do they sick ass and are they bums because they dont go out and shoot teh poictures that they collage.


When you cut out images from a magazine and create NEW structures, and what I mean by new structures I mean human heads on a deer bodies kind of manipulation. Then I see this as creating something new. It's no longer a magazine, no longer just like the source, and is animated. Its very removed from the original. Its good shit no doubt. But say you make your own drawings and collage them. Then I praise you even greater because its closer to the maker. Its more unique and rare.


(not to mention um, reviving dead politicians to snap their photos to then put into the said collages??)


Find the picture and make a drawing, or painting, or make a 3d model of them. Be creative. It doesn't have to be a photo to have an impact and be recognizable.



there's pumping onceself up by believving in what you do and then theres pumping onself up by cutting others down.


These are the things I think about when I think about what makes things my favorite. These are my own personal standards. WHY do you perfer sampling over creating your own stuff? You must have a reason. The only thing I've heard you say that reflects a reason is that you can't get an image because you can't possibly get a shot of say Richard Nixon as president anymore. Please see Holly's post about fishermen.


I think i woudl feel more guilty if i pranced around saying my shit dont stink becauswe of my brakhage & nam jun paik ripoffs (DIY of course) and teh style i copied from other VJs....

The irony.


not saying thats what you do, but i seen a lot of uninspired i-did-it-myself-therfore-i-rock crap, and i still act respectful to them, say nice set, find something i liked to pumpo and then try to suggest in positive ways things i saw that could be better
i would love that same treatment from teh smaplers-suck camp, thats all.....


I thought your mixes were great. How could they be better?


once again, i meant no personal offence Diss, in the words of the (um,) great Rodney King; can't we all just get along??


No hard feelings here. I believe we both have strong convictions to a method, style, and process. That's great. That's what makes this forum so valuable. Its when we disagree that thought arises. It wouldn't be very interesting of a world if we all thought the same.

:)

[shikakufx]

I think its simple, there always going to be both, the discussion in here is nothing new. There was always the same argument between electronic musicians and djs.
You can be creative in both styles, if you want to show manga or the matrix screensaver you will be categorized by some people in one way, and by another kind of people in another way.
Personally I think showing that stuff is something I dont like, Im not saying its wrong, I just don like it, but I know some people out there will do.

And as far as creating your own visuals, if they are good, I will like it, but if I dont like them, to me you will fall in the same category than the guy that is showing matrix or manga.

Its imposible to keep a huge crowd happy with what you are doing, aggain same applies to music, for some people Moby its awesome, I cant stand him but that doesnt make him a bad musician or dj.
Its not my taste thats all.
See my point?

[shikakufx]

And Sampling is here to stay.
we hear it all the time in todays music.
Amazing things like
Future Sound Of London, or Cornelius, (insert here your favorite artists), etc.

everyone is using it, and if well used. it can take the whole track to another level.

if you do your own from scratch, that to me says nothing until I get to see what you are doing. it can look really lame or awesome. same thing goes to people that sample video.

I do notinted to hurt anybodys feelings here, this is just my point of view, personally I do both.

peace

[holly]

Ok, so despite what I was saying earlier I really am all for sampling in theory (I'm just not all for that justification nonsense). I think clubland is supposed to be a bit samplicious, everything from trendy fashion to dragqueens (hmm, drag as sampling. Didn't think of that before) to politics to silly television spoofing.... Although I can't stand it, the most popular club music here in NYC is 80's rock'n'roll, and the cheesier the better. Maybe not in the megaclubs where all the outoftowners go but definitely in the smaller clubs that serve a neighborhood or a scene, and always if a club has more than one environment one room is r'n'r, so that is a sampling mentality. Cut'n'clip culture.

But what I find when I try to get into sampling for myself is that it just doesn't work for me. I have a big Halloween party coming up and what is more sample-appropriate than something thematic like Halloween with like 100 years worth of horror movie cliches to play with.... Or so I thought. I honestly had a lousy time finding samples that I thought would be worthwhile. Grrr. I thought I could get into it, but either I suck at samples, or it just goes against what I am trying to accomplish....

You know that quantum theory that says you can define a specific particle within an area "cloud" or you can define a specific location where a particle may or may not be, but you can never define a specific particle in a specific place...? Well, for me this is what sampling is. I can think of a movie that might have good samples, but when I go there to look for them I can't find anything usable, and when I am not expecting a good sample sometimes a shot will catch my eye and it would be worth sampling but is so out of context that it has no use in my specific intention.... Am I too picky? Is that part of needing to make your own footage? Is there something Zen about sampling that is carefree and all about letting go of expectations? I can't handle that. I'm too much of a control freak. Do samplers rely on happy accidents or do they develope skills for finding what they want?

I have heard many samplers say they have a need to alter the footage with filters/fx/etc to make it their own.... Is that just more justification or is that just about having fun with filters to the point that the original image has been destroyed anyway, ergo there is no need to create an original because it will be so obscured anyway?

Anyway, I'm not against sampling, but I can't sit here and say it's all about the VJ being lazy because I can't seem to develop any sort of skill at sampling at all.

[shikakufx]

I think sampling is a form of art.
Whoever says no to this, then I hope you dont listen to hip hop music, ambient, drum n bass, trip hop, etc
I think there is a skill in knowing how to make the sample yours, that doesnt mean that people wont recognize it, in fact sometimes you might want people to recognize it. That doesnt make it better or worst, its just another technique.
Some people might not fully accepted, but the same thing happen with music 20 years ago, and today if you are carefull you will hear samples everywhere.

(and Im not only talking about P.Diddy's lazy ways of sample other artists, there is a lot more.)

I think sometimes can be by accident, you are playing with something and suddently it works, no explanation needed. Be experimental, investigate, try new things, and old ones too, but the most important thing BE OPEN MINDED!

:)

[WordVirus23]

I'm a sampler, and for a while it was getting so bad, I couldn't watch movies or tv without having this approx 2 second buffer going... "would that loop?" "was that good motion" it got to be annoying, b/c I wasn't even paying attention to the program I was trying to enjoy. I don't watch tv much (maybe once a month) yet its my largest field to harvest from... I have friends and DJs record their TV surfing habits and then I sample from those tapes... like getting my TV fix secondhand.

but yes, there is definitely something a little Zen about watching massive amounts of video in fast forward cueing; suddenly screaching to a halt, rewinding, grabbing a couple seconds, then back to the mad dash, only to do it over again. and then later, spend stupid amounts of time in premiere trying to get rid of that stupid frame that isn't supposed to be there. all for 2 seconds of video.
1000's upon 1000's of times :)

..james...

Originally posted by holly
Ok, so despite what I was saying earlier I really am all for sampling in theory (I'm just not all for that justification nonsense). I think clubland is supposed to be a bit samplicious, everything from trendy fashion to dragqueens (hmm, drag as sampling. Didn't think of that before) to politics to silly television spoofing.... Although I can't stand it, the most popular club music here in NYC is 80's rock'n'roll, and the cheesier the better. Maybe not in the megaclubs where all the outoftowners go but definitely in the smaller clubs that serve a neighborhood or a scene, and always if a club has more than one environment one room is r'n'r, so that is a sampling mentality. Cut'n'clip culture.

But what I find when I try to get into sampling for myself is that it just doesn't work for me. I have a big Halloween party coming up and what is more sample-appropriate than something thematic like Halloween with like 100 years worth of horror movie cliches to play with.... Or so I thought. I honestly had a lousy time finding samples that I thought would be worthwhile. Grrr. I thought I could get into it, but either I suck at samples, or it just goes against what I am trying to accomplish....

You know that quantum theory that says you can define a specific particle within an area "cloud" or you can define a specific location where a particle may or may not be, but you can never define a specific particle in a specific place...? Well, for me this is what sampling is. I can think of a movie that might have good samples, but when I go there to look for them I can't find anything usable, and when I am not expecting a good sample sometimes a shot will catch my eye and it would be worth sampling but is so out of context that it has no use in my specific intention.... Am I too picky? Is that part of needing to make your own footage? Is there something Zen about sampling that is carefree and all about letting go of expectations? I can't handle that. I'm too much of a control freak. Do samplers rely on happy accidents or do they develope skills for finding what they want?

I have heard many samplers say they have a need to alter the footage with filters/fx/etc to make it their own.... Is that just more justification or is that just about having fun with filters to the point that the original image has been destroyed anyway, ergo there is no need to create an original because it will be so obscured anyway?

Anyway, I'm not against sampling, but I can't sit here and say it's all about the VJ being lazy because I can't seem to develop any sort of skill at sampling at all.

[WordVirus23]

some of my best clips are quite by accident... little snippets that I hadn't noticed... or crazy juxtapositions...

Originally posted by shikakufx
I think sometimes can be by accident, you are playing with something and suddently it works, no explanation needed. Be experimental, investigate, try new things, and old ones too, but the most important thing BE OPEN MINDED!

:)

[eirenah]

Holly babe, i'm with you on this one!
(can you imagine? ; )

I self-create my own visuals because:
- don't have nerves for trying to find a perfect sample
- i think it's better to invest the time (you'd spent in finding samples) to expand your skills for creating visuals - and i see it as long-term investment (eg i wouldn't feel good at all if i spent 2 hours in finding the sample, feels much better if i spent that time working on my own)
- i can express better if my startpoint is pure idea, and if i take my own route to get the final output - if that process has taken different directions, at least i know i influenced it - and on the other hand if the startingpoint is allready shaped sample, tought, message, there is not much you can do - you can try to make it work with the rest of your stuff and you can modify it.

but. it's not my idea of perfect vj-dj-art (...) world.
it's just the way i work.
if i felt everyone should do this then i would have to give up all that great sampled music i adore. hell i wouldn't send my clips to Ecin for his fileshare link. also, copyleft and opensource issue. it's a hudge step for developing and recycling old stuff that could and can be better. I'll pull a parallel line here. I think it's great to develope opensource software so people can modify it and make it better. But it would be very wrong if 'modifier' would sing the work as his own. And that's what sometimes vjs do. sample and claim to be original. iritating.

why dogs lick their balls? because they can.:P

As much as we can, vjOxygen and i tag-team together. When we work, we record our mixes that are spontaniously made, and re-using it sometimes again when working solo. So that way, yes, we're sampling each other, but we wouldn't tag-team if we weren't the 'perfect couple'. when i have her sample, i don't have to think what should i do with it. i know exactly what i'll do with it, and vice-versa.. which is not a case with 2sec movie sample. what the helll should i do with it? And my point is, everyone who samples, but feels he couldn't create something original alone (and wants to) - find yourself a mate. do your own stuff together. brainstorm. recycle each other's stuff. experiment. you'll get much better output.

lots of VJs start with sampling, because there's lots of other stuff to dedicate to became one (hardware, software, mixing skills). and it's ok. but as some healthy, logical path, it would be great if ppl would reduce samples from gig to gig and replace them with original content. And at the end, keeping only the needfull samples in their work - the ones that's impossible to create (first step to the moon etc). I would call it a progress. But if the only thing ppl do thrue the years is finding new samples, the only way they can make progress is expanding mixing skills, which doesn't leave much space to originality. Me personally, i measure my originality from some banal situations - eg. when vjIllectric says - you were on telly - it was only few sec, but i knew it's your work. I guess i wouldn't hear thet if i was a sampler. And as i mentioned in CE2 thread - i guess it's not a nice feeling when you come to a room full of VJs and you see you have exactly the same samples as other ppl. but i wouldn't know. as much as it's easier to sample, it's a risk to be unoriginal and replaceable.

Yet, music has taken some more sophisticated directions. samplers have developed their own styles so now it's possible to hear few seconds of a song, and know exactly who it is. i hope Vjing is about to take those directions in sampling too.

...unju, i'm very interested in short report about avit talk on this topic..

[holly]

Nice comments Eirenah. I'd say I feel (personally) the exact same way. If it takes me sooo long to sample, are others having a much faster method? If not, why not use that time to explore other methods of creating visuals...? It just adds to the arsinal. For me VJ is as much about content (maybe more) as mixing and performance, so "owning" the footage is very important (not just in the sense of copyright, but in the sense of having formed every frame from my own ideas and experimentation). After I tried sampling because my curiousity was piqued from the discussions on this forum, I think I am now more careful to say that sampling is a valid decision, but certainly not just a "simpler" method.

I like the idea of sampling from a partner and synergizing between yourselves. That's very cool.
:yep:

[filf]

Firstly - interesting to see your comments lil-c after meeting and playing wwith you during avit.

Secondly I am gutted i missed this discussion at avit - it was one of the main things I wanted to hear and participate in to hear differing viewpoints on this obviously touchy subject.

I am a self creator after originally utilising samples - but I don't have any less respect for samplers and am even swayed into trying my hand at sampling again in the future. Although to be honest I am enjoying the conceptual creative processes alot at the moment.

HipHop/Jazz samples are a constant inspiration to me and prove the point that a decent sample is always going to stand head and shoulders over something that is obvious and not well considered. How many times have I heard and loved a tune - not for the lyricism of the rapper but for the looped instrumental that gives a tune its atmosphere and feeling. Then to find the original record and love it even more than what introduced it to you in the first place; this keeps alive the original creatives who would otherwise [remain/fade into] obscurity.

I have great respect for many of those rappers/musicians as artists because they are taking something and re-representing it to me in a modern context - effectively keeping alive their inspirations for a contemporary audience who would otherwise remain blissfully unaware - you are also getting an insight into an individual as a creator by checking their samples.

Exactly the same runs true for film and imagery in my eyes - taste and style playing a major part in what gets you turned on by another. It is HOW IT IS DONE - it is not either or - in the plaguerist societies many of is live in it is nigh on impossible to remain truly one hundred percent original. In fact it is one of the reasons I have stayed away from seeing other projectionists/vjs material/work for fear of being corrupted. However after [what I saw of/being part of/meeting people at] AVIT I realise this is a false economy because of the forum of like minded heads. I look forward to being more active in these forums in the future.

[vjpixylight]

anyone can sample a clip off a movie and use it, but the art in sampling is redefining a sample that can evolk different responses from different ppl..
If the 'original content artist makes original material, but the viewing public has no idea what it is or means, that originality doesn't serve it's purpose..
Likewise if a sampler uses sampled footage, but uses it in a way that the viewing public will react to as different, and say, "i never saw that clip used that way", or ' I think i understand the meaning of that movie from which that sample comes from better now", then who is to say the samplist hasn't stimulated new brainwaves in the spectators..

What i see in this whole argument about sampling, is that the artist's that make original content always seem to feel slighted if they don't get as much recognition for their original efforts, as opposed to the artist that uses sampled footage, and get more ppl reacting to what they do....

So in the grand scheme of this debate, it always seems to boil down to ego's being bruised, and then attacking the other side because your footage doesn't seem to be as keen as the samplers/originators footage and that is what keeps this sampling vs. original debate endlessly going over and over and over the millls again..

in the werds of rodney{Pixy} King, 'Live and let live. support what you like, but don't attack what you don't like'.

[syzygy]

Originally posted by filf
In fact it is one of the reasons I have stayed away from seeing other projectionists/vjs material/work for fear of being corrupted. However after [what I saw of/being part of/meeting people at] AVIT I realise this is a false economy because of the forum of like minded heads. I look forward to being more active in these forums in the future.

Wow! That is fantastic! Exactly what AVIT is supposed to be all about.

We may have our differences but all in all, I think our community can only help to push each other to new heights.

Dan.

[shikakufx]

I aggree with you, live and let live.
All techniques are valid, sampling or self created, like I said before to me you are not better than anybody by just doing your own or just sampling, you can do both and still not be a good vj.

Its not about if you are using mac or pc, sampling or self created, arkaos or MD, etc. You will have respect from me, If I like what I see on the screens, if makes me feel emotions, if its well layered out with the music, etc.

Exactly the same happens with djs, some of them play at the biggest clubs, and they are full of ego, but as far as I know if I dont like what I hear, to me they still suck. So please dont put yourself on the horse just because you do your own or you sample, its not about that.

Some people said that Andy Wharhol was crazy because of using "samples" on his artwork, some other people said he was a genious, either way. People are still talking about him.

[BrainStove]

Well I thought, after my long time disappearing around here posting my "Controv" opinions, I would have the right to rant a lilbit my BrainStoveness... :D :P
BTW it?s the very 1st time I?m intervening in these kind of Topics/Threads I find so amusing, (if you don?t believe me, just make a search through all my posts so far ;))

Ok. here we go... Despite of my weirdness I?ll say something never said/posted before about this never agreeing topic, (I don?t think I?m the only one suffering these unique symptoms I gonna explain as follow)

1) Since I?m totally a LeftBrainWired chap, of course I?m more oriented to the Technical, Mad Scientist, Researcher side of VJing than the Artsy, Narrative, Filmmaker, Esthetic side.

2) Because of the above I?m usually not interested in sampling anything, but mainly cuz I think any existing footage/imagery already seen (specially if recognized) it?s instantly Old, Obsolete & prolly boring no matter how screwed it may look with your postprocessing, to show again in my visuals (same with my own shit once done), I?m the first one constantly looking for novelty, the unknown, the Surprise Factor everytime.

3) I?m not in narrative visuals, prolly the ones more involved in sampling video due their special needs to construct speechs/discourses thru their visuals in the intellectual/rational realms of thoughts & Ideas, therefore they need more that alphabet, orthography, dictionary quarry of preexisting footage.

4) That?s why I started the Surreal thread, I always try to deal more with feelings/moods rather thoughts/ideas with the crowd I?m VJing for, always looking for the crowd reaching that Zen state, Blank mind, No thoughts, Sense fullness in tune & matching their most individual inner essence just in case they open their eyes and take a glance to the screens, cuz I?m totally aware they are there more for the music than the visuals and very often the ones really enjoying the Rave experience are Eyes closed dancing around.

5) Yeah of course, that might have something to do with the kind of events I use to work as VJ, they are only Big Opensky Raves where the music always is Acid/Hard Techno and sometimes Psychedelic.
The very few times I?ve VJed in a big enough closed club with a roof I?ve performed more like a mad lampy projecting visuals on peoples bodies & all over the place with no screen at all and never saw a crowd more excited/high about my visuals.

6) Maybe it?s just me but I?ve already said that amongst my rarities; I never pay/ed attention to any lyrics in any song in any language so that may be influencing my way/style to interact with the crowd with my visuals, I never aim to catch the exclusive attention of the crowd in such party enviroments.

7) Last but not least, could you believe I did never downloaded any clips proposed in any of the links all over the VJC/F, mostly not even watched them?
So, Sampling vs Self created??? is it a JOKE?
Oh yeah, my crappy Internet connection had something to do with that, but if you reread this post again you know now it wasn?t the only reason ;) :P :angel:

[disassembler]

Self made content has less strings attached. Making easier to take your work further. You limit yourself in a overall sense by using samples. I understand by not using samples your limiting yourself also.

Self created source is harder to pull off than sampling. Because it has to live up to everything that a sample has to and has be conceptualized and created.

The original is always worth more than the reproductions, on a singular level.

I didn't make this up.

I not saying this to cut ANYBODY down. It's not to pump up MY ego. I haven't achieved the standard I envision. What I talk about is what I strive for.

I'm all for peace, love, and happiness. But you can't deny the existence of greed and hate. They exist.


Without high standards and critical thinking we don't go anywhere.

Buddhist monk says "One must go nowhere to go everywhere".
Tell that to my boss, and my bill collectors. Why buy that new piece of gear if its all gravy? Why do anything for that matter.

There are reasons why we're not all __________ (fill in with whatever your not).

What it boils down to is personal opinion. I know that. This is just my point of view. My comments don't mean I don't like any of you as people nor appreciate you or efforts. But there is a highest peak in the world. There is limits and not everthing is equal. Just the facts. Obviously everything is in flux and what is true today could be false tomorrow. But when its true its true.

Getting people :grrr: doesn't bother me as it gets us all to think. Good stuff will come out of these discussions as long as its constructive. Please think.

I just got to keep it going.

[Rovastar]

Hi all I don't know if anyone that wasn't at Brighton saw our heated debate on the webcast. :);)

Fun and passionate and a lovely level of respect from all of the panel. Which continued on later in the pub. :)

Anyone see the webcast (it will at some point no doubt be on the AVIT websites)?

[andrea]

I saw the webcast, couldn?t drag me away.
I couldn?t make avit so was really impressed to see this available.
thanks x x

I got the general impression that there is room for both self created and sampled content in a set. I don?t want to sit on the fence but I think both acts are valid forms of expression, and to me that?s what its about.

I think that throughout history we have taken the ideas of old and reinterpreted them to have a relevant meaning for the society we live in, we do it all the time that?s how we learn ( trying not to go of on a pomo trip) even with the case of self created content, there is always a source for the spark of inspiration accompanied by an accumulative knowledge of what went before, so enabling that personal expression.
Yes of course they both have there own personal values and virtues, but they are exactly that personal. Which is why for me its great to see this kind of discution.

What interested me more was the idea of one being more content/politically driven and one being more 'supportive? of the club experience? then leading to the question where do narrative visuals belong.
The ?squatting in clubs? idea seems pretty spot on, but where do you take it from there, possible a question about the future of what I see as a form of interactive real-time filmmaking. Club, gallery, cinema, I don?t know but it gets me thinking about pushing the boundaries of vjing to a whole new contextual/theoretical level?.

Obviously that?s just me, as im narrative driven.

Hhmmm ponder ponder
:)

[unjulation]

i aint seen it yet to scared to see and hear what i look like ;)

[unjulation]

right after a few days to find my bareings, what were the points that were important within this space

1) the indervidual perception that the work they/you/me is/are involved within is important to merit comet

2) if you are within a av sepeciality then by the very nature of it it will/can move you forward like no outher sapce can

3) once we take on bord that we as, vj's, are so dissepriate and indervidual we can actualy start haveing a conversation with the outside world

mind this is only my percerpition and.................

[holly]

None of those points have anything to do with sampling vs self-made content. Unj, were those the notes from a different conference???
:confused: :P :scared:

[filf]

At the end of the day if we are projecting within a club environment we are there in most instances to provide a service.

Satisfy the audience.
Make the audience feel comfortable.
Compliment all performers.
Not get carried away with our own ego driven ideals.

I have always self created but think that quite often a viewer entering the spaces I have projected might not have got my visuals because they are what have surfaced from my minds eye.

However I have always tried to serve the purpose of creating thru projection a more welcoming friendly space than your average club environment is.

If a visual has been sampled from existing footage already known by the audience then they are going to in some cases be more satisfied by that visual because of their familiarity with the imagery.

Most audiences in a club environment don't want to be challenged they want to be made to feel good in themselves. Whether it be through self creation or sampling the aim is to mantain a freshness and friendly asthetic through interesting material - compostion and presentation.

I think what I was trying to say with my earlier post that sampling is fine - it is the nature of the sample and what you do with it that is important. A whack sample with whack rhymes on a whack record will always be whack. Whether it be self created or sampled - same same for film.

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by filf
Satisfy the audience. Make the audience feel comfortable.
Compliment all performers. Not get carried away with our own ego driven ideals.

Most audiences in a club environment don't want to be challenged they want to be made to feel good in themselves. Whether it be through self creation or sampling the aim is to mantain a freshness and friendly asthetic through interesting material - compostion and presentation.



maybe its just my ego-driven ideals (I love how when its something that one doesn't do, they can so easily just chalk it up to ego) but goddamn if im going to busting my ass continually to compliment performers, supply comfort (!), and offer non-thinking feel-good pablum for the babies to suckle on. that may be why you're here, but sure as shit ain't why i'm here (what is it with this thread that tweaks me so???) maybe that's why i do so much underground stuff-- where the kids aren't on speed and vodkaredbulls and where they appreciate a good challenge, like thinking and use the parties as a way to connect with people as opposed to escaping their dull jobs and dull tv and general dullery.... i play for people who do take chances and who appreciate a POV slightly different from their own. this is a little off topic but i feel so weird seeing a call to inactivity, when we have a medium as powerful as ours, to sit and be comfortable and complacent really rubs me the wrong way....

oh and about the sampled vs self created work, i do have to say that the works that BLEW my mind in the UK (not the ones i thought were excellent, like simplistics, exeeda.... but the mindblowers) were self created clips (not self-created trippy designs but the real shebang, narrative, camerawork, filters....) like the robot falling in love with the supermodel (who did that, Graham?) all awash in a sepia film look (cgi + camea work; amazing). of course those weren't done by one person, but by crews (so see, the respect issue, which i believed we already burried is really a grey area) but still for an avowed sampler like myself (who NEVER said that samples were better anyway) i am now looking for a new camera (after about 5 years of refusing to shoot) those were great works. and i don't thin k the punters are gonna be comfortable with what i shoot. guess if i care....

[oxygen]

I Agree with littlcat .
Giving the audiance what they want is boring.
i'd like to confront them, show them something they dont know yet.
(at least i try, someway)
lately i use a lot of b&w abstacts , graphically processed stuff, etc.
sure a lot of pple might not like it as much, as they dont recognise it as something realistic.
(note: in my early years of vjing, i was out on pleasing the audiance)
therefore i also dont care as I'm showing my own creative process. Might be an arragont attitude. on the other way , one has to do something different
to create an evolution in imagery.
futhermore i dont have much with this discussion about sample versus own content. i do both. latetly more own content, but thats just a choice.
About pple saying that creating your own content is better i
do not agree on that one.
I have seen many great things made only with sampled images which were
actually a great statement and a thrue peace of art......which never could have been accomplished by own created content!

[andrea]

quote littlcat "this is a little off topic but i feel so weird seeing a call to inactivity, when we have a medium as powerful as ours, to sit and be comfortable and complacent really rubs me the wrong way...."

So true, no other artists have the opportunity to hita public on a regular basis with what they have created. Its an amazing opportunity to be able to show your developing ideas to people, if not for the feedback, also for the chance it gives you to see you thoughts and dreams become a reality.
its all part of the process. The journey into your own creativity

man

So they might not always work in da club for everyone but don?t underestimate peoples desire to be challenged. Infact especially in a club, ?fill my open spongy brain with stimulation? I once heard my imaginary friend say.

I?m new to all this, but the only reason I got interested in vjing is for that reason. Not to produce visual soma for pilled up monkeys ? me included!

Sampled v creation?like I said chuck it all in the mix
its not what you do it?s the way that you do it ta da da da da [feel free to tap dance]



:jump:

[holly]

http://www.gifs.net/animate/tapdance.gif

Well, I think there is a difference between challenging an audience and annoying or alienating an audience. It is very easy to create irritation or be confrontational. It is a little harder to create something "wonderous" where the people are taken to a new (higher) level. Flies to honey, not vinigar, then when you've lured them into a safe cozy place...
http://www.unity.demon.co.uk/images/splat.gif

Still though, on-topic:
Had a recent EyeWash where two different bands showed CNN footage, one was a commentator questioning Bush, one was stock war footage of missiles etc. Both bands mostly showed "original" footage up until these samples. From a political point of view I can't really comment (but I mean, how radical is it to show mainstream media's "careful and cautious" criticism of Bush? To me this seems stunted. A homeless person screaming in the street about "Bush you MotherFucker!" would be more powerful because you don't see this on TV...). Artisticly it sort of stopped the show, but not in a good way. There was no attempt to capture the audience first and then show them the hard truth.... Just droning on about the evils of the world is like those strange Bible-End-of-the-World-is-Near guys who stand at the mouth of trainstations as people walk by and ignore him.... Plus, there was no attempt to show the opposite: What is "good" in the world? Are you saying another president is better or are you just saying what you don't like? Where is the solution? Do you ever show "good" things from the news? Where is the old lady in a wheelchair finishing the marathon? It just seems very one-sided and not particularly deep or effective or well thought out.

example: intercut children laughing and playing with war footage. Results are thought provoking and ambiguous. Are children growing up to fight wars? War effects our children? What does this mean to the artist? What does it mean to me? Anyway, it is maybe not the best example, but you see it gives room for interpretation. It is easy to see a big war machine and think that has nothing to do with our lives so it should be eliminated, but that is not going to happen anytime soon. It is more complex to show TWO images one very identifiable and cozy (children throw rocks in a pond, etc) the other threatening and politically charged (battleship fires missiles) and this provokes a range of thought and emotions. THIS is challenging. When the two bands showed this CNN footage I could see the focus of the audience was lost. Everyone ignores a preacher, but show two images that cannot be reconciled and you are challenging their heads to try to find the connection.

Just a thought.

[eirenah]

Originally posted by oxygen
I Giving the audiance what they want is boring.

"Don't give people what they want, give them what they need!"
----------------------------------BelgradeYardSoundSystem :)

yeah i've gone OT in first sencence but sampling vs. selfcreating cannot be analysed as independent issue...

now we have to presume what our audience need, and it's not 1 and only rule for all of us.
Brainstove's need surreal stuff, Lara's need political msgs, different stuff for different audience. Allmost all of us have defined their styles thrue music they like for performance, and that way we know what kind of audience we're dealing with, and the ones who care to do stuff properly won't accept the gig where they're not able to give ppl what they want. I can't do goa gigs, Rei wouldn't do underground gigs, Pixy wouldn't do corporate stuff. And it's ok, cause that way we can give the best of our talent/capabilities/knowledge.

sampling vs. selfcreating - the moment this thread was started, it was obvious that there's no way we can end up with conclusion what's good and what's bad. It's like discussion about vegeterian-nonvegeterian food. And it's ok if everyone gives their own pros and contras, what they do and why they do it so we can all learn something new. So as i allready gave my subjective oppinion about sampling [i don't do it, and it's my choice, cause i feel i'm better in selfcreating, which is not the same for all of us, very simple, and i don't have less respect for ppl who do sample] - i'll drop one more tought - it's very important how and what you sample, in which context you put it, and how you make interventions on your sample - ppl who take good care about that stuff are great samplers. BBC-Bush clip doesn't make sence if it's surrounded with cheesy 3d lake with pink flowers, mr.Cunningham's come-to-daddy style clip won't work with funky music and so on.
So in my oppinion there are some rules ppl should stick to [and break them in very sofisticated way] when sampling, and not take it for granted [we've all seen a lot of i'll-googlize/(AddYourFavouritePeer2PeerClient)-some-free-downloadable-clips-and-sync'em-2thebeat-and-i-can-become-a-vj gigs, havent we - that's what really pisses me off in sampling]

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by holly
Well, I think there is a difference between challenging an audience and annoying or alienating an audience. It is very easy to create irritation or be confrontational. It is a little harder to create something "wonderous" where the people are taken to a new (higher) level. Flies to honey, not vinigar, then when you've lured them into a safe cozy place...


oh i agree totally... one of the challengesis how/when to apply social consciousness and how much... this all depends on the environment (club full of party goers or people seeking a challenge.... or anything in between) as well as what you are trying to say; the deeper the message, the sneakier (or more playful) you have to be about it-- humour works too (like Mondo's Bush/CrashTestDummies montage)

no one is going to appreciate the sledgehammer approach (though a few years ago i did a human rights festival and the approach there was 70% politics 30% eye candy which was a challenge to not seem to know-it-all). it';s definitley not an i-don't-give-a-shit-about-the-audience thing, but much more like each time you have a room full of punters they will have their own unique desires and thresholds so youre gonna have to be sensitive to what is too much and what is not enough

still, even in the most vapid speedy clubs i feel liek i woudl be cheating myself if i didnt find a way to squeeze something in

[holly]

Not trying to put words in your mouth, Eirenah, but maybe making your own visuals makes them more cohesive (they work together on some level whether intentionally or not) simply because they are all of one source, while sampled visuals run a risk of being "too" random...? I admit, when the 2 different bands broke their sets for the CNN samples it was off-kilter. Obviously if the whole set had been political samples it never would have seemed out of place.... Not trying to impose rules on what you must show, but yeah, a sense of flow is just as important to keep the audience.... 'm not sure how a political message (per se) should be woven into an otherwise psychedelic set, but it seems like it could have been done with more purpose..., more planning....

Eh, who has time to sort it all out? Maybe it just so happens each band had one political "song" and I just felt they were a sudden jump from the rest of the show(s). I think it was more of a compositional issue than a narritive issue, but maybe they mean the same thing...?

[eirenah]

Originally posted by holly
Not trying to put words in your mouth, Eirenah, but maybe making your own visuals makes them more cohesive (they work together on some level whether intentionally or not) simply because they are all of one source, while sampled visuals run a risk of being "too" random...?

Yes, i am willing to sign that one Holly : )
I was trying to say something similar (but thinking on croatian, writing in english - some toughts dissapear during that process). With sampled visuals you have to take more care about combinig stuff together and give more effort to create quality, coherent unit - which kinda comes by default with selfcreated visuals...

[neeko]

what about those who can't create thier own stuff.

reading through these post the debate seems to be about choice.
some don't have the choice.

some footage cannot be remade, like the berlin wall coming down.

some footage can be created easily, all footage iis created by someone. sampled vs self created maynot be the heart of the debate. it could be disguising a bigger debate about using others footage as a shortcut to quick content vs making the effort.

[vjpixylight]

why not self create and use samples too? surely there is room for all..
I think visual samples should be used sparingly the way most audio samples are..(at least in most genres)
What is important is that you mix for the music, like erienah is talking about..

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by neeko
some footage cannot be remade, like the berlin wall coming down.
now i love sampling (or selcting tracks) as much as the next guy, and i have used that argument in the past (events, dead politicians....) but something i noticed in the UK that i woud like to share with you..... over the AVit i saw a couple of people with different world trade center shots... usually exploding back and forth..... in london i saw something someone made themselves... it didn't totally look like the WTC but enough to know what it was.. and because it wasnt bbc or cnn footage (and for a few other reqasons) it was actually a lot more free.. the kewelest partm was that over the legnth of the clip what happened was that instead of blowing up all of the little pieces came together it was like a beautiful analogy, a poem,

and you can do that with the BBC clips, sure, but it seemd really open. so if you want to do the berlin wall falling down, it might look great with sampled footage, but it would also look great if you borrowed a friends camcorder, found a brick wall, painted some graf on it and get two friends to chisel away at the wall for an hour or two... people will know what youre talking about--

i feel that there is a valid reason to sample, and that it could have a power that is not inherent in delf created visuals (not to mention variety), at the same time it has its limitations in a way that a camera after effects and your mind does not...

[holly]

That is beautifully put, LilCat. You don't always have to be so literal as to show news footage for people to know what you are talking about. Without trying to sound elitist, there is charm in expressing or recreating an event in your own "words". Even when it looks like shoddy crap:eek: ;) it still has a personal feel to it that I enjoy. News footage always feels impersonal to me, even if it depicts a great/infamous moment in history. It's hard to milk an emotional reaction from footage you've seen before, or especially from a newscaster's commentary....

[Anyone]

interested in sampling?

check this out (http://www.vjforums.com/showthread.php?postid=35502#post35502)

Ne1:)

[BrainStove]

Originally posted by Holly
It's hard to milk an emotional reaction from footage you've seen before, or especially from a newscaster's commentary....

Hehehe, Glad you are entering now to the Surrealism realms ;)

[oxygen]

quote:"It's hard to milk an emotional reaction from footage you've seen before, or especially from a newscaster's commentary...."

..it may be hard though i have seen pple doing it...

a dutch artist called eddie D.
he made lots of videoworks aka poems with sampled footage and news comments...
http://www.eddied.nu/
-----
i remeber another short clip (the 1 minutes)
It shows an ordinary football-match...
watching it for 35 sec. you start realising the 'ball' is missing.....
------
-visual power show in paradiso: "Piek" showed a video of Saddam Hoessein (during war talking to bush) but now the subtiles are translated as he is pissing the shit out of the belgum football team(playing against the dutch).. it was a totall cracker.
-----
i also remeber this porn-samples music-clip.(iffr 2002)
u get so confronted with these images and the music they put onto and the way they are brought to you. total bizar that was esp. all the weirdest stuff was put together and looped forward/backwards etc..
(hm, have to see it.)
----

though all the clips i mentioned exists of image And sound.
and are to watch as an av-experience. and not only as a vj-mixing-experience.
maybe that may help with sampled footage wether it has
the right impact or not...
but all the clips i mention are deff. evoking an emotional reaction by using sampled footage , and are challenging the expectations of the viewer. wether this mindtwist was made within the intention of a humorous, surreallistic or bizarre experience...

[eirenah]

completely thrue, but i don't think it's all about that kind of emotional reaction.
eg. if you put a big horse shitting the biggest and ugliest shit ever, and sound is actually political speech, you'll definitly get reaction on it. but depends what kind of reaction you want.

I am allways for that 'other' thing.
You know the 1st, golden rule of erotic and horror movies -
the sexiest and scarryest stuff are the ones you don't actually see.
Now, that i think is a big challenge.
to scare the audience by not showing 1 single zombie or brain on the wall
to make a turn_on by not showing penis or vagina for 1 sec

(eg the first Peter Jackson movie - was it 'BadTaste' or 'BrainDead'? Blood and brains and kidneys, all human organs you can imagine exploding everywhere, yet this is very funny movie - a cult trash horror. But real horrors - the ones that completely scare you to the level you go to bed with lights on - are the ones with scarry atmosphere, lights, good photography, pure suspence...)

so what i ment in my last post was, i think that with selfcreated visuals you have much more possibilities to do this thing - send a message without a message itself - dunno how better to express it.... you can give people the freedom to interpret it the way they want, you can play with their visual perception and even feelings - and in case of very concrete stuff there's not much options to interpret it or feel it in too many ways

uhmmm... maybe it's a good idea to move half of this thread to Surreal2... ?
or at least somewhere to 'mixing content' forum... so we can find it sometimes later...

[BrainStove]

Hehehe Yeah, with no intentions to kidnapp this thread, I think we can Branche-Out the Surrealism drops in HERE (http://www.vjforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=4467)...

Actually I was starting to wonder Why ppl seems to be so scaried to jump into the Surreal discussion Bandwagon :D :P

[holly]

wait ? in this thread what does surreal mean?

[xiayu]

hey, so like what the hell is a dick swinger?

[oxygen]

"if you put a big horse shitting the biggest and ugliest shit ever, and sound is actually political speech, you'll definitly get reaction on it..''

Think u missed my point here.
I was talking about the emotional reaction out of sampled (political) footage.
In here i was trying to explain that i have seen pple using existing footage and putting it to another level of what it actually was ment for.
By editing, composing , or showing a new light on it, the original message has a new meaning and got out of its own context.
That doenst mean it cannot be interpreted on different ways.
And what i meant was that they are playing with the viewers' expectations and feelings. Wether the image itself allready had a purpose or meaning doenst matter for our achievements "to give ppl what they need, not what they want.. ";)
It's just another way of singing the same song ..

" you can play with their visual perception and even feelings - and in case of very concrete stuff there's not much options to interpret it or feel it in too many ways"

..This is, i think, a different conversation (abstract versus realistic images?).
.

[eirenah]

yeah this is definitly different thread... but if we start it, in some misterious ways we would take offtopic directions again : )

as i said, it's like discussing which is better - vegeterian or non-vegetarian food. Or religions. Or colours. Or taste. Thats what makes it so good. it's all subjective, everyone can be right, and everyone can be wrong..
Dunno, ppl like you in Amsterdam can see lots of various performers on act, lots of other different approaches to video-art-installations-expression, and here (cro) is not much i can see and make judgement based on big-numbers-law. examples that you gave are more or less abstract to me, at least i cannot imagine in which music context they would be interesting. maybe they would be interesting as an idea if music was on 2nd place, as a background, which is not the goal of VJing i guess. but i cannot judge cause i never saw anything similar used in cool way (if i did, i'd probably stick to your attitude, but probably wouldn't want to switch to that style anyway)

but i still think creating your own idea of eg. twintowers (if it's recognizable) is much more open to new interpretations then sampling them (that's why at the end i didn't want to use exactly that clip in public for that plazmatick song, even if they fit perfect, even if the song is about wtc)

hey, let's make a thread called Offtopic, where the word Offtopic would be offtopic!! :jump2: :jump: :jump2: :jump:

[unjulation]

None of those points have anything to do with sampling vs self-made content. Unj, were those the notes from a different conference???

yes i know holly but i've got bord with this topic now because all it ever does is go round in circals

1) if you belive in samperling then you will do it even tho it can be hipocritical to outher belifies an indervidual holds

2) if you dont belive in samperling you will a) create your own and b) think that samperlers are the lowest of the low - bareing winamp user's ;)

so what i was on about was the whole amobea side of things that kept comeing up within the discusion (mind i aint seen it so my memory of the morning could be flakey) about a/v

[amoeba]

a m o e b a // design : media : web

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::
www.theestateovcreation.co.uk


hello everyone, unjulation/rovastar etc.

amoeba/scott
here, good to see discussions from all sides of the fence here.

heres a couple of thoughts for you lot.

as regards sampling, imagine if you went out to your favourite clubs and all they played was resampled versions of old tunes........oooops thats happening now! well imagine when it gets worse........remixed, re sampled trancehousetekno rubbish now you wouldny want to pay money to go in would you...unless copiuose quantities ov good drugs were involved...

my point is that constatntly re-sampling and using OTHER peoples footage without permission, TO ME, is a waste of creative space/soundwaves.
admitedly re-using other songs and clips in a different context CAN be interesting, but ultimately its other peoples work ur getting the kudos for.
EBN changed a lot of peoples view on sampling so did negative land and the NU micro sampling IDM style electronica gets attention compared to self created source it lacks originality. Id much rather see and hear stuff IVe NEVER seen before rather than the old re-hashed re-sampled stuff.

Its just my personal artistic taste, thats all.

NOW heres a question for ya........

IF and WHEN vj's start to learn to use software/after effects etc with their own made content, will they be happy to see other vj's stealing their work and mixing it through a bad copy of the matrix and dr devious's cyberdelia 92
and will all the sampling vj's still be sampling when they are creating a/v master pieces....I think not

Now I met a dude at aVIT who told me he could run at least 10 layers of DV footage live through his super duper laptop, great....10 layers of other peoples work ....ahem please give ur laptop to one of the many skint creative guys that I met, and I bet they wouldnt run 10 streams of sampled content

I recently saw public enemy live and even they don't use samples, they actually re-create the sounds live using instruments and for me it was such a breath of fresh air in the sampling hiphop world.

another phrase was, I sample because I can.........ahem

I don't because I can.....now kids just cause you can yell FIRE at the top of your voice in a cinema doesn't mean everybody does...please use some common decency and create your own immersive a/v environment if you want to, if you don't then thats fine you'll be vj'ng to bad trance/d and b for the rest of your work for free lives, me Im trying to create a viable business model for my output so that I don't have to do anything else to earn a living....by getting paid for creative work that I and I alone create. And by doing this like the other creatives that I met at avit I'm hoping to encourage more creativity and originality, even if its just to spite the likes of me...then thats fine as long as u create, and have permission to sample, now there are vj crews who actualy get permision to sample and I have nothing but respect for their honesty.

I love the diversity of views on this board and the number of highly creative individuals who are on it as well, and who are striving to create a new a/v scene, whether in Live cinema or performances. good luck to you all

if you do sample cause you havent got the right equipment to create then I aint against you.....that much ;) but if you have the right equipment and software then their really is no need to and I am against you.........come thee revollution....backs against the walls and all that.

For 5 years I created the digital content for a vj crew, other than myself and when they mixed my self created source with sampled stuff I would scream...blue murder......eventually they stopped after i threatened never to make anything for them no matter how much money/drugs they offrered and now create their own source, which Im sure is a good model/typical story for all vj crews.

anyway thats enough scottish babble from me

keep up the good posts

and keep creating new things


kill all hippies

one day soon a little box costing ?500
quid will replace all vj's in clubs..........great
next is thee shit dj's turn...be scared...be very scared

thanks 4 UR time
[ amoeba ]


:::::::::::::::::::::

amoeba design
3a cross street,
Hove,
Brighton.

[ e ] amoeba@theestateovcreation.co.uk
[ w ] theestateovcreation.co.uk

//theerhythmovvision

[eXhale]

self-created visuals don't necessarily mean 'new' and 'original'. i have seen way too many footages of roads and cars passing by. how boring...

[Mbazzy]

This is really a very interesting but strange thread at the same time for an audio cut/copy/paste samplingartist that Iam [ still doing no visuals yet ... :rolleyes: ] ...

In audio somehow I find it more obvious where to draw the line between sampling [eg. from vinyl, fieldrecording, ... ] and new material [ played on synths,, sequenced etc] ...

And personnally I prefer the sampling ways of people like Amon Tobin, Prefuse 73, Akufen, ... than the 12-in-a-dozen approach in mainstream hiphop or EuroTrance ...

... in visuals I don't know where to draw the line between visual samples and original content : what's the basic difference [ bESIDE the work youobviously put yourself into it !] by showing
eg. fast moving thunderclouds, apposed to the same thing sampled eg. out of Koyaanisqatsi ? Both 3 sec loops ...

In my limited view it's not the raw source material that's to be put in question, but what is being done with it ... ad there the keyword is : CREATIVITY ....

[unjulation]

"i sample because i can" as quoted by me as my parting statment and inspired by holly saying dont justifie it just do it

all good points amobea but looks like we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one, mind when the reverlution comes i'm just heading for the hills and let you guys argue amongest your selves

i just dont feel the need to create anything apart from the mix it's self, it's such an untaped vain that i've got a few more years yet blood sucking that one, he, he

like i said in the discusion, to me what is the important thing is that the punters have a good time, and as a jobing vj, who incidentley absolutly loves the whole club enviroment and its throw away culture and the fact that that it is nothing more then geting of your head and haveing a time in reality, you could say that peeps just waste 6 hours of their lives untill we die and its not meeningfull well yhe and the rest of the of the things we do are sooooooooo meningfull to reality as a whole? personaly i think not

so if i create soimething that looks good it dont matter to me ware the sorces came from, i'm a vj not an artist, someone might look at my work and say it's artistic but thats their perception of it not mine

its like i have had meny an agument about the worth of it all and personaly i just make prety pictures in clubs that people who are there will (hopefully) like, with the full understanding about the punters/munters head space at the time, its what i like doing and its what i want to do and its what i do, nothing more nothing less

if you want to change the world stop farting about with clubs or vj'ing or a/v because as far as i can see thats not going to change anything

as for the viable biz model i dont think that it just lies within self created stuf there are plenty of avenues that an indervidual can take such as runing workshops, working in f.e. colagues, etc etc

and as for pl;aying at bad trance parties etc etc thats a valued judgment made by your self that i personaly dont think holds up in the light of day, that dictates that all the partrys i have done are bad, the pay might be but thats a seperate isue based upon the promoter being greedy, but the punters luv what i'm doing

right got a hold of the tigers tail i think cos what is the diferance between createing things in non-lineier editing software such as after efects etc and creating new stuf useing what i serpose would be termed as linier editing softs such as resolume etc?

again ill go back to the end result as being the most important thing, if the prety pictures you create come from sampeld stuf or non sampeled stuf so what as long as the punters enjoyed what they saw on the screen they are the ones who are paying your wages, yes you could say its the promoter but if they aint geting peeps through the door you aint goin to be paid

kill all hippies

to bloody right espesily those ones with long hair and smelly feet, bloody sope dodgers

on your finall point i aint afrid of no box there will always be a space/room for the cult of the personality/caracter and that in it's self can go a long long way..............

[eirenah]

very nice said, amoeba.
only i would disagree about -lack of equipement kills people's creativity. i wouldn't say so. huh, no equipement at all can kill it (but then you would find another ventile to bread thrue), but P2, P3, G3, G4 zxyw(?&?=$% it's all the same for creativity. if you've got a great idea you'll find a way to realize it... (ok, if you don't have a camera, you can't shoot anything, but if you have lousy camera every good idea can be realised. the same with computers)

exhale what you said i'm signing it 100%. We didn't touch the big question - what if someone wants, but isn't able to create? i claim everyone with visual awareness is able to create (and i don't mean Visual ARTISTS, i mean ALL VJS, mixers, samplers, if you're a VJ, you've GOT to have visual awareness, and sence for what's visually good and what's not) - BUT there are some more parameters, such as computing skills, not everyone is good at it. And there are lots of ppl with great mixing skills, also with sence for great recycling and editing - i say they should sample. but give credits. ask authors.

Mbazzy > Music samplers like AmonTobin and Akufen are working on their newalbumsamples for months, a vj sampler prepares his set for hours. now you do the math. If vjing ever takes the amon-tobin route in sampling, i'll start to pay tickets only to see someon's visual performance.

[amoeba]

a m o e b a // design : media : web

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
// 07112k+3 > video / web / motion graphics
www.theestateovcreation.co.uk

/hola dudes,
fair point unj re mixing, as I dont mix as such any more
I forget that u guys get the buzz out of the synergy of live mixing
source that doesnt match the music normally, but when mixed with others
does, its been a long time since I mixed video source together but
I do remember the buzz, and i respect ur stance.

Im always gonna be on the creation side, Over the years Ive trained
various people in various sofwares and disciplines and if theres one thing I know is that people ARE creative and can teach theirselves HOW to be MORE
creative, if you have any sort of visual awareness, which everyone here has then UR creative, and can train urselfs to be moreso. try harder.

weve all hypnotised ourselfs in many ways playing about with visual imagery. I see it as an extension ov thee majikal act, i.e creating something out of nothing with intent, purpose and determination.
but as I generally see all creative things as a majikal act I realise the power these things can have, thus using my logic I have deduced that if this is the case then I'd rather be doing majik with images and source that I have created and that I have thee power over....again this is a personal outlook,
which I have hypnoteezed my self with. Ive never liked the idea of directly using without permission other peoples majik/power sources/creativity/output, to me it always felt wrong.

personally I have a desire to reach as many pople as possible with my brand/style/take on ov a/v, Ive always desired TV/film/media output and for me sampling etc isnt even an option for that type ov goal. I want grannies/masons/people in white sportswear and families to experience my particular creative output not just munted clubbers ;)

I like the p2, g3, g4 bit....Ive seen great stuff of gameboy cameras, Ive just did 23 1 minute palindromic a/v animations shot on a web camera,
years ago I did a TV sting 10 seconds long on a quadra 66av which ran at an amazing 16 mghz.....it took 8 days to render,and played like a slug, but it looked great and still looks good today I even know some a/v artists using ataris, and b/w tv's and there stuf is amazin.
if ur creative and have thee intent youl always find away.

again thanks 4 UR time
[ amoeba ]


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

[ e ] amoeba@theestateovcreation.co.uk
[ w ] theestateovcreation.co.uk

//theerhythmovvision

[neeko]

amoeba touched on a good point.
Permission.
what right have any of us to just take the work of someone else and play it because we can?
theres nothing to respect in that.

[Mbazzy]

OK, I start seeing somewhat clearer in this discussion .

Eirenah, thanx for pointing out : I had the impression that this was more about how to obtain your raw material BEFORE starting to work on it etc . ... I do understand there is not so much pride in just using off-the-shelf sampled material , even when layered a dozen times ...

But I think that using sampled material the "Amon Tobin" way is the equivalent of creating original content , even if it's from a CNN broadcast ...

But I also think this discussion touches a borderline where, what VJ's see themselves : +/- technical-creative-light-engineers-like-people vs. visual Artists .

[unjulation]

this is a quote from peter_maxavision that was posted on eye candy yesterday, oh and by the way i even asked wether i could use the quote ;)

"Within the video mix community, I am beginning to see a fundamental
fragmentation occurring which is a natural product of evolutionary
growth. If such movements are to grow and develop, natural
ideological differences will begin springing up, extending the
culture's reach and influence.

First there was house, then acid house, then industrial, then techno,
and on and on into hundreds of subdivisions, separate but all tied
fundamentally to house.

Throughout the first generations of the video mix, the cinematic arts
and graphic arts lived within a peaceful and cooperative harmony
(btw, "cinematic arts" as presented here includes the entire
tradition of the moving image, from Zoatropes to widescreen TV).

The computer has changed that balance. For an enormous variety of
reasons, graphic possibilities far outweigh moving pictorial
manipulation at this stage of the digital revolution. Therefore, it
is most natural for the new generation to dive into these endless
graphic wonderlands (though the pictorialists will definitely be back
on center stage within the next 5-10 years). So a fundamental split
occurs on one level (graphic vs. cinematic, i.e. non-sampling vs.
sampling), yet they are still held together by a basic bond: their
fascination with manipulating the image.

As the various strains of house musical culture learned very quickly,
it is much more fulfilling (and so much easier on the nervous system)
to ENCOURAGE such growth in a culture rather than creating a
situation so divisive, the whole culture starts to break apart. In
house culture, separate rooms had separate kinds of music. Yet the
people flowed back and forth, enjoying all. Happy to have many new
choices.

The same can be true in the video mix community. My humble advice is
for everybody to just hang loose, watch all the different strands
appear and fade and reappear as the culture grows. Relax and enjoy
it. Everyone will be happier.

Creativity gets you through the day,
;^)

Peter"

i kinda like this veiw point as a whole

[TechnoLust]

The previous post by unjulation is potentially a fantastic bookend to this discussion thread. Quite simply, he touches on the most essential factor for any VJ--creativity.

Whether you sample footage, or whether you author your own footage, the VJ performance is about your creativity. More than that, it's not just about your creativity as you perform, but your creativity in your preparations and organization of material prior to the performance. It's about your creativity in building your system of hardware and software to perform your collection of material.

My own view of the "purpose" of visuals is to make the environment of the event more cohesive. I believe there are limitless ways to add cohesion, but here's a few of the more obvious examples...

* announcing performers
* incorporating a live camera feed of the performer and audience
* integrating the look and feel of the event marketing (fliers, posters) into the visuals (use the fonts, colors, graphic elements)
* move the visuals in sync to the beat of the music... stimulating the audience visually as well as aurally
* and many other ideas &lt;philosophy&gt;are out there in the ether of realized and potential human experiences&lt;/philosophy&gt;

The assembly of the components of cohesion leads to an experience that is greater than the sum of its parts.

Earlier BrainStove mentioned that "very often the ones really enjoying the Rave experience are Eyes closed dancing around." I think that's because one or more of the following conditions are true:

1. The dancer really can't handle any more stimulation than what they're already getting from the music (for any number of reasons).
2. The visuals lack sync to the music, and that conflict is mentally distracting, so the dancer closes their eyes to zero in on the music (it's easier to shut out the lights than the sound, besides)
3. The visuals are sync'ed, but the larger accomplishment of cohesion is lacking.

Cohesion is at least partly about using the audience's sense of "familiarity" with past experiences/media. Let me digress for a moment and talk about familiarity with a musician's album. When you first listen to it, you like the singles you've heard, but the other songs don't create that much enjoyment for you. But as you listen to the whole album again and again, eventually you get familiar with the sounds and you discover what elements of each song can bring about enjoyment for you. Let's call this concept "familiarity vibes."

Ok, now getting back to VJing. I think most of us can agree that, because the DJs are different at each show we do, we're looking for each VJ set to be at least somewhat, if not drastically, different from every other set we've done or will do (except maybe when you're touring with a band). That being the case, what elements do we have at our disposal to evoke good "familiarity vibes" in our audience? The answer is "found footage"--they will know at least some of the footage from past cultural experiences.

Providing something the audience is familiar with will add to the cohesion of the show. A good VJ may possibly add to the cohesion of larger "scene" of which the show is but one event. A god-like VJ might even create a cohesion with the dancers' lives before and after the experience of show, and even the dancers' experience of the scene (e.g. the rave scene, the grunge scene, etc.).

To conclude, I believe the VJ can both challenge and comfort the audience by presenting familiar and unfamiliar imagery. The most creative and gifted among us will find the best balance for any given moment.

-TL

[fluchtpunkt]

Originally posted by neeko
amoeba touched on a good point.
Permission.
what right have any of us to just take the work of someone else and play it because we can?
theres nothing to respect in that.

but we're not talking about just taking the work of someone else and playing it! we're talking about taking (bits & pieces of) someone elses work & sampling (i.e. recontextualizing) it.

...

in our media saturated world who the f*** is to deny me (or anyone else) the right to reflect upon the world as it is portrayed by said media??? do you want to live in a world where only big money has the permission to use & control the images that constitute e.g. 'world news'?

i agree that in certain cases permission to sample should be seeked. generally however i strongly believe that 'art' should be free & should not need to justify itself nor seek permission! art typically has to justify itself (to a certain means) in totalitarian societies.

i agree that (often?) sampling may not be necessary & that having produced everything from scratch yourself can be an incredibly rewarding experience. these however are personal choices/oppinions & imo in no way have general implications on the (artistic) merit of someone elses work if he/she came to different conclusions.

if you are looking for respect then you will most likely get it for being creative (whether with sampling or without) - not for not using any sampled material!

...

btw: there's nothing to respect in the continuous attempts of (some) anti-sampling advocates to depict samplers as disrespectful, unhonorable or lazy! ;)
if someone shouts respect i at least expect them to practice it themselves! :love2:

[unjulation]

all good points mate but once again i should point out that i was quoteing someone else in my last post but yhe i do think it makes a fine bookend to a very good discusion but ill leave it open and see if anyone has anything more on the subject

oh and by the way the whole sampled vs self created visuall debate is going strong on the eye candy yahoo groups list with some old faces and new but its got/geting a little too circular for my likeing

edited to say -

ah so there are still things to say mind i think you were writeing at the same time as me, lol, anyway the point id make is as a samperler i would use anything wether re-contextulized or not if i feel that the space required a totaly un edited/ docterd pice of film ill use it, its a casterdernada thing use whats best for the situation

[amoeba]

get permission, have respect do what though will.
[ as in your own true will, not do what u want, there is a HUGE difference ]
If ur into any form ov majik then u will know it only ever leads to difficulty
when using others product and output, but hey each to there own etc

and all this recontextualising stuff !!!!!!!! I am SO F*******N bored of that
this is 2003, not 1919 in paris or vienna I aint gustav klint, dada ism was a statement/movement not a style, the surrealist and situationists again were movements not a technocal treatment or style, neoism was a recontextualised movement in the 80's 90's, they all took from other things and :recontextualised" etc but they progressed a long time ago, the movements stopped and mutated and grew into other self communication expresions. MY MUM CAN SAMPLE, MY 6 Year old pal makes better sampled tv stuff than most vj's, I like it but it doesnt constitute a way of life or a be all and end all of creativity.....anyone here remember lorri anderson and her sampled midi bodysuit from 1978!!!!!!! or how about PopWILL EAT ITSELF from the 80's, or alan vega/suicide from the 70's again this is a justifiable creative a/v outlet done well by artists, but I think you will find that these people all moved on and progressed.

if ur content to use other peoples messages and power then good luck,
its just not for me, and not a viable commercial business model for a working carrear, and again thats MY personal opinion about MY work, not a generalisation...loook at the sampling vj/video artists that are still skint and are still doing the same thing, cool if thats what they want, but if you want to do this for any sort of time, and support u/crew/family then using sampled stuff is a road to financial nowhere...in my opinion and of what Ive observed since the early 90's.

I live and die by my own output/creativity and hopefully respect to those of equel integraty.

oh I hear a song comin on


............coz theirs one thing I know, lord above

...iz that I aint goin to goa..........aint going to goa

I belive Im gonna, shut down my chakras, shove shiva off of my shelf,
throw away those tie dies, those tibetan bells,

cool down my karma with a case of O.B.E,
AINT NO CALL FOR CASTENADA IN MY FRONTLINE LIBRARY....

cause theres one thing I know...lord above..."SING" I ANT GOIN TO GOA!

I dont need no factal, crysatal gemotry lovin cyclical new age jip,
I ant walking on lay lines,
reading no high times,
...just puts me on another bad trip.

well timothy leary, check out this ditty, he sold acid for the FBI,
he aint no 8 brain wonder, the gurus just went under.....
and you can keep ur california sunshine


....coz theres one thing I know

lord above......its that I aint goin to goa....SING...aint going to goa

...and you don't dance to techno anymore....
I dont see u under the strobe lights or the dance floor..
its been a while since I saw ur ultraviolet smile....
and u dont dance to techno any more.

now an 808, and a 303, aint the friends that they used to be
aint got no time for sweet 909
......I said good by to chicago, detroit lady had to let her go,
and there aint no guestlist at the borderline
.......SING...and you dont dance to techno anymore.......

xx23xx
:) :) :)

[syzygy]

seem a bit weird to have a go at people who sample and then quote song lyrics without even crediting the author...

Dan.

[amoeba]

DAN, that was a quote not a sample, .....for all the pedantics out there ;)

but for those of you wanting to hear the funniest band and the wickedist man on the planet on the planet then jake black/rev d.wayne. love from alabama 3, [alabama3.com virgin records], [ excile on cold harbour lane/la peste/in the blood lp's/cd/cassette]
is your man, he's a good Scottish friend of mine, twisted and bitter with the best line in lyrics since bill hicks, and he and the band gave me permission to use his lyrics in my animations, which I did for alabama 3 from 99-2001,
go to my website download some videos and watch the animated lyrics.'

again appologies for the confused,
My quoted songs were ment to raise a smile/annoy hippies/trancey pants
not to encourage pedantry.

xx23xx

[unjulation]

[quote]get permission, have respect do what though will.
[ as in your own true will, not do what u want, there is a HUGE difference ]
If ur into any form ov majik then u will know it only ever leads to difficulty
when using others product and output, but hey each to there own etc[quote]

lol, nah mate nowt do do with magic just reality situations and how you deal with them, it always struck me as good advice to do what the situation dictated rarther then what you would whant to do, a bit like , nero-lingistic-programing, richard chanderler, but i could be wrong with the name there, its all about useing the most apropriate tool/skill for the job, if a sample is the right thing to use in whatever form wether distorted or straight then use it, use your skills in the best way

now in the eye candy thredd holly go ons about useing samples because they are trendy and not likeing them but hay horses for corses if you ask me, use your indervidual talents in the best way poss, if you can see that a clip from a movie will work withinin a spercific situation then use it dont be a fool and kill your self over trying to create the same thing your self

we as humans owe nothing to anyting apart from what we indervidualy give credance to, because nature and reality cirtaily dont owe use any thing and genraly it will give you short shift understanding the reality of a situation will get you a long way understanding that we as hummens make up most laws social or outherwise will then alowe you to manipulate any given situation for the best possible out come

next question :- for who?

thats up to the indervidual to make there own choice as to what is right or wrong

now that truely is "do what tho will and it will be the whole of the law"

to counter the next most obvious argument which would be " but that would alow anyone to do anything they wanted, wether good or bad" i would say yes your right but do you as an indervidual what to go out and rape, pillige, main and mutilat?

i would also say that free will forces you into a situation ware actualy it comes down to you as an indervidual to make the right chioce in any given situation which is far harder but more rewarding to deal with then dealing with the law of the land per-say

[amoeba]

hi guys, by quoting
do what tough willI ment what ur internal spirit/guiding metaphor/H.'.G.'.A/intent knows is best for u, not what you want.
I was using it in the thelemic sense as in crowley, and if u note his carear
most people misunderstood that first basic rule, and missunderstood him,
leading to the rape and pillage allegations etc.

deep down inside if its ur true intent/goal/modus operandi and will benefit ur time here on this planet to samle then I cant help that, but if you understand the deeper connotations behind it then Im sure you will follow that guide. its not what you want, its what you need to do, and if thats sampling then thats your majik , personally Ithink its a waste of that particular creative current but hey what can I do about it save posting my cries from thee abyss ;) and offering my loud opinions, and personal experiences

love under will

amoeba

[eXhale]

well since everyone goes about magick... sampling popular tv shows or films has many advantages since the videos have already been charged with meaning within a given framework. using them can have much more effect than your own footages that people have never seen before (apart from YOU, and this is important as it seems we often forget that we do not have the same perception of our visuals as punters).

as it turns out, most people are more familiar with characters of popular soap operas or political figures than they are with osiris, hermes, quetzacotal or other gods... it's a whole mythology we are dealing with here and, if you want your visuals to cause CHANGE in people's perception / psychocosm, it would be foolish not to use it.

[amoeba]

exhale what u say is quite correct, and I agree with ur ethos.
I did this particular type of majik along time ago with vhs lots ov tv's etc.
we did video tarot/psychic TV style stuff, sampling our friends drawings and remixing and running sequences over TV /war/extreme cut ups/rituals/invocations etc. but that was way, way back, when after effects and premier were just ideas in adobes head, and all we had was vhs and huge cameras that cost around 4 grand, and we were on the tail end of that as well ;) and the minute we could, we stopped with the sampling of other majikal sources and created our own universes of colour/shape/taste and smell ;) around

ebn, klf, chris morris, and p.w.e.i made carears out of sampling and de-tournemount and very creative they were to, in the 80's/early 90's, but
this is the year 2003, and the vast majority of what Im against is the crude lowest common denomenator sampling of others work/films, rehashing old ideas, and the stagnation of genuine POTENTIAL creativity energy.

Is anyone still impressed with seeing loops of kung fu fighting and the matrix, badly looped over Qyuaisbloodysquatzi or barrF*****rakkka

;)

[neoteo]

i think the 2 are good options , just one is just one ... each one is diferent and as a diferent kind of work ,,... and where does the diference comes when you do something completely diferent with samples ... making it so diferent you cant tell where it came from ... when do you consider self created ... i do some with samples and some with plug ins and effects .... for me the big diference is rendering .. self created take much more time ...
in live i think the best is really to use the 2 kinds
what really mathers is the emotions you create in poeple with the sequence of images with the sound .. the rest is details

[BrainStove]

But, but, at the end... Are we all Surreals or not? :D :P

:alien: :dali: :wizard: :dali: :alien:

[TechnoLust]

Awakenings?!

I'm sorry, but now I feel like you're asking who among us has more religion or is more spiritual than others... asking who has more faith and enlightenment. I'm sure it wasn't your intent, but it's how I perceived it.

moving on...

Many of us seem to support, to varying degrees, that self-creators are a higher form than samplers. I think the problem is really that there are so few samplers who are extraordinary. Perhaps it's easier, in a way, to be extraordinary with your own material, because it's so strange and new. When you're sampling, you're fighting with, and trying to leverage, the footage's preexisting context--its "emotional baggage,"if you will.

If you imagine that authored footage is a newborn child, and found footage is an adolescent teenager who brings lots of past-experience baggage along with it... which is the greater challenge to mold and shape to your own desires as a teacher-of the-children / VJ-of-the-footage?

Each is challenging, but in different ways. I think either endeavor is equally worthy of respect. The accomplishment, or lack thereof, is what counts.

-TL

[eXhale]

amoeba: quite interesting, what you did is pretty much what i'm trying to do now. however i don't know if it means i'm trying to do outdated stuff. i don't see time and 'progress' as linear, it all goes in cycles. what was done then can be done again in new contexts with new technologies... anyway, i regret having missed your set at avit :(

[Amukidi]

"Is anyone still impressed with seeing loops of kung fu fighting and the matrix, badly looped over Qyuaisbloodysquatzi or barrF*****rakkka"

Ha Ha - WORD mate!

[DinaGuth]

Hey Amuki
How about seeing good looped samples over Koyaanisquatsi, but maybe not with Kung Fu movies......too 90's :-)
Come and see us perform this at Newcastle's A/V festival on Nov 22nd.
http://www.avfest.co.uk

Also Fibla from BCN will perform a complete new soundtrack...Live!
We have spent many hours remixing it, so hopefully it will meet your approval
I'll even to try get you on the guest list :-)
cheers
Mike [D-Fuse]

[maxavision]

Hi Folks -

Ung asked me to reproduce the following which I posted on eyecandy a couple of days ago. It was written amidst a much too overheated battle between the "samplers" and the "anti-samplers" which had descended into an ugly and very personal battle between a surprsing number of posters.

Greetings to all my friends and best wishes to everyone else.
;^)

Peter


Subject: The Baby Grows

Within the video mix community, I am beginning to see a fundamental fragmentation occurring which is a natural product of evolutionary growth. If such movements are to grow and develop, natural ideological differences will begin springing up, extending the culture's reach and influence.

First there was house, then acid house, then industrial, then techno, and on and on into hundreds of subdivisions, separate but all tied fundamentally to house.

Throughout the first generations of the video mix, the cinematic arts and graphic arts lived within a peaceful and cooperative harmony (btw, "cinematic arts" as presented here includes the entire tradition of the moving image, from Zoatropes to widescreen TV).

The computer has changed that balance. For an enormous variety of reasons, graphic possibilities far outweigh moving pictorial manipulation at this stage of the digital revolution. Therefore, it is most natural for the new generation to dive into these endless graphic wonderlands (though the pictorialists will definitely be back on center stage within the next 5-10 years). So a fundamental split occurs on one level (graphic vs. cinematic, i.e. non-sampling vs. sampling), yet they are still held together by a basic bond: their fascination with manipulating the image.

As the various strains of house musical culture learned very quickly, it is much more fulfilling (and so much easier on the nervous system) to ENCOURAGE such growth in a culture rather than creating a situation so divisive, the whole culture starts to break apart. In house culture, separate rooms had separate kinds of music. Yet the people flowed back and forth, enjoying all. Happy to have many new choices.

The same can be true in the video mix community. My humble advice is for everybody to just hang loose, watch all the different strands appear and fade and reappear as the culture grows. Relax and enjoy it. Everyone will be happier.

Creativity gets you through the day,
;^)

Peter

[amoeba]

I admire those who can just sit back and watch
the growth and evollution etc.

Me Im personally not up for that, I cant help but
challenge the stagnation that I see and continue
to challenge others to grow...ARTISTICALLY
which Im sure is on the game plan is it not.

by the continual use of stolen/without permission samples,
exactly where is ur art going to evolve to........

I have two words for all you samplers.....JIVE BUNNY....

c'mon evry body....c'mon...c'mon...c'mon evrybody
lets twist again....remember the video,
amazing use of recontextualised footage remixed in a detournemont style showing the relationship between ....you get the picture......
it was bollox ....wheres the difference guys, are you all happy to
produce work and have a carear built on ONE tiny TECHNIQUE that was outdated around 1992 i.e sampled footage....its ONLY one technique out of millions of treatments, yet people are still trying to forge carears out of this one trick pony..........am I daft or can others see this.

u think Im going to sit around and watch what I am part of
turn into a homogenous pile of non descript stolen footage,
rgb mixed, kung fu sampled, squares and bloody circles visual soup,
made on equipment that could produce feature films.....ahem
to all those continual use of samples troops.....give a thought
to the real creatives who cant afford ur equipment,
but could give u a run for ue money on original content.

[amoeba]
standing on the wind swept dusty road, troops at the ready,
tumbleweeds swooshing around, again I look at the oncoming
future and I load my guns and fire at will....bang....creativity....bang ;)

[amoeba]

I admire those who can just sit back and watch
the growth and evollution etc.

Me Im personally not up for that, I cant help but
challenge the stagnation that I see and continue
to challenge others to grow...ARTISTICALLY
which Im sure is on the game plan is it not.

by the continual use of stolen/without permission samples,
exactly where is ur art going to evolve to........

I have two words for all you samplers.....JIVE BUNNY....

c'mon evry body....c'mon...c'mon...c'mon evrybody
lets twist again....remember the video,
amazing use of recontextualised footage remixed in a detournemont style showing the relationship between ....you get the picture......
it was bollox ....wheres the difference guys, are you all happy to
produce work and have a carear built on ONE tiny TECHNIQUE that was outdated around 1992 i.e sampled footage....its ONLY one technique out of millions of treatments, yet people are still trying to forge carears out of this one trick pony..........am I daft or can others see this.

u think Im going to sit around and watch what I am part of
turn into a homogenous pile of non descript stolen footage,
rgb mixed, kung fu sampled, squares and bloody circles visual soup,
made on equipment that could produce feature films.....ahem
to all those continual use of samples troops.....give a thought
to the real creatives who cant afford ur equipment,
but could give u a run for ue money on original content.

[amoeba]
standing on the wind swept dusty road, troops at the ready,
tumbleweeds swooshing around, again I look at the oncoming
future and I load my guns and fire at will....bang....creativity....bang ;)

[evomedia]

amoeba, war of creativity against the sampled vj world, I'll be there. I'll start digging the trench...

[vjpixylight]

personally I think there really isn't anything out there, that hasn't been done before..it has all been built upon idea's/practices/thought that has been done in one way or another...it is the paradigne that we constantly find our world in..it is cyclical...
the way we interpret it can make these cycles seem new from time to time, but we always seem to go back to the same way of viewing our world..
I would challenge anyone to show me a totally original thought that hasn't ever been thought before, in the history of human existence, and I will concede that there is some form of original thinking out there..
it is really only our ego's that lead us to believe that we are the only ones on earth that have original thought..It makes us feel special..
so just because you can make what you percieve of as an original piece of art, chances are, someone else has had the same thought patterns that either could have developed that art in the same manner, or did, but never shared it with the rest of us..

[neeko]

Amobeas army grows.

Original thought, nothing new, Ok, I can see where your going with that.
Every mother that gives birth, gives rise to a new unique individual, every individual is capable of creating something new.

Give a child a page and a crayon and it will draw. this is a good thing. no?
Everyone loves art even if it only goes as far as selecting wallpaper.
When the child draws on the wall paper is it being creative?
yes/no?
BUT Is it making art? NO!
, Its doodiling over someone else's pattern, making a mess in the eyes of everyone and is activly discouraged by adults.

Sampling is a means by way the uncreative delude themselves into thinking they are being artistic.
Creativity is about getting something within you out on to a tangable meduim. It starts with the blank page, Take a poster and draw a beard on the pretty girl and call it art by all means. You wil have made your statment and your mark. Do you also expect others to be impressed that you can deface the art of another?
Dismiss the original as being wrong only when you can create something as worthy. untill then, admit your limited creativity lacks the ability to work from scratch just like the child doodiling on the wallpaper. Comeback when you have something of your own to show for your efforts. and the maturity to know the difference.
Locked and loaded "Capin Amoeba SIR" this may take us some time.

:yep:

[eXhale]

exactly pixy, what matters is the effect of the visuals on people. thinking you're on the cutting edge of art makes your ego all warm and fuzzy but ultimately it doesn't matter. we are here to provide an experience, not to promote our 'personality' or 'talent' or 'uniqueness'. all this is an illusion. what matters is to show the right visuals to the right people at the right moment.

[littlecatalyst]

everybodys wrong.
using stupid old (unoriginal) arguments is wrong. certitudes are wrong. being full of yourself is wrong. relying on only one mode of expression is wrong. insisting that there is nothing new possible in that old mode is wrong, harping on who did what in the 90s is lame, not making your own images is lame, making lame images is lamer, making lame images and then rather than going back to the studio barking about like a rabid dog is lame,
...alot of the most impressive things i have seen lately have been DIY, BUT a lot of the bolloks i have seen lately are also DIY, and there may be a lot of nubies using barfaka (way to show some mthfkng respect to the people who made that Ron Frike and the like) i doubt it, but there are a lot of nubies picking up this shittitude that you are spreading and that is just plain WRONG. whos the enemy? what is your point? that you are greater than the rest? that everyone else sucks? what is your goal and agenda??? i dont think this argument goes anywhere....

personally im going to mix my mix the way i like to mix, its a blend of DIY and Baraka (all baraka all the time... yeah right) everyday there is more access to archival imagery, there is so much of that stuff around now that it is less and less likely that people have the same clips to begin with.... but thet is an aesthetic, and its not just from the 20's because each time frame has its own references, and within the works that i am seeing now are issues that were not dealt with by the EBNs because tehy are issues that are pertinant now,

this is just more schoolyard my-dad-is-bigger-than-your-dad crap. if you feel so great about yourself great. good for you. if you want to start an army to (do what instill your sense of aesthetic?)
dude, you are fighting the wrong enemy.....

blech

[vjpixylight]

ah but without sampling none of us wouldn't even be here..
I mean didn't god/aliens clone the first man and women..
until you can disprove the most basic of our being, I'll still be here..


untill then, admit your limited creativity lacks the ability to work from scratch just like the child doodiling on the wallpaper. Comeback when you have something of your own to show for your efforts. and the maturity to know the difference.

hahaha that funny, comming from a 19 post enigma..
maybe your the one that should come back after you have made enuf posts to be taken seriously...



:yep:

[amoeba]

hi exhale/pixy

regarding the providing an experience for the clubbers I think thats
where we differ, as I dont vj as such any more , i.e use my animations over other peoles music then Im not part of the shared club/dance/dj/vj experience anymore.

Since I started a/v performing and putting on shows/performances its always been about the message that IM putting forward, not the group consciousness type providing a visual backdrop for munted clubbers.

I suppose thats where we differ and thats where some of our problems arrise ;)

I do rememberthe buzz and feeeling of following the music with video and getting momments of synchronicity /a/v output and messages etc. but for me thats in the past, and what I want to do is challenge and inspire people by my work in a non club type way. thats not to mean that I dont respect vj's....well somne of them ;)

I think the difference is between people who are content to watch their work over random tunes played by someone else, hoping that this will lead to momments of complete lucidity and synchronicciteeeeee, vrs those who create the entire a/v performance and have control over the effects of the audio/video and can try and create an immersive a/v environment which if ur in total control over will enduce momments of synchro/synergy and that u have controll over, not the just dj alone

I know that it sounds like totalitarian words and that this isn't what most vj's want, but Im putting my thoughts forward to inspire those of a similar dissuasion to go out and create, thats all chaps.

there is a difference between a/v performers and vj's
and I would just like to see more vj's with talent jumping the fence over to the performers side, c'mon chaps theres plently of room over here............

till nxt time

adios amoebas

[syzygy]

Originally posted by amoeba

there is a difference between a/v performers and vj's
and I would just like to see more vj's with talent jumping the fence over to the performers side, c'mon chaps theres plently of room over here............


Fair enough, but I suspect that many more people would be encouraged to join you on your side of the fence if you didn't act in quite such an arrogant, ignorant manner towards the other side(s?)

A lot of your posts give the impression that you genuinely think that only people following the same artistic direction as you (self created AV) are worthy of respect.

I agree with many of your points about the value of AV and of self created content, but your attitude towards other approaches and your reactions to people who are doing things differently makes me wonder whether you are actually quite as certain as you seem about what you are doing. In my experience, people who are really sure of their direction don't feel the need to spout off all the time.

Regarding your Jive Bunny analogy, yes you are being daft. Sure, you can pick out an example of sampling that led to a less than artistically rewarding end product. I could do the same for self created content - would picking out a bad example suddenly make your approach crap?

If you genuinely want to encourage people to explore the directions that you are, try concentrating on why it is good in its own right rather than why is somehow intrinsicly better or more right than other approaches.

Dan.

[eXhale]

providing an experience does not apply only to vjs working in clubs. if people come to a/v performances, it should be to change themselves, to enrich their unconscious, to expand their imagination, to alter their reality (or whatever, can't find the words)... not to just witness the artist's talents and create a new cult behind an artist's "personality".

i realize that's pretty much what the music scene is all about, with rock stars and superstar djs, but this is imo exactly what NEEDS to be changed. tv, adveritsements, artist's cults, all our culture is based on alienation and isolation. it is the business model behind mtv and countless other industries. people project their desires on artists and believe they "fullfill" these desires by purchasing artists' albums or tshirts or whatever. what nonsense!

the focus needs to be put back on people's experience, on their life, on their reality, on their community, on the people around them (and ideally it should be a dialog where everyone is involved, but this is a topic for another discussion), otherwise all we're doing is contributing to the further alienation and destruction of that society.

[holly]

Pixy said (a looong time ago....):
personally I think there really isn't anything out there, that hasn't been done before..it has all been built upon idea's/practices/thought that has been done in one way or another...it is the paradigne that we constantly find our world in..it is cyclical...
the way we interpret it can make these cycles seem new from time to time, but we always seem to go back to the same way of viewing our world..
I would challenge anyone to show me a totally original thought that hasn't ever been thought before, in the history of human existence, and I will concede that there is some form of original thinking out there..
it is really only our ego's that lead us to believe that we are the only ones on earth that have original thought..It makes us feel special..
so just because you can make what you percieve of as an original piece of art, chances are, someone else has had the same thought patterns that either could have developed that art in the same manner, or did, but never shared it with the rest of us..
I'm not saying that no one has ever thought what I do with my VJ before, but I'm certainly not seeing it in other people's VJ.

As to finding people who think like me, well, again I am assuming they are out there but I am not finding them....

EX says that we are not supposed to have a personality, and I simply dissagree. It is your choice to not show your personality, and perhaps your personality (as such) is not assertive so there would be no reason to show it. It would be a priority for you to be as shy and faceless as possible. Jumping from "personality" to "purpose" (as in what is our role as entertainers) I think you might be happy providing the French Service equivilant of VJing where every little table item is brought out on a silver tray and never touched by the lowly server's hands, but screw that. I have a dominant personality, a dominant philosophy, and that doesn't mean I don't allow room for other voices but it means I have no reason to pretend to be meek and servile just because some laptop VJ thinks my personality is too loud for his taste.

No one is doing what I am doing. If they are, I have not found it. I have not found samples which show what I am trying to accomplish, therefore I do not use samples. I do not agree with 70% of the philosophies of samplers, but I don't assume that sampling is generic or easy (any more than do-it-yourself is generic or easy) sure, it could be if you are lazy and have nothing to say! It all depends on how deep into your yourself and your process you are going. If it's all just surface flash and blinky blinky then I've seen some LED toys and glowsticks that were more profound. Honestly, I think the only valid use of sampling is beauty, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder so that has infinite meanings. I don't think you can say something profound with another man's words, but appreciating beauty (even when crafted by another's hands) is always valid.

If you are claiming that anyone and everyone does the same visuals as you then sit down and be replaced by a VJ-bot already (or better yet, a female VJ). I do not honestly believe that anyone here really thinks that - what are ya just playing iTunes on auto-mode? The latest volume of The Best of Audiovisualizers...? If you think there are no original ideas or perhaps more important: no new ideas that haven't yet been said, then you are living in a very insulated, isolated world of your own construction. Maybe you need to get out more because you may not agree with 95% of what I say, but I can garauntee that a lot of it you have NOT heard before....

Amoeba Guy, I started with media in performance and went TO vjing. Performance has its own wanker issues and annoyances - most of them associated with performer egos and low-life affectations (I'm an actor, therefore I must act like trash). VJing is just my video stripped down to what I like to do. It appeals to me because I can play alone or with a band or with a dj or with a dance company or to a big club but it is always what I want to show and a reflection of my personality that I choose to show. I get women telling me all the time they never thought VJing could be THAT kind of stuff, and so I know first hand it has NOT all been said before.

[holly]

Pixy said (a looong time ago....):
personally I think there really isn't anything out there, that hasn't been done before..it has all been built upon idea's/practices/thought that has been done in one way or another...it is the paradigne that we constantly find our world in..it is cyclical...
the way we interpret it can make these cycles seem new from time to time, but we always seem to go back to the same way of viewing our world..
I would challenge anyone to show me a totally original thought that hasn't ever been thought before, in the history of human existence, and I will concede that there is some form of original thinking out there..
it is really only our ego's that lead us to believe that we are the only ones on earth that have original thought..It makes us feel special..
so just because you can make what you percieve of as an original piece of art, chances are, someone else has had the same thought patterns that either could have developed that art in the same manner, or did, but never shared it with the rest of us..
I'm not saying that no one has ever thought what I do with my VJ before, but I'm certainly not seeing it in other people's VJ.

As to finding people who think like me, well, again I am assuming they are out there but I am not finding them....

EX says that we are not supposed to have a personality, and I simply dissagree. It is your choice to not show your personality, and perhaps your personality (as such) is not assertive so there would be no reason to show it. It would be a priority for you to be as shy and faceless as possible. Jumping from "personality" to "purpose" (as in what is our role as entertainers) I think you might be happy providing the French Service equivilant of VJing where every little table item is brought out on a silver tray and never touched by the lowly server's hands, but screw that. I have a dominant personality, a dominant philosophy, and that doesn't mean I don't allow room for other voices but it means I have no reason to pretend to be meek and servile just because some laptop VJ thinks my personality is too loud for his taste.

No one is doing what I am doing. If they are, I have not found it. I have not found samples which show what I am trying to accomplish, therefore I do not use samples. I do not agree with 70% of the philosophies of samplers, but I don't assume that sampling is generic or easy (any more than do-it-yourself is generic or easy) sure, it could be if you are lazy and have nothing to say! It all depends on how deep into your yourself and your process you are going. If it's all just surface flash and blinky blinky then I've seen some LED toys and glowsticks that were more profound. Honestly, I think the only valid use of sampling is beauty, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder so that has infinite meanings. I don't think you can say something profound with another man's words, but appreciating beauty is always valid.

If you are claiming that anyone and everyone does the same visuals as you then sit down and be replaced by a VJ-bot already (or better yet, a female VJ). I do not honestly believe that anyone here really thinks that - what are ya just playing iTunes on auto-mode? The latest volume of The Best of Audiovisualizers...? If you think there are no original ideas or perhaps more important: no new ideas that haven't yet been said, then you are living in a very insulated, isolated world of your own construction. Maybe you need to get out more because you may not agree with 95% of what I say, but I can garauntee that a lot of it you have NOT heard before....

Amoeba Guy, I started with media in performance and went TO vjing. Performance has its own wanker issues and annoyances - most of them associated with performer egos and low-life affectations (I'm an actor, therefore I must act like trash). VJing is just my video stripped down to what I like to do. It appeals to me because I can play alone or with a band or with a dj or with a dance company or to a big club but it is always what I want to show and a reflection of my personality that I choose to show. I get women telling me all the time they never thought VJing could be THAT kind of stuff, and so I know first hand it has NOT all been said before.

[amoeba]

hi holly, Ive never seen ur stuff apart from the downloads, and I wouldnt ever make a judgement without seeing it,
but from what I gather and have seen so far we are actually on the same tip.
apart from the fact I dont vj as such any more but u create and mix in innovative ways using self created source et voila thats what I like, no matter the asthetic style or quality.

I do agree with ur stance, and know that ideas DO come up that NO=one has done before, I really do believe and know this to be true.
Ive had a long time practasing and have had brilliant encouragement/feedback from others in the professional market,
thus leading me to that conclusion.
and would luv to see ur show to see for myself, though the chances of u seeing what I do live, are probably slim 2 none as I havent left the country in over 3 years and am to busy with DVD projects and generally perform at one offs here in the UK.
As a source producer and creator I know exactly how creative and inique works of art can be, as do most of you lot here on the list, Im just a wee bit dissapointed to see poeple not getting this
and continuing to use sampling as the be all and end all.

again individual creativity and renegade behaviour /rebellion is the only way to break the chains of corporate homogenised culture.

don't get me wrong Im not advocating revollution, cause every revollution thats ever happened inevitably comes to its own sticky demise, usually by another revolution ;)

what Im advocating here is REBELLION as its roots go much deeper and are less transient to public opinion.


cheers

scott/amoeba

[holly]

Wow, Amoeba Guy = Scott.
Didn't know that one before....
:yep:

I don't want to knock live stage performance, I'm just saying all formats have their ups and downs. I started out in the club scene as a glam clubkid, moved into go-go dancing as it meant being at club+getting paid. It obviously wasn't very creative beyond wearing sassy outfits and shaking tail, so I started promoting my own parties and remixing and DJing (had a background in media and music). Eventually hooked up with a choreographer to make stage works that felt as fun as go-go dancing, used the immediacy of DJ music, but had the structure of Dance and theater (plus audience concentration is key to development artisticly speaking). Now I've almost come full circle back to VJing as what I do is kinda like when I did sassy go-go dancing in sexy outfits, but it also has that live-mix aspect that DJing did, plus it has all the lighting and production of our theater work. In a sense I haven't come full circle so much as I've spiraled outward, retreading some of the same ground but at a whole new level with better tools....

I think part of the REBELLION you are pushing is being rebellious to yourself and your own methods. I tried sampling because it is something I don't do normally. I figured I should push my own limits to gain some knowledge about the larger VJ scene and its methods. It turned out I really had no affinity for it, but I would have just been shooting out the other side of my mouth if I hadn't rebelled against my own system.

I'm a little dissapointed I guess when VJs here get so locked into the oneness of their own method to the point that they would knock an alternative format (like battles or cabaret) without even having seen or tried it. But it's human nature to get old and stagnate. I get what you are saying about sample-scene feeling a bit dated and early 90's.... I'm starting to feel the same about audiovisualizing. There are definitely "peaks" when everyone is doing the one popular thing.... It's lame to not see beyond that. Many people will resist change, but that's why there are new youngins everyday to challenge the old and rebelle against the establishment - usually just because they don't know any better.

Cheers!

[robotfunk]

I can see your frustration with people using any old thing that they can get their hands on, but I disagree with you that sampling is always unoriginal. Jive Bunny is a hilarious example but not really representative of what one can achieve with sampling.

My work is about 50% totally original and 50% sampled, both the audio and the video. For me sampling is just a way to expand my dictionary. Also I follow a strict code when sampling ...

I like to sample stuff thats a million miles away from VJing or animation. I like using the most obscure parts of obscure footage, and using these 'words' to make something completely new. Even the samples are so fucked up they are next to impossible to recognize. I once made a tune that was more than 90% sampled from a jazz tune, and let ppl hear the original and what I made out of it, noone recognized anything from the original in my resulting tune.

I'd never use a well known scene from a well known movie, I'd never use other VJ's material and I don't use animations ... anything that is too close to what VJs do is off limits.

Not only cos of ethical reasons, but mainly cos I don't wanna look like every (or even any) other visualist on the planet.

also pragmatically i think sampling or not is a moot point ... what matters for me is quality and originality.

ive seen wicked stuff that was all sampled, ive seen awful tripe that was all original and vice versa.
quality and originality are the only things that matter to me.

[neeko]

The sampiling debate can go round in circles and yes some peeps may be creative with it, but truth be known, nine times out of ten its just a shortcut. If you had the cash to re make what your sampiling, chances are you would re make it and do it your own way, unless of course its a parody which needs the original and is a legitimate fair use anyway.

That being the case, the the real sampling issue is that most samples are used because of a lack of cash or resources to make whats wanted from scratch, The inherent problem with that is the abuse of the method where sampiling is not so much about creativity, but filling a hard drive with free clips and struggling to justify it. Which brands a bad rep over everyone.

MY gut reaction is to doubt the integraty of 99 out of a 100 Vjs who admit to sampiling. So what must the public be thinking?

To carry of sampiling well you'd need to be 150% creative, and I'd doubt if the numbers of Vjs promoting sampling can all claim to be that shit hot. so where does that leave us?
Most likely with sampling being a cheap shortcut for most Vjs using the method.
Not good news!

[neoteo]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
personally I think there really isn't anything out there, that hasn't been done before..it has all been built upon idea's/practices/thought that has been done in one way or another...it is the paradigne that we constantly find our world in..it is cyclical...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

i think human emotions are prety much the same .. but diferent

you can say its cyclical, but the new cycle comes older in experience then the one before ...

i believe in infinite math combinations ... there is infinity to do yet

even if all has been built, no one can see it all in a life time ...

im sure not all vjs know how to do seft created visual, like not all djs are music composers ...

i dont think this makes them less good in what they do

we all must walk a path ... i think its not possible to start all at the same time , we must focus on something and then go to another ... till you can use all the experience in the same direction ...
and go for more experience
but never stop trying new stuff, even if its just new for you
its a snow ball cycle

[holly]

Well neeko, I wouldn't go so far as to claim 99% against samplers..., although I might claim that percentage against audiovisualizers who make "noisecandy". Too much fx and not enough starting content and it all just looks like the same tweeker mess....

But that's another debate:yep:

[eXhale]

EX says that we are not supposed to have a personality, and I simply dissagree. It is your choice to not show your personality, and perhaps your personality (as such) is not assertive so there would be no reason to show it. It would be a priority for you to be as shy and faceless as possible.good points holly, i have played a bit the devil's advocate regarding individuality but don't get me wrong, from my point of view the "independance" of capitalism/materialism and the "sameness" of fascism/communism are both illusions, imbalances dissempowering everyone. the individual and social components are not opposite, they are complementary (as the wave-particles of quantum physics) and should be kept in balance.

in the end it all comes down to what works best for you, i admit my own sense of self tends to be quite fluid, which has its advantages and disadvantages, but i reckon we also need people standing up, as long as it influences people positively and it isn't used to sell crap ;)

[Primebase3]

Im not as scientific as ex on the whole thing :) and I'm a little bummed out of missing out on avit (busy with lots of stuff...can't wait to show it to my fave forum!), especially the discussions which are indeed getting better :yep: but the way I see it creating as an act ALONE go's a long way.

I mean your at home watching a cool flick or talking with your crew about something and then the next day you DO something with it I've noticed that a LOT of people don't even get to the DO stage. what comes out of it , sampled or homemade, on paper or as sound its yours. you made it. that's it.

people can go on and on and on about the tools/means you made it with. but does that really matter what other people say about the how/why? you enjoyed your own creative process and you show it to people or not.

like I said I don't have a abundance of theorem or an art degree on the subject but I FEEL the same about a good designed building from a good architect as I do towards a good crafted beat from a kid from L.A .


uhm.. that's it. sorry but couldn't resist this interesting discussion.


peace,

ps: I do both (sample+ homemade/played)

[vjpixylight]

Originally posted by holly
Pixy said (a looong time ago....):

I'm not saying that no one has ever thought what I do with my VJ before, but I'm certainly not seeing it in other people's VJ.



If you are claiming that anyone and everyone does the same visuals as you then sit down and be replaced by a VJ-bot already (or better yet, a female VJ). I do not honestly believe that anyone here really thinks that - what are ya just playing iTunes on auto-mode? The latest volume of The Best of Audiovisualizers...? If you think there are no original ideas or perhaps more important: no new ideas that haven't yet been said, then you are living in a very insulated, isolated world of your own construction. Maybe you need to get out more because you may not agree with 95% of what I say, but I can garauntee that a lot of it you have NOT heard before....



I guess your missing my point holly..
with over 6 billion possibilities for original thought, do you really think or claim that what you do hasn't been thought of or done before?
wow, what an ego you must engender..
Just because you havn't seen it done, do you think it hasn't?
We are rapidly approaching a time, when thought will become reality, so in that respect, we are not going to be original in any respect.
If I want to create something from thought, it will be part of a greater collective consciouness, and EGO will not be involved here..
I really think you should get out more holly, being isolated in the big apple make thought linear, and doesn't do anything to make it cohesive...
As for me, I've jumpped over the pond on several occasions...

[Lucidhouse]

Hey pixylight,
Where do you get this 6 billion figure from? As far as i'm concerened there's not that much original thought going on, lots of clones around beeing fed on a diet of banal repetative so called intertainement. Dopeheads with far out ideas but have they done it?
Which takes us back to the sampled vs selfmade discussion.
As an artist I want to push the boundries of my medium, I mirror Robotfunk's thoughts on this, I do both, yes I sample things that have been done before, but I create something completely new out of those samples, or so I'd like to think, If I tought that I was beeing second hand and repetative then I'd give it up and veg infront of the telly. Inventing new stuff is what drives creative people, I'f you think it's all been done before then give up trying and go work in the factory of veejay's that all look the same.

[vjpixylight]

you might think it's new...(it certainly is to you), but the fact is, that there is going to be some element of what ever you do, that has been done before..
It will have something in it that has been learned...
either from school, (remember your 5th grade art teacher, showing you about water color mixing?)
from inspiration, (that one peter gabriel video that does timelapse), or from the collective consciousness(archytpal imagery)...
do you use your own video taken from art that other ppl have made?
perhapse you make your art from someone elses software...
I still havn't seen anyone really challenge the statement I have made that anyone here is 100% original, because if you were, you would be the creator of our universe...

[holly]

Well, I'm not claiming to be GOD, Pixy. What I said (I think pretty clearly) was that I wasn't seeing anyone doing the shit I do in VJ land. Maybe I'm not an original *person* and just an original VJ.... At anyrate, things thought are not the same as things said. I never assumed I was the only one who thought things, but I am often the first to say them (in public anyway).

I've looked for like-minded individuals and have found few. It's cool. I'm not trying to be different, just trying to be true to myself. I don't expect to change the world, I just expect to be heard. I would be the first to NOT put-up with a world full of Hollys. Har har.

And Pixy, this "You have no original thoughts in your head and this justifies all sampling" is a tired and well-tread excuse, and I don't see what it has to do with sampling anyway. I already posted this as a lame excuse before you even brought it up (read page 1 of this thread), though I guess I can't fault you for repeating it since you seem to be convinced that everything previously said is worth repeating....
:yep:

:yep:

:yep:

:yep:

[vjpixylight]

Isn't that what 'Digital' is all about?? An identical copy...
Don't we live in the digital age? for all we know we are just copies of the original thought..
It might be a tired old argument, but it is what it is, and until it can be dis-proven, then sample away...
:)

[Lucidhouse]

pixilight quote: "It will have something in it that has been learned... either from school, (remember your 5th grade art teacher, showing you about water color mixing?)
from inspiration, (that one peter gabriel video that does timelapse), or from the collective consciousness(archytpal imagery)..."

That goes without say, We accumulate inspiration from all around us, so do a novalist or a musicians, suppose in that respect we all sample...

* "perhapse you make your art from someone elses software..."

Don't get your point here, does it mean because I use a tool, be it a very advanced one. I'm not creating something original. Does using a pencil to draw make the drawing unoriginal?

*"I still havn't seen anyone really challenge the statement I have made that anyone here is 100% original, because if you were, you would be the creator of our universe..."

Geneticaly I'm a 100% original. I'm not aware of having been cloned yet, but even if I was, my clone would'nt have the same experiances or tooth fillings as me.

[vjpixylight]

Originally posted by Lucidhouse
pixilight quote: "It will have something in it that has been learned... either from school, (remember your 5th grade art teacher, showing you about water color mixing?)
from inspiration, (that one peter gabriel video that does timelapse), or from the collective consciousness(archytpal imagery)..."

That goes without say, We accumulate inspiration from all around us, so do a novalist or a musicians, suppose in that respect we all sample...

Indeed we do:)

* "perhapse you make your art from someone elses software..."

Don't get your point here, does it mean because I use a tool, be it a very advanced one. I'm not creating something original. Does using a pencil to draw make the drawing unoriginal?

Point is, that we need the tools that someone else creates...Hence not 100 percent original..

*"I still havn't seen anyone really challenge the statement I have made that anyone here is 100% original, because if you were, you would be the creator of our universe..."

Geneticaly I'm a 100% original. I'm not aware of having been cloned yet, but even if I was, my clone would'nt have the same experiances or tooth fillings as me.
Ah, but now we could be talking parallel universe's here..
In a parallel universe there could be a cloned you, with those exact fillings, just at another moment in the space time continuem..
My point here is that we all crave something that makes us different and unique...It extends to what we do...When we say we create 100% original art, it is our EGO needing to be original, and not our true being, which doesn't need the justification of originality to exsist..

[Lucidhouse]

Originally posted by vjpixylight
My point here is that we all crave something that makes us different and unique...It extends to what we do...When we say we create 100% original art, it is our EGO needing to be original, and not our true being, which doesn't need the justification of originality to exsist..


Fair point .. though I would never claim that my art is 100% original.

[neoteo]

original is vage , if we think all we do is a result of what we have seen in our life ...
when you film something you take credits in the angle , in focus , in the image you can take out from nature ... but nature was there already ... where is the line ? who created that line ?
this sampeld vs self-created visuals discusionm ...for me its really none sence

the name COLD CUT comes to my mind i dont know why

:alien:

[vjpixylight]

Originally posted by neoteo
original is vage , if we think all we do is a result of what we have seen in our life ...
when you film something you take credits in the angle , in focus , in the image you can take out from nature ... but nature was there already ... where is the line ? who created that line ?
this sampeld vs self-created visuals discusionm ...for me its really none sence

the name COLD CUT comes to my mind i dont know why

:alien:

Exactlly!
It is for some, a way to say that I am better than you, cause I create my own content...It is a way to justify the endless hours spent on creating content for other's...
It really doesn't matter in the long run, cause ppl will pay to see what they want to see wether it be self created or sampled..
This whole thing is really a non-starter, but it does give those of us who like to argue(me included) fodder...

[littlecatalyst]

i dunno why i'm on this silent era kick lately, (still kinda feel like we're just about entering into something similar to whats was just beginning 100 years ago) this has really strong arguments for both sampling and DIY stuff.. if you can get through the verbosity... its kinda intersting to see what the future was looking like VJwise from that guy walter benjamin (way back when we were all leading previous lives....) and a couple of other good articles
http://pixels.filmtv.ucla.edu/gallery/web/julian_scaff/benjamin/default.html

[vjpixylight]

Originally posted by littlecatalyst
i dunno why i'm on this silent era kick lately, (still kinda feel like we're just about entering into something similar to whats was just beginning 100 years ago) this has really strong arguments for both sampling and DIY stuff.. if you can get through the verbosity... its kinda intersting to see what the future was looking like VJwise from that guy walter benjamin (way back when we were all leading previous lives....) and a couple of other good articles
http://pixels.filmtv.ucla.edu/gallery/web/julian_scaff/benjamin/default.html

I think it is indeed a good comparison, especially for the narrative side of VJing, to really see a modern silent movie..

[eXhale]

as far as creation is concerned, i see it as taking bits of information from a large amount of places and putting it together to create a meaningful whole. information can be words, images, sounds, etc. our brains are like information processors (input - organize - output), our 'originality' lies in the way our brains has been self-programmed through our experiences... maybe it sounds just like another abstract concept :) but i experience it very strongly.

[spaceman]

The day I have enough cash to run my own space program, i'll stop using Nasa footage.

don't mind me being blunt but this conversation seems to me like a mid afternoon talk show to me.
It's set up from the start to be an endless debate with clashing view points.

Like my dad told me countless times : "When you do something; do it well, otherwize don't even bother".

that's the bottom line really.......

[Amukidi]

"The day I have enough cash to run my own space program, i'll stop using Nasa footage."

Lame. What an asinine statement.

[elbows]

I dont aactually see whats lame about that, isnt it a valid point? The point being that footage of certain things is hard to capture yourself.

Im very much into news, politics & current affairs. It wont be easy for me to do any visuals along those lines without sampling the news etc. Now I havent gone down this route yet, because frankly Im still not quite sure what Im doing, but I certainly aint ruling out sampling if it fits the broader picture of what Im trying to achieve.

Anyway each to their own, every possible style of VJing etc has its place as far as Im concerned, I dont see any reason to either fear or lash out at samplers. I dont understand content/concept puritans. Variety is the spice of life!

[evomedia]

learn a 3d program if you want space footage, after all sci fi films dont rely on nasa or trips to space. Think what you mean is it easier just to sample, spaceman

[elbows]

Dont humans subconciously sample stuff all the time anyway though?

Like ideas and concepts, storylines. These things are routinely borrowed, directos styles are copied, acting styles borrowed, characters copied, musical genres and influences are fused.

Its not quite the same as sampling, but I see similarities.

[vjpixylight]

actually Nasa footage is for open and fair use, and doesn't need clearance..
as is all government footage like the hubble telescope pic's ect..

creativity comes in many forms and facets..noone here should put them in a box..

I think that one of the best artists of all time, Jim Morrison< used all and everything that related to his approach of getting thought out to the masses..
He used the stories of Oedipus, William Blake, and other's, to reconceptualize what he wanted to say to a new generation of ppl..

If he felt that was reasonable and fair use of sampled footage, who are we to question it..

And, as far as I know, he was never sued for copyright infringement...:D

[Amukidi]

"actually Nasa footage is for open and fair use, and doesn't need clearance..
as is all government footage like the hubble telescope pic's ect.."

Words of joy to someone who wants to use space footage!
The point I was making was one of principle e.g. "I can't afford a car, so I'll use that one over there" That's all. Its just the duplicity I cannot understand - if folks used these principles of yours to help themselves to stuff that you own or made, you'd not tollerate it. I'm not against sampling per se - I just don't think that wholesale grabbing of footage is sampling - but I guess that's another debate!

[holly]

learn a 3d program if you want space footage, after all sci fi films dont rely on nasa or trips to space. Even NASA doesn't rely on trips to space! More than half their public archive is animations! Tax money paid for those animations so they could wow congress into more funding. It's free and belongs to the public so use it all.

Dont humans subconciously sample stuff all the time anyway though?
Like ideas and concepts, storylines. These things are routinely borrowed, directos styles are copied, acting styles borrowed, characters copied, musical genres and influences are fused.
That's not sampling, that's immitating ? as in: the sincerest form of flattery. It in NO WAY resembles sampling. Creating something new with your own hands that is inspired or informed by the works of others is not the same as just using a copy of the other's work. We all know what sampling is. If it's legit, use it, but don't try a vaguely esoteric and philosophical definition of life to attempt to blur what is NOT sampling. You know the difference. Everyone knows the difference. This arguement is desperate and lame.

I think that one of the best artists of all time, Jim Morrison< used all and everything that related to his approach of getting thought out to the masses..He used the stories of Oedipus, William Blake, and other's, to reconceptualize what he wanted to say to a new generation of ppl..
Again, not sampling. Writing a song about mythological legends? You must be kidding if you think that is convincing anyone that copyright violation is different from stealing.

Samplers seem to rely on multiple meaning of the words "original" and "copy" as justification and attack. "Original", at least in the sampler debate is often used to mean "1st generation" or "self-created" yet samplers choose to use another meaning: "unlike anything else" to obscure the debate. They also use a very fluid version of the word "copy". Yes, "Copy" can mean to imitate or ape or parady, but in the context of sampling "Copy" means making a duplicate. Debating the esoteric and secondary meanings of words is not debating. No one is confused or enlightened, just angered and turned off.

As long as samplers are shifty in their definitions people will assume they are shifty in their morals. It certainly doesn't help their image. If samplers simply held to "I use it, I recontextualize it..., etc, there would be much less fuel to debate on the anti-sampling side, and those who were anti-sampling would just seem like art-elitists, like anyone who felt watercolors were less than oils....

[vjpixylight]

holly, you are the one muddying up the waters here..
"Some are born to sweet delight...
Some are born to the endless night..."
are the exact word's Jim used which also happen to be the exact words written by William Blake...
Now wether you wanna call it imitating or sampling, but get your fact staight.
JM was a sampler in the highest degree, and if it was good for him, it is good for me..

[syzygy]

What is the substantive difference between me filimg myself wearing a particular set of clothes (made by someone else) and me, for example, filming some diagrams out of a book?

In both cases, I am taking copyrighted material from one form and transfering an image of it to a different media.

I rather suspect that there are many people on these forums who would consider filming the diagrams to be copyright theft but would be happy to film themselves in an outfit they bought.

Aren't the intellectual property rights of the clothes designer being infringed?

Dan.

[holly]

William Blake (b: 1757, d: 1827)

Due to the nature of his life and work taking place SOOOO VEERRRYY LOOONG AGO, he is not protected by any copyright laws anymore. Blake's work is public domain. Using his words in a song is what is called QUOTING, not sampling, and I'm not even sure it could be claimed as recontextualization.

But unless I am missing something and Blake had a career on Top of the Pops back in 1801 there is certainly No Sampling going on.

You are the one obscuring facts, Pixy. Get over it. Sampling IS what it is: using a media duplicate: Audio to Audio; Words to Words; Video to Video. If I were going to sample I certainly wouldn't be making up lame generalizations about the quantum flexible nature of the universe. I'd just do it because it appealed to me.

If I wanted to waste time arguing definitions I'd hang out in the Surrealism thread. Why doesn't a sampler just settle this for once and all. Show those who are anti-sampling something great done with a sample (I'm sure you've done it 1,000,000 times already if it's a regular part of your VJ - I think I've done it and I only have 2 samples!), then the means is justified by the ends and everyone can go back to VJing, and maybe even win some converts to sampling! Doesn't have to be life-changing, just cool enough for a regular VJ to go, "yeah, that's cool...."

[vjpixylight]

there is no point in trying to reason with the "give me copyright or give me death" religious fanatics here..
To them if you aren't in their scope of originality, you might as well be a thief..
sorry that it has to be like this, but it is..
:(

If using words from 200 years ago qualify as alright, but using words from 2 years ago doesn't, then I say who is making these ideotic rules..

if you can use Nasa footage with out guilt, but say it is sampling to use a star wars clip, then you are just sleeping with the devil...

lets just go by a web defintion for sampling, and see if it fits in this context..

Sampling_-_Sampling is the process of selecting a proper subset of elements from the full population so that the subset can be used to make inference to the population as a whole. A probability sample is one in which each element has a known and positive chance (probability) of selection. A simple random sample is one in which each member has the same chance of selection. In DAWN, a sample of hospitals is selected in order to make inference to all hospitals; DAWN uses simple random sampling within strata.

dawninfo.samhsa.gov/tools/glossary.asp

[holly]

Aren't the intellectual property rights of the clothes designer being infringed?
Hmmm. That's a new one.
I don't think so, because the clothes would have to be duplicated and used as clothes. That is called "knock-offs" and it IS illegal and actively enforced (which video sampling is NOT so who cares if you sample?) What is being duplicated is the pattern, not the dress, more similar to piracy.... I suppose sampling with designer duds would be something along the lines of removing the pockets or a sleeve from a Channel blouse and sewing it onto your own jacket or blazer.

But just using the object in a film doesn't seem like sampling to me. It's about like-media to like-media. And anyway the laws seem to go to the cameraman. There's a famous photo of a sailor kissing a girl on V-Day in TimesSquare, and the couple tried to sue the photographer because the photo basically made his career, but the courts gave the camera "sanctity of fact" or something similar. When a camera is used to capture reallife there can be no claim of "sampling". But if you sneak in a theater and cammie the final sequence from the Matrix I think you definitely have "licensing issues", probably sampling, maybe if you locked down the camera and attempted to make a pristine duplication (afterall before digital, all movies were duplicated optically) it could be called an illegal duplicate, like those DVDs you can get on the street the day after a movie has come out, but shaky cam is just another filter, right? Depends on how much shakycam filtering is applied....:P

I think if it ever came down to a court case it would be a hard sell that VJ sampling is any sort of infringement on (for example) movies. I would think most VJ-sampling would be considered recontextualization. At this point there is no commercial gain from VJing. So why any subterfuge? Either this is an artistic debate or a moral/legal debate. Artistic debate is moot because (f)Artists must "challange all realities" so all art is valid on some level, but as a moral/legal debate it is really much more obvious and simple than all these esoteric arguements.

[holly]

You keep pulling up those obscure definitions Pixy. I think you're starting to convince everyone. And actually I pulled up a simpler definition: the FIRST definition that comes up on Dictionary.com:

sampling: A portion, piece, or segment that is representative of a whole.

In this case I think I should probably redefine my "Sampling is not the same as Piracy" stance because clearly a sample represents the whole. Ergo: a little or a lot, sampling a few seconds is the same as pirating the whole movie....

[vjpixylight]

okay holly you win...
I am going to do morally what i feel is art...
If I wanna sample, I'll sample...
if I wanna film some footage, i'll film the footage...
If I feel a need to create some content, I'll do that as well..

If ppl here don't like that...Oh well, sue me..
It is simple, I am not trying to get the world to be my friend, I am only doing what I feel I am free to do...if other's feel I have no right to do what I want to do, then They should hire a lawyer, contact a lawmaker, or go to church and prayer for my soul, because the fact that some don't like it doesn't mean shite to me...

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by holly
If I wanted to waste time arguing definitions I'd hang out in the Surrealism thread. :lol: :lol: :haha: :lol: :lurker: :lol: :haha: :cheers: :lol: :roll: :dali:

[holly]

okay holly you win...
I am going to do morally what i feel is art...
If I wanna sample, I'll sample...
if I wanna film some footage, i'll film the footage...
If I feel a need to create some content, I'll do that as well..

:jump2: Yippie!!! :jump2:

Have pride, Sister! Sample without tears! No shame in being honest! We sample because we WANT to! Not because the universe forces us, or to get back at the media establishment, or even because it's a valid art movement!

We sample because we WANT to!
http://www.childrensclinicofswla.com/images/confetti.jpg

[syzygy]

Originally posted by holly
But just using the object in a film doesn't seem like sampling to me. It's about like-media to like-media.

I think the like-media idea has some substance, but it also has limitations.

Who decides where the boundaries between media types fall? Can a 1 second cinepak loop really be descibed as being of like media with a 200 minute feature film on celluloid?

The like-media idea also runs into problems with example like filming images from a book - is it suddenly okay to use those images because they are transferred from paper media to viodeo media?

What I'm getting at is that using any object or information created by others in video is a use of their creation. It seems strange that use of some kinds of content makes many people immediately think "theft" while other kinds of content are not seen as a problem.

For me, the really important thing is whether the derivative work competes with the original. Showing a film of yourself in certain clothes clearly doesn't compete with those clothes (hey, it might help their sales) and so it would be ridiculous to consider that an infringement of IP rights. However, I think it is just as clear that a 1 second loop doesn't compete with the feature film it came from, so it seems just as ridiculous to consider that an infringement.

As far as I'm concerned anyone who holds the view that owners of copyright should always have the right to decide how their content is used, need to ensure that they have permission to use _every_ piece of copyrighted content that they feature in their work (that includes any footage of any made object not created by the artist themselves (unless it was made long enough ago), otherwise they are just painting their division line in a place that suits them and they are a hypocrite.

Dan.

[disassembler]

Work smarter, not harder.
Penny saved is a penny earned.

TO USE A CHEESE CAKE COMMERCIAL AS AN EX-SAMPLE>>>>

Carrie: Marsha your cheese cake is sooooo good. You must have slaved hours to get something that good.

Marsha: Thank you Carrie. Marsha smiles and nods. In the back of her head the commerical narrator comes in and you see a shot of her kitchen where she's so cleverly used a 20min cheese cake in the box.

Narrator: Nobody will know you didn't spend hours making the cheese cake by scratch. THEY'LL NEVER KNOW THE DIFFERENCE

Countries where there isn't any cheese cake will love your shit, but go to the cheese cake capital and try to pass off the 20 min candy. Don't be surprised when nobody tries your cake.

[holly]

Who decides where the boundaries between media types fall? Can a 1 second cinepak loop really be descibed as being of like media with a 200 minute feature film on celluloid? I don't really think so, but I think you could say a 200 minute Dvix download is an awful lot like a 200 minute DVD in mpeg2. Clearly there is a spectrum. When we deal in specifics it is easy (I think) to say what is sampling and what is piracy. 1 second? 20 seconds? (1 second stretched to 20 seconds?) 1 hour? The courts would say something about capturing the essence or "heart" of the film. If you can do that in 20 seconds then maybe....

Mmmmm.... Cheesecake.

I gotta hold you to the same standard as the samplers Deon. WTF does cheescake have to do with sampling???

[elbows]

Originally posted by holly
That's not sampling, that's immitating ? as in: the sincerest form of flattery. It in NO WAY resembles sampling. Creating something new with your own hands that is inspired or informed by the works of others is not the same as just using a copy of the other's work. We all know what sampling is. If it's legit, use it, but don't try a vaguely esoteric and philosophical definition of life to attempt to blur what is NOT sampling. You know the difference. Everyone knows the difference. This arguement is desperate and lame.

Sorry but obviously I dont consider it lame, or I wouldnt have said it in the first place.

Im not having a discussion about the legal systems definitions here, Im talking about reality. You cant ask me not to use a certain philosophical definition of life, we all have our personal philosophies which form our opinions and have these discussions. I regret that I wont be turning off my reality and subscribing to yours. I dont live in a black and white world, I see blurred lines because the world is just our brains making meaningful patterns out of chaos anyway.

An argument becomes desperate and lame when people have to resort to calling a point desperate and lame. Dont presume to know whether Im sharing my honest opinions or whether Im making a desperate point that I dont even believe in just to prop up my point of view. As it happens I have no need to argue tohe point for the sake of it because Im not strongly on either side, and I have little interest in changing anybodys mind, I was just thinking out loud.

[disassembler]

If the 20 min cheese cake satisfies the masses then why work hard making your own cheese cake. Jello has already done the work for me and it only takes 20 mins. And they know how to sell cheese cakes that the masses enjoy.

I loved those cheese cakes for the first three times I had them. But now everyone has the same cheese cake and I'm dying for a different recipe. I got to taste Cathy's home made cheese cake and never in my lifetime thought cake could be so good, and made by one person. Now I can't enjoy anything less cause I've tasted better.


Sampling in music came about as a result of having no money and only records and turntables, and no time to prepare their own content. I believe this to be at the root of why people sample.

[neeko]

This is turning into a mess.

I remember music in the seventies and eighties, when each tune was noticably different form those out at the same time. music styles where loose and only the talented (mostly) earned the chance to record a song that made it as popular.

What Happened?
just becase everyone that feels they can have a go, can not knock up a beat on a computer and churn out a tune, now does so at will, dosnt mean that what they churned out is good.

What is sampiling if its not borrowing from the talented?

Whats the samplers thought process?

observation, then judgement.
I like that, thats good, sample. continue sample some more.

Now the sampler has a collection of the best bits from others (in their opinion) no special talent involved in this so far. Its a simple reaction to the work of the preceeding talents. no diffrenent than the average teenager making up a compilation tape of their favorite tunes, take that basic instinct a step further and the teenager can blend or mix tunes into a flowing collection of personal favorites. is that just a small skill or big Art? Everyone else is doing it too, how hard can it be. dare to be different evolve to the next level blending fav video clips in new and wonderful ways. whoopee dooo. were sitll looking at fancy version of every teenagers game of lets play producer for a day.

ewww thats pretty, I'll have a peiice of that. and that and that too, The magpie hasn't got the biggest brain in the bird world but still manages the same process of collectine things that are pretty to the eye. But is the magpie an artist? or just a dumb bird collecting things that it likes. Is its nest art or just a basic instinct to arrange these pretty things in a way it finds pleasing?

What odds? The magpie Is happy. and thats all that metters unless the pretty things it takes for its nest belong to someone else. Let it collect is prettys, but let them be legitimate prettys.

Meanwhile back at source, for the magpie to build it next, there must be a creator of brand new things, otherwise the same old same old is rehashed to death by those who can see no further than liking something and playing with it in pretty patterns.

Pushing the boundries of what has been done already is still limited to the boundries imposed by the source. It can't really be new, it can at best reach being a new twist on the old. an new arrangement. But is it a legitimate rearangement with concept and vlaue or just iligetimate goofing around with no purpose beyond pleasing the ego or basic instinct to arrange borrowed collections.

Look to your mother, her layout of household objects, clothing taste and style. Is this art or comon sensabilitys of good taste and practicality?

It likely that every human has an instint to arrange things in a way they find appealing. While that in its self may be rewarding, not everyone has the ability to be creative from scratch. There will always be a rare few who can start with a blank space and create something new from their imagination. while for others there needs to be a starting point or base work.
One is a rare talent and the other is a common ability and instinct to rearange to personal taste.
Like the magpie stealing a silver spoon the human need to rearange may well be strong motavition to sample whatever you like and play it to death. but basic instinct and rare talent to be genuinely creative are two ends of the same creative spectum.
One is drivin to create someting new while the other is pulled by the need yet lacks the rare ability to start with nothing.
the middle ground still shows respect to the rare creative talent and supports them with respecting their work and the terms under which they share their creation, while the low end of the spectrum respect nothing but their own instinct to arrange everything they can regardless of the wishs of the talented who created the work.
It is easy for those laking talent and vision to feel they have the right to rearange things they like. but in truth they are slaves to their instincts and egos. further up the creative food chain comes respect for those who create something new and a sense of understanding thier disapointment in those who lacked the vision to treat the creation as little more than some object of prettyness to be rearanged, particularly when the rearangement is done by those lacking the talant or scope to see it for what it is in it original form. It is easy to be a magpie, it is easy to grab everything and arrange it, its not so easy to create something new from a blank space.
Sampling the work of the talented is disrespectful and egotistical when done against the experess wish of the creator.
Sampiling with permission shows respect and in many ways is complimentry, but seeking the permission allows for the creators input, encoragement, aproval or refusal.
rearanging the obvious is not worthy of the level of respect granted to the rare few who start their works from nothing but a blank space and a thought.
redoing what has already been done in your own way, is not special. its ego and instinct at the most basic levels. its not something to yell about from the rooftops and its not original.
Its just an everyday joe desperatly trying to feel special in an attempt to stand out from the rest while using what was already good as a quick leg up.
The very nature of sampiling is unoriginal. To stand out from the crowd requires personal growth and originality. Its a personal thing and may or may not be appreciated by others. the personal relationship between the creator and the finished work provides the sole purpose for its creation. seeing it remixed is seeing it being taken out of that personal context and being misunderstood.
Perhaps some feel that the enigma of the monalisa would be solved by painting glasses on her. doing so even in jest is to destroy the enigma and destry the value of that artwork for all that ever saw the reworked glasses version.
Anybody can rearange whats presented to them. Very few can create something from scratch that inspires everyone who sees it.
Samplers by default, borrow in an attempt to improve on the original. At best they create an alternitive pleasing to themselves and perhaps others that "didnt get it, first time". Re contextulising for dummies.
Whats to appreciate in the rearangment of anothers talents by someone lacking the ability to make something equal to what already so good that the sampler was drivin to value it enough to copy it.
Sampiling is to copy, regardless of what comes next. the wide and varied reasons and justifications for doing so boil down to one basic point. it was already good enough to catch your attention in its original form. jumping on the bandwagon afterwards takes no talent, your no different than everyone else who has the human ability to like what they saw or heard.
Sampiling does not show how talented you are, it shows only that you want to be, or have not yet found the key.
Justifying Sampiling only underlines frusration or a lack of personal ability.
It takes no effort to use only legitimate sources
It takes talent to create your own
It takes desperation to justify or excuse boot-leging content.
What do you gain by showing your desperation in public when it leaves the others feeling you can't be trusted around thier original works
Copying is the work of the apprentice. What harm is there in showing respect to the craftsmen/women in whose footsteps you are following. Only an over inflated ego could drive you to believing your better than they, while basing your ability on playing with their works.

Sampiling is pants and perhaps practice at best.
You will only know better, on the day you are good enough to stand alone.

[BrainStove]

Originally posted by Holly
If I wanted to waste time arguing definitions I'd hang out in the Surrealism thread.
Originally posted by littlecatalyst
:lol: :lol: :haha: :lol: :lurker: :lol: :haha: :cheers: :lol: :roll: :dali:

Hehehe Yeah!, as hilarious as it might sound, in that case of the "Surreal" thread (not Surrealism nor Surrealist thread), YOU "Academicist" are really peeing outta the kettle by mistakenly entering in that thread wearing those "Eyes Straps" (over here in my town we call those "Gringolas", those implements racing horses wear to keep their sight straight ahead only, tunnel scope, ignoring the surroundings), therefore you are still missing the target to hit the ball back "into" and not "outta" the fault/penalty line of the court. :P

So McEnroesss, I?m still awaiting your best shots over there to see whom will win that Game this time. :lick: :punch: :lick:

[Lucidhouse]

pictures speak louder than words

[disassembler]

Originally posted by Lucidhouse
pictures speak louder than words

Exactly.

[holly]

Ooh, ooh. So Disassembler, are you saying that if the house wife spent some bucks on a real cheesecake, you know the kind, totally fresh from the best pastryshoppe in town, added some fresh strawberries at the last minute and then brought that to the guests and passed it off as her own, that she would be a less guilty of sampling? You seem to believe sampling means low-grade bad quality when I would think it's all about the opposite, about getting better quality than you can make at home....

translation:
What's your stance on spending big bucks to buy content from a footage source like EyeWire or something? Like, If I bought the best timelapse footage of flowers blooming, already keyed and everything, for $400, and made some AE comps with it, am I as guilty as the guy who just tapes a flower special on PBS? Is spending the bucks for best quality (and acknowledging that the timelapse flowers are supposed to be comped and re-used) still bad in your opinion?

[neoteo]

ill say ... who is more " artist " ( if its this the question here )

the painter or the fotografer ? when they take a picture of the same view ... for ex ..

i think recicling , sampling , is as art as any form of art ...
art evolves , even when you create your images from zero , you are using tools , limited tools , created by others ..
we are all samples of everything else ... copyright is need to protect from others making money with stolen matirials ,, but not from making art with it ... art genaretes art ...

keep the good sampling heheh

i could say self created are the best ... and they are , but for me the diference is not so big , cose when i use samples , i change it so much , you cant see from where it came from ... inside the program the sample is just binary code that with lots of math equasions gives me fresh art .. with new feelings on it ...

:heart:

[littlecatalyst]

im going to ignore neeko's obvious paranoia (afraid every sampler is going to steal from his 'talent' and even thinking that kind of thing is what we're talkoing about here (jezuz read the prevoius megilla about smnpling vs DIY ffs)
likewise im gonna ignore all the anthropomorphisations as i am no expert on what a magpie thinks nor what makes her happy... and just findf this argument togo round and round too much (and of course when you jump in without reading anything anyone else has said.... you will sound like a silly 9 yearold..)

Originally posted by neeko
This is turning into a mess.
I remember music in the seventies and eighties, when each tune was noticably different form those out at the same time. music styles where loose and only the talented (mostly) earned the chance to record a song that made it as popular.


but this i gott ask about? were we on the same panet in the 70s and80s?? are you simply 'remembering' it from videos and greatest hits packages? really you want to talk about generic shit in music. the 80's while yes it hd bob marley was a huge shitpile of cheese, there were all of 4 genres and you coudl sounjd exactly like everyone else in that genre if you felt like it (with a few notable excepotions) the 80s gave birth to boy bands (all produced by the same guy up to new kids) um 80's=> that was brittnys birth she was on star search and the mickey mouse club,
um about disco? do you really think there was that much of a difference between KC & Sunshine band and any of the 1000 clones of that band? i remember good music in the 80s but that was because i was following the grateful dead around, OMD Thompson Twins all of that in one box, candy girl, the Jacson's Victory, jeeezuz! there is more diversity now in music than ever, blame the samplers if you want but if you were there you sure must have had better drugs than I did....

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by holly

I think if it ever came down to a court case it would be a hard sell that VJ sampling is any sort of infringement on (for example) movies. I would think most VJ-sampling would be considered recontextualization. At this point there is no commercial gain from VJing. So why any subterfuge? Either this is an artistic debate or a moral/legal debate. Artistic debate is moot because (f)Artists must "challange all realities" so all art is valid on some level, but as a moral/legal debate it is really much more obvious and simple than all these esoteric arguements.

Actually hol I disagree. Commerical gain can mean many things and one will be getting a name for yourself.

Even if you do gigs for free it does not entitle you to use copyrighted images without permission.

the images are yours to own and to be displayed as you like.

Doing freebies /cheap to get recogition is seen as commerical gain so I would careful on this stance also.

I remember at AVIT in Brigton I was talking to ELectric Method (I think that is teh name) who scratch/rape footage of MTV music videos and 'make' there own stuff. Maddonna and fatboy slim mashed up etc.

They were obviously all you can use whatever you want, blah, blah, blah. I asked if another Vj used your stuff would that be ok. They said yes. Ok. Then I upped the ante what about your stuff being used on the next GAp TV advert or whatever. 'Oh they could not do that as my stuff is illegal' but what if they had clearance of all those artist in your 'video mix'. 'Ummhhhh no that would be unfair, I would sue them, etc, etc'

LOL at the morals of samplers. There is no trust among theives.

[littlecatalyst]

ok rova thats a funny moral paradox u show us....
but what about the conversation you & I had where we saw that were really seeing things from an amazingly similar standpoint??

[vjpixylight]

I see where your coming from rova, so there is in sampling, use of sorta variable usage(bit rate) rates, amongst all the makers of content and samplers who might choose to include it in a mix, and those who do both...If you use 100% samples to fill up a nite VJing, most peeps will get tired of seeing alot of the same,(and VJ's will get sick and tired of seeing it thruought the nite. (as VJ's mixing will be paying the most attn to the mix than any other peeps there)..
Sampling when used as the whipped topping, for that deliciuos 3 hour 'home made cheese cake' that you know, has to be tasty.

There is also a bit more piratical sampling, which is down and out taking and putting your name on recorded content to resale as your product..which is what most opposse here when slaging samplers and is surely Valid..
Fair enough, it is a form of theivery, but in most cases samples are really only 'borrowed' With permission or without, from the content creator..content will for the most part never be pysically taken away from the owner, the way real property can be.. creator alway has the original drafts, and can't be phsyically taken away from them, the way a stolen camera would be..

The moderate key is in the use of well placed sampling, if done right, is another creative process that can remake the visual/audio parts another artform, without a doubt..

And to what Dion has made analogous, with food,.
I say 2 many cooks in the kitchen spoil the food, and that you also need visual servers to serve the cook's deliocious food, to the consuming public...
No different here, unless you want to be a chef on the tellivision,
serving up that cheeseball role in the VJ TV world..

[littlecatalyst]

i just wish it was called "intellectual capital" rather than intellectual property...
as for who's cake takes less time to make, (1st Diss i hope you get to New York or Montreal where real cheesecake is made.... or gimme ur address so i can mail you something sweet.....) but really what takes more/less time? sure if i were some lameass and all i want to use were Rova's visualizers, than it woudl take me seconds... but lets look at two situations; one, i get a girl + boy to come into the studio and dance in front of my bluescreen (in clothes my designer friends lent to me to make them look cool).. i then use that to key over some other bakgrounds i made last year...
or heres one example i had, i saw a film at a festival and it knocked my socks off. not only did it take me three (3) months to track down the production company and finally (many conversations later) find the filmaker. but then another month of phone tag & showing him clips so he would understand what i wanted to do.... after 6 months i finally got a copy of his work (he does stuff with optical printers that i'm sure could be done with aftereffects but they are sooo rich!!) ANYWAY, not only did i get permission to use little clips (and he's by far not the only artist who has allowed me such privillege) but in the end i actually got him in the door in my old film school where he has now been on staff for three years. so it pays to get permission... my point is this, is that not effort? did i not go to great legnths to get to use the clip i wanted? (oh not to mention cutting it up and selecting the clips i really wanted, creating loops-- analog- and then showing them to him again to get his ok) woudlnt it have been quicker and easier to just reshoot the footage? take 'inspiration' and do the closest i could to what i originally wanted? would it have looked the same? no. would it have had the same feeling? maybe. was the artist happy that his work was going to be reworked? totally. but my point is which cheesecake is easier? no, really, who can say what is easier....

sure its easier to run a winamp that rova made on bus A and then some blockbuster videos rented for that evening on bus B but i hardy think that is what we are discussing.... and i have yet to see a vj with that audacity (though sure that they exist)

me, i like the look. i like the feel. i like getting stuff that there is NO WAY i could shoot (and sure i could learn all the 3D anim softs so i could make them all myself, but imhtto that would be a waste of time tha i could be mixing). theres the thing holly was saying I mix with samples and found footage because I LIKE TO, but i also get off in that intellectual crap like archival art film theory and the like, and i do dig jams (especially AV with sound) that look into the media issues like propaganda systems and media illiteracy, so i dont think one can say "just say you do it because you like to" because there will always be 1000 reasons why someone chooses to do something....

what we really have to understand here is which cheescake taste like cheescake and which tastes like cardboard. and in this case i think neither taste like cardboard (Sample or DIY) and find it funny to still see all this slagging....
(lastly i have seen a lot of people doing things that are WAY beyond where EBN left it ten years ago... so many aspects change over time and even though they may still be using clips, so much is different that you can see through this one micro medium how times are changing) dont shoot the medium for the message, nor throw out the baby with the bathwater..

[unjulation]

If you use 100% samples to fill up a nite VJing, most peeps will get tired of seeing alot of the same,(and VJ's will get sick and tired of seeing it thruought the nite. (as VJ's mixing will be paying the most attn to the mix than any other peeps there)..

big fat pendulious nakers is all i can say to that, everything that i use is not mine and i have never had a complaint yet, my partners have comlpaind to me for being unable to stand up at any given time but thats a seperate isue

[vjpixylight]

Originally posted by unjulation
big fat pendulious nakers is all i can say to that, everything that i use is not mine and i have never had a complaint yet, my partners have comlpaind to me for being unable to stand up at any given time but thats a seperate isue

okay Unj, with some limited exceptions:D
It can be someone eles' vehical, but it sure can be fun
to drive it the way you like too...
I just think there should be mixture of alot of different
spice's, from the spice rack, but that's cause I like spice..
Purist, might not even like their visuals salted..
All in all, it depends on what your audince will
find the most pleasurable, and in a context, which you
want to work in..
:yep:

[holly]

Ha ha ha, Unj.

I wholey agree. How can anything be judged in theory? Either you are seeing it and it is great, or it is poop (or maybe it is ehh...), but theories on percentage of samples or quality of sources are meaningless without actually showing work examples. Big props to Lucid for just slapping up some a jpg and showing how good it can look. That's all that really matters.

And Lil'Cat, liking footage because it appeals to your intellectual side is still "liking" something. Even if you show something you don't "like" because you enjoy the intellectual aspects of it, you "like" the intellectualism, so it's a pretty open term. If you are showing samples because you feel it is a bitter medicine for your punters then maybe you are a sadist and "like" making everyone suffer. My point is if it appeals to you that is justification enough. I'd like this sort of debate to move away from cheesecake and other bizarre unrelated metaphores because in the end it is just gas. Show samples like Lucid, and no one has anything to say. Talk about cheesecake and it goes on and on....

And yeah Pixy, unfortunately I have seen a VJ show an "exotica" dvd (Baraka-squatsi, et al) in one channel and G-Force in the other. It was poop.

What sort of bothers me is we go to all these lengths to justify ALL forms of VJing (sample, a/v, experimental docudrama) and yet when a discussion on making a semi-official DVD for AVit comes up (in another thread) samples are immediately dismissed from the project. Isn't this a double standard? We make a big noise about ALL VJs being valid INCLUDING sampling and go to all lengths to justify it as an art medium, but then when it comes right down to it, some VJs are more equal than others.... Is this just Liberal hypocracy (we are all equal so long as it is not questioned or scrutinized)? What's up with that? Pixy, I'd be most interested in hearing your take on the subject seeing as how you are familiar with both sampling and DVD production.

[unjulation]

tell you whats interesting tho you are more likely to get someone give you a compliment then a diss, this is probably a psychological/social thing that happens in the uk if someone dont like your stuf they just ignore it and get on with there own thing but if someone actualy likes it then it will take them the "drugs" to actualy come and say anything
kinda the same thing socaily but represented and expresed in diferant ways

[unjulation]

just after reading hollys stuf im willing to send anyone some of my stuf but i aint going to pay the postage for the priverlage, lol, me a cheap skeate with my reputaion?
to blody right!
but aye anyone want a copy pm me with some details and ill put my foot and mouth desise ware it shouild be

[vjpixylight]

Originally posted by holly
Ha ha ha, Unj.

What sort of bothers me is we go to all these lengths to justify ALL forms of VJing (sample, a/v, experimental docudrama) and yet when a discussion on making a semi-official DVD for AVit comes up (in another thread) samples are immediately dismissed from the project. Isn't this a double standard? We make a big noise about ALL VJs being valid INCLUDING sampling and go to all lengths to justify it as an art medium, but then when it comes right down to it, some VJs are more equal than others.... Is this just Liberal hypocracy (we are all equal so long as it is not questioned or scrutinized)? What's up with that? Pixy, I'd be most interested in hearing your take on the subject seeing as how you are familiar with both sampling and DVD production.

I haven't read that thread in a few days, so I am not sure what you are getting at here..
For content, samplers and the non, is there an issue with noone putting up sampled footage in their 1 min mix?
Is that what you are asking me Holly?

Naturally, VJ's would rather show self made content for a recorded piece of work, in a big organization (Avit) DVD promo...and it doesn't mean they ain't using sampled footage either..
I like better to be using recognizable samples played during live sets, and mixing them together, uniquely different each time they are mixed live..
I would certainly put an A/V piece that linked audio-visual elements from some well know movie, (if this were more my style..)
Here is an example,....
I went to the Addictive TV screening for a london film fest "Raindance" I think, going on last weel called "AudioVisualize" which had 6 pieces of audiovisual movies..
The first piece was by "Eclectic Method" called 'Snake Worship Island', which was an A/V sync mashup, scratching of wannabe bruce lee movies with actors named Bruce Li and so on..(remember mr. Li:)
Anyhow the point is, they used a perfectly legit form of sampling, (tho not my style in the use of sampling )< still valid art to my eyes and ears>;)

Like unj says, I try and get others using the DVD's I make...the more peeps using them, the better as far as I'm concerned..
I guess I follow the Grateful Dead model, that has always allowed ppl to bootleg tape GD live shows, because which no 2 shows are the same, they had such a variety of live, "various artist's" song-list's,} covering so many good traditional folk and bluegrass tunes) ...and they did them, their own unique way..

And yeah Pixy, unfortunately I have seen a VJ show an "exotica" dvd (Baraka-squatsi, et al) in one channel and G-Force in the other. It was poop.

..maybe, but in a greater scheme of just applying motion to a room, which open's up the over-all atmosphere, and visuals are worked into more of a flow with the general theme..
It is a simple case of laid back mixing, which many VJ's like to do, (and simple shows as well), at least these VJ's still have the desire to make something different happen that wouldn't normally be there..

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by vjpixylight

The first piece was by "Eclectic Method" called 'Snake Worship Island', which was an A/V sync mashup, scratching of wannabe bruce lee movies with actors named Bruce Li and so on..(remember mr. Li:)
Anyhow the point is, they used a perfectly legit form of sampling, (tho not my style in the use of sampling )< still valid art to my eyes and ears>;)


That was who I was chatting too. Interesting how they do not put their money where teh mouth is when 'releasing' something. :):)

[neeko]

Strange that anybody could consider my previous post parinoid.

Sampling falls into two camps.

A, with the original creators blessing
B, without the original creators blessing.

One is respectable and the other is egocentric.

Wheres the confusion?

Both may lack the rare talent to create something from nothing. but at least working with the original creators blessing is credible in its own right.

Whats that issue about tools got to do with sampling?
Any craftsman knows what tools they will need and seek them out to achieve the desired end result.
finding a tool and chucking something at it and then jumping up and down in excitement about the randomesque results is fine for a bigginer only learning what the tools can do. Its not much of a reason to claim artistc licence. The tool in that instance did all the work, all ya did was feed it raw material.

Work backwards from your finished product. Why did you make it, Is it in some way special and what makes it so?
The tools
The borrowed sample
or Your own input?

It stands to reason that a finished product that bears no signs of tooling or borrowing, will always be more crediable than a semi automated spew from some video tool, force fed with ripped-off work.

But then again, logic and ego, don't make great bed fellows.

Scuse me while I bow out and leave you all continuing this pointless debate about the obvious in peace.

[Amukidi]

Interesting point Neeko, and one I nearly brought up myself but for the cyclical nature of this thread!! A few sampling musicians pay respect/tribute to the owner/author/writer of the samples they use - this I find totally OK as often they seek permission to use it in the first place. I never use a piece of music for my AV sets without the express blessing of the musician/s, I just don't feel that I have the right to use it without this blessing. How many of you regular clip samplers have ever sought permission to use someone else's material? You may be surprised as to how willing many artists are, in fact, many feel complimented by your interest in their work. For me, just helping myself to whatever takes my fancy doesn't ring true - but I am from another generation compared to most of the members of this forum! (including you Pixy, you young pup at only 41!!!).

[littlecatalyst]

yeh but what about the stuff that tehres no way you are going to get your hands on, especially say, if its an AV piece about media, forget it, you wont get the rights (and in some countries odly like in the states, you can legally then do it)

[neoteo]

i use it all , expecially if its american , like hollywood movies ... the best stolen samples for me ... :yep:

[Amukidi]

"yeh but what about the stuff that tehres no way you are going to get your hands on, especially say, if its an AV piece about media, forget it, you wont get the rights (and in some countries odly like in the states, you can legally then do it)"

So move on, find something else! That's how I work anyway - a good example, I wanted to use a piece of music co-written by a good friend and his brother, they were both happy for me to use it, but, unfortunately the publishers had total control over the piece, so no matter what the "owners" of that piece thought, I wasn't going to be able to use it for less than $x,000s, I was bitterly disappointed at first, but you've gotta shrug it off and get on with life. The world, believe it or not, does NOT owe any of us a living. (Lee - not meaning to sound so patronising here!!!!). Would've been reet nice tho! "Always returning" from "Apollo"!

[littlecatalyst]

without meaning to sound self important) the world actually needs pieces like these... im not sure who it was at the massjam who had all of those trademark infringements (another intellectual capital) and then the no logo stuff- but we need that kind of stuff...evenb if he oculdnt get permission to use them

[neeko]

Originally posted by littlecatalyst
yeh but what about the stuff that tehres no way you are going to get your hands on, especially say, if its an AV piece about media, forget it, you wont get the rights (and in some countries odly like in the states, you can legally then do it)

Well? what about it?

Hey buddy. Im a really good driver and want to borrow your car.

NO!

Hey thats not fair. its a cool car and I want to drive it, you shouldnt be allowed to own it. you should share it with everybody who wants to drive it.

NO!

Litlecat. you cannot be serious! If the kiddie next door gets a pretty new swing. do we all throw a tantrum because we dont own one?

Amukidi Reckons hes older them most here but form where Im sitting. kindergarden mentality just stopped this being a debate and turned it into petulant ravings about the world not being fair.

It isnt. get over it.
Im gone from the thread.
adios amigos

[holly]

um about disco? do you really think there was that much of a difference between KC & Sunshine band and any of the 1000 clones of that band? Oooh, Lil'Cat! Don't be downing da Disco! The record industry (I almost said "music" but that is a different thing...) always swings between a "raw live band garage" sound and a "slick heavily produced dance/pop" sound. Disco was the second wave of studio albums (the first being the early 60's when stereo was first invented and Enoch Light and Esquivel abused anything with 2 ears) when for the first time everyone had a proper low-noise LP player and nice big bassy speakers. Mmmm, Bernard Edwards and Nile Rogers were geniuses at churning out honey smooth hits through puppetbands like Chic, Sister Sledge, etc. Even tho Disco evolved from Latin Dance and Soul Music (creating the "Philiadelphia Sound") there were basically three camps of Disco: White (which favored cheese funtime bands like KC: think cut-off jeans and rollerboogie), Black (laidback and soulfull like Chic: think fishtanks and Halston strappy sheath dresses) and Euro (cold, coked-up, and proto-electro like Georgio Moroder). Uber ABBA's voules-vous is nihalism incarnate ? listen to the lyrics, man! You will understand the Devil behind the Disco!

Anyway, point being there are times when media comes up from the bottom (garage) and times when media comes down from the top (produced) and there's just crap anywhere you look. A great producer will spawn a hundred wannabe clones just as a great garageband will spawn a hundred wannabe clones. Don't judge history by the low points, try to figure out why everyone swung that way. Chances are there was a genius pioneer doing it right for a brief time before being drowned in a deluge of mediocraty....

Ok..., back to same-old, same-old....
Sampling yadda yadda...

[eXhale]

Originally posted by neeko
Sampling falls into two camps.

A, with the original creators blessing
B, without the original creators blessing.

One is respectable and the other is egocentric.try to get permissions to sample an obscure 80's german video bought on a second-hand store (no contact details on the video) and then we can continue the debate... :rolleyes: i haven't heard anyone on this thread saying that they were sampling other vjs' work, several have explicitely stated it was against their ethic. what's egocentric (and paranoid) is to assume that everyone want to steal your work. what's childish is to make gross assumptions and grand generalizations just to prove your point...


Hey buddy. Im a really good driver and want to borrow your car.

NO!

Hey thats not fair. its a cool car and I want to drive it, you shouldnt be allowed to own it. you should share it with everybody who wants to drive it.

NO!apart from the fact there is a difference between a physical object and digital information, i find it pretty sad how the concept of property makes us all so defensive and isolated. not to mention our "god-given" rights of land ownership is the prime reason why our planet is heading toward ecological collapse. you can keep your stuff for yourself, i'll continue sharing what i have with my friends.

:sad:

[holly]

No, let's talk about disco instead....

[syzygy]

Is noiw a good time to bring up Lockes theory of property?

Basically what he said was that people gain a righ tto call something theirs by 'mixing their labour' with it - by investing time and effort in changing it.

By that defintion, a sampler certainly could gain a moral right to use content, by investing enough labour in changing it.

Of course, it would mean that sampler who just take the content and use it would not have mixed enough labour to gain any moral property rights...

Dan.

[neeko]

Originally posted by eXhale
try to get permissions to sample an obscure 80's german video bought on a second-hand store (no contact details on the video) and then we can continue the debate... :rolleyes: i haven't heard anyone on this thread saying that they wanted to sample other vjs' work. what's egocentric (and paranoid) is to assume that everyone want to steal your work. what's childish is to make gross assumptions and grand generalizations just to prove your point...

How do ya get to escape from this thread?

eX there is no debate. Either you can get the permissions or you can't. If you can cool, and if you can't your back at the same issue.

Your still the one deciding that it wants to be sampled.
Whats diffrent between your question and lilcats?

Hey theres an obscure 80's german car, I want it. I cant find its owner,
Regardless, of copy not devaluing the original issues the crux of the matter is that the rights to use that obscure 80's german video remain with the creator regardless of wether you can find them or not.

Are you prepaired to place an advertisment in major German newspapers to find them? or is it just easier to say it was abandoned and feel better.


Originally posted by eXhale
what's childish is to make gross assumptions and grand generalizations just to prove your point...

A grand generalization is. "if its man made someone owns it". and quite rightly so or civilisation would collapse into a free for all where the biggest and meanist can take what they want when they want.
property is a well understood principle of socity, Its not negotiable just becasue someone wants to have something pretty already belonging to another. the deal is Buy it, ask for it or steal it.
All are valid.

Theres no difficulty in your senirio.

"try to get permissions to sample an obscure 80's german video bought on a second-hand store (no contact details on the video) and then we can continue the debate".

nobody asked you to play it. if you wanna play it. seek the owner or play it underground and hope you get away with it. but why are you pretending that doing so is legitimate?

Choice.

Play it legally
or
play it illegally

your call.
so why bitch about how you are judged for doing it illegally, nobody is twisting your arm to play it. the choice is yours alone.

reality check!
People are judged by their actions. you choose your own.

[syzygy]

I have yet to hear responses from the most anti-sampling people on thsi thread to my point about where you draw the line on use fo other peoples intellectual property.

Every time you film something that someone else has made, you are using their creation in your work. That include buildings, clothes, every day objects, vehicles and anything else that someone has invested effort in creating.

Every time you film members of the public, you are making use of peoples personal images in your work.

I assume you don't feel that you need to ask the permission of every creator of every object that you film when making content. I also assume that you don't insist on getting model release forms for every person who you identifyable capture on film when shooting.

Yet you believe that a sampler should ask permission for every last 1 second clip that is based on content that someone else made.

So do the ethical rules bend depending on whether the style happens to fit with your aesthetic?

Dan.

[eXhale]

Originally posted by neeko
A grand generalization is. "if its man made someone owns it". and quite rightly so or civilisation would collapse into a free for all where the biggest and meanist can take what they want when they want.if everything is owned by every living beings, no one can "take" anything. there would be no point in hurrying to grab as much as we can since all the things we take would still be owned by everyone. as a result people would only take what they need, and put it back to the collectivity after use.

[neeko]

Originally posted by syzygy
I have yet to hear responses from the most anti-sampling people on thsi thread to my point about where you draw the line on use fo other peoples intellectual property.

Every time you film something that someone else has made, you are using their creation in your work. That include buildings, clothes, every day objects, vehicles and anything else that someone has invested effort in creating.
Dan.

ok I'll bite.

Simple rules of thumb and common sense.

moving images and still images are a tangable medium. copying the work of another in the same or equivelnt medium is an issue.

however thee are instances where its allowed to slide past. Ie if I shoot a video of a downtown scene and a display board happens to be playing the latest trailer for a holywood blockbuster, then no problem provided its incidental and not the focus or basis of my shoot. the legalitys are clear on that point so no worrys.
if I shoot and individual in a way that may reflect on their life, Id damn better have a release, yet if I shoot a city street where the crowd are incidential again legally no problem.
if I shoot clothing the issue is why? is it incidential or is it to comment and focus on a persons creation. if so either I do so under fair use citeing it legitimatly as an example in a critique.
What it boils down to is have I something to gain from a particular shot and at someone elses detrement.

An I infringing on their market. Am I gaining at their expense.
have I shot a linme of clothing before it was released to the public. have I shot something critical to my scene that someone else has solid grounds to be upset about. Did I film a model whos trade is based on their image and thier image in now a focus in my work without their permission, or did they happen to be an incidentail passer by as demonstrated by the fact that the focal point of my shoot remains on the subject matter and not capitilising on the model accidently walking into my shoot, more to the point with them being a model did they deliberatly walk into my shoot in which case they not only consent by implication but actively sought inclusion by playing to the camera.

Can I include a building in my shoot? do buildings normally have a copyright restriction aginst being filmed? in normal walks of live no. But if that building is part of a movie set then it's purpose is motion graphics and not mine to include as the focus of my shoot when its intended for and paid fopr by someone else. Its not my place to gain from the work of another.

All in all its about the focus of your work and wether or not your depriving someone else of their personal right to capitialise on their own personal assets.

If I shoot a street with a mc donalds clearly visable bu still incidential to the footage then no issues arise.
But If I shoot with mc donalds as the focus of my work then clearly I am answerable to them for USING their investment as the focus of mine. common sense dictates that even shooting a kids birthday party in mc donanlds is fine in principle since the suroundings are incidential to the kids party. however if I set a movie script based in mc donalds then mc donalds is a key element to the work. yet If I wish to critique mc donalds fair use allows for the mc donalds footage to be included however I still remain responsable for the nature of the critique and ramifications of how I portray them. and beyond all that, mc donald would still retain the right to prohibit filming on their premisis without predjudice.

So basicly you can film anything in public unless unsual restrictions are in place, You cannot automaticly assume you can film any performance without permission since the performance is an asset of the performer and cannot be the main focus of your footage. For Vjs your role is often to project the performance but you may often find that you do not own the rights to what you filmed on the job (but still own the footage, and a nice oppertunity to sell it on to those who do, unless recording was a part of the deal)

so in short you can film what you like in public as long as your not depriving someone else of their rights by focusing on their specific assets by taking advantage of them in doing so.

And that kinda sums up sampiling right there and then.
Deliberatly taking advantage of someone elses work without gaining their permission is a sly action and unworthy of any kind of basic respect.

now may I leave the thread?

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by neeko
now may I leave.........

Yes George you may. ;)

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by neeko
Litlecat. you cannot be serious! If the kiddie next door gets a pretty new swing. do we all throw a tantrum because we dont own one?

si9nce he's promised us he'll leave three times already i really believe that dear Neeko is still around, but even if he isn't forthe rest of y'all that was a RHETORICAL QUESTION i asked.... liek one that does not need an answer, you know.... why? cause my question was about critiquing media bits w/out anyone;s permission, and well, i dont knwo about you in the UK but goddamn, that is a right that i have even in canada (Fair Dealingf) and totally in the USA (Fair Use) and Neeko or anyone else interested in these issues can easily see all about these loveley loopholes in the copyright law that allow for exactly this issues.

so take your patronizing shiny new swing and shove it. maybe next time you can do what several people asked you to do already and read the previous posts....

[littlecatalyst]

...and rova to give you an equal but opposite answer to the double standard that you broght up.... a few years ago i was dealing with one of californias' best copyright lawyers (he works for artists at a cut rate) and he is pretty familiar with my work... one day he calls me to tell me that he saw patty smith play at the fillmore and she was definitley using clips from my mashup (earthchanges) during her concert (remixed a little).... well it took me afew years to figure out how she even got a copy, finally figured it out when a friend told me about his buddy whodid teh visuals for pattty smith and i remembered givibg him a copy like 5 years ago..... dude i was honoured. he is not making large cash, and hes using a lot more than just my visuals. do you think i shoudl chase after them for some small amount of cash, or just be happy that people are seeing the collages that i made tobe seen? that satisfaction works for me. sure would have been noce to get an email from her but really, who cares? it is so in the past... at least people get to see it

[syzygy]

(removed by author as it wasn't a very useful contribution to the debate.)

Dan.

[holly]

***removed by author as above***

Move along people. Nothing here to see.

[syzygy]

fair point holly. It was an ill-considered post made out of the frustration of forcing myself not to respond to repeated trolls made under a string of false IDs.

I've removed my post.

What I will say, though, is that the post wasn't as off topic as holly makes out. Yes, I did use a particular example based on who I think neeko is, but that example was still relevent to this debate and to neeko's last point.

My goal was not simply to make someone angry, but rather to point of that things are not as black and white as he makes out.

Anyway, apologies again for letting frustration overtake good sense.

Dan.

[holly]

I think this debate would be shorter if we were all talking about the same thing (just the facts, Ma'am) rather than this hypothetical free for all. Clearly there are property issues in the real world that are obvious: If anyone said that my body should be shared as freely as some have stated that all property should be shared they would have fewer fingers to grab with.... Some things are NOT intended to be shared and there have been plenty of times and places where men in power have considered a woman's body to be a national resource and have changed laws to allow more access and ownership to women's bodies for the public. In this context (and it is hard for me to ignore this example) I can't go along with the no one should own anything and then everyone would have access to everything theory. I've been hearing all my life how women don't own certain parts of their own bodies that are perceived to be for use by men (and men only). The day that a woman's body (and life) is universally recognized as owned ONLY by the woman herself, I could be a little more relaxed about "all things created should be owned by the public". I don't like men, I don't like the way they often de-humanize women into chattle or property, and I don't like laws that say an individual can lose basic human rights because of the configuration of their bodies (like marriage, sex, procreation, and genital mutilation), or even punish or coerce sex and gender minorities with vague taxation and Jim Crowe laws (a woman with a baby AND a husband is taxed less than a woman with a baby and no husband...). There has to be accountability and protection for every last individual. No one is above the law, no one is below the law.

I'm sorry, but a lack of respect for personal property is a short step from a total lack of respect for an individual's human rights. In fact, in genocide programs usually one of the first laws passed is to remove the ability for that group to own property.

Sampling as an artform is valid, but ownership (or transferred ownership) by default or assumption is immoral no matter how you look at it. Sharing must be by choice. Access to public media must be encouraged, and too few people have dedicated their resources to making their media archives publicly available (Prellinger, BBC, Library of Congress). This should be the first choice for samplers because it encourages the use of media that is truely given to the public. Hopefully it would encourage more archives to open up, to publicly share, and not give just the right to duplicate but also open the channels for access. Free downloads and free vj clips are a good thing for everyone. By appreciating what is given, don't we encourage others to freely give? Stealing without permission will only lead to tighter fists and harsher laws.

[WordVirus23]

If I use a single frame of a work, say the face of a buddha statue, am I stealing from the copyright owner or am I stealing from buddha?

[syzygy]

Interesting post Holly.

I agree that respect for personal property is important. I don't think the world would work without property. Humans are simply not capable of sharing without some rules to regulate things.

I do have big problems, however, with the concept of intellectual property. I don't think it shouldn't exist, but I do think it needs a very different kind of treatment to physical property.

Equating IP to physical property is, in my opinion, not very useful. Equating IP and physical property to a persons right to control their own body is even less useful. Sure, it makes an emotive point to bring in genital mutilation and coeerced sex, but it doesn't really help us in discussing what rights an IP creator should have over how that IP is subsequently used.

Even within intellectual property there are clearly different classes of IP, which really need to be treated in different ways. My right to prevent someone reprinting one of my books and not paying me any royalties (copyright) is very different from a right for me to prevent anyone else using a technical solution I came up with (patent)

Trying to define all of these different things as the same thing, property, and treating them all in the same way is a recipe of disaster.

Imagine if patents were treated like physical property - handed down to the heirs of the original registrant in perpetuity. Technical innovation and progress would be stifled as those with crucial patents would have control forever rather than for a limited time.

Imagine if copyrighted information was treated like physical property - there would be no crime of copyright theft in most countries where law is based on English law at least (Under English law, property theft has to involve the owner being deprived of the property so copyright theft requires a different definition)

A person is found guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving him of it; and `thief' and `steal' shall be construed accordingly.
(Theft Act (1968))

It seems that the USA defines theft similarly:
theft definition ? theft is a felony; it is the taking of someone else?s property with the intention of permanently depriving that person of it.

So it seems clear to me that a different treatment is required for IP as that used for physical property (which, in turn, needs a different treatment from humans themselves)

Dan.

[holly]

I agree, Dan. The problem is who gets to decide what is what? Maybe my post sounded bleeding heart feminist to some of you, but the point is some societies recognize women as property, quite a few men in Western society also see women as little more than property which they would rather destroy than "share" or allow autonomy. If something as obvious as a human being can be manipulated, owned, and used (and we're not talking rare or obscure examples), who honestly believes that morals can be dictated (or go unchecked) by another?

The concept of everything being free is just uncomfortable, especially in a forum where half(?) are saying they don't want to participate. Clearly the goal would be to create a large "commune" of mutually sharing members that does not infringe on the independance of those who'd rather not. If a free Archive like that existed, open to all who wished to participate, wouldn't it hold the best examples of all IP? Those who did not participate would shut themselves out of the best resource in the world....

But that's not really what we are seeing, is it?.... Obviously the idea of public domain archives are relatively new so it's hard to see how things will turn out in a hundred years.

I am less sure how Patents are so different from Copyrights ? Although the law certainly recognizes a HUGE difference.... Why is an invention (basically an idea) more important to society than an IP (basically another idea) so that patents are made public after only 10 years? Or is it the other way around: IP is so sacred that it is protected virtually forever from the public?

Sometimes I get the idea that some Samplers sample because they believe content has very little value.... Is that true? They simply don't see any innitial value attached to what they use...?

[spaceman]

let's say i have a loop from E.T. (the movie) of the alien's finger touching the boy's finger with the same detail from the michealangelo's painting (god touching adam's finger)
here's the couple of things to think about:
1. Steven Speilberg ripped the idea from michealangelo (did he ask permition?, did he pay a license fee? would the original creator be happy to have his religious master piece used in a capitalistic piece of hollywood fun?)
2. do I have to get permition to use an idea that already is a rip-off
3. It is obvious that both images are not my own: the audience knows it and i don't claim otherwize. so i'm not actualy stealing anything?: more like borrowing without asking.
4. I am depriving the original creators from due revenue?: When's the last time you saw steven speilberg playing on motion dive in a night club? or michealangelo for that matter.
5. Is my work original?: well actualy it is (cos content matters)
-seeing 3 seconds looped has a diferent impact than the same scene when seen as part of a 1.30 work
-the new piece rize's mad kind ever lasting question about "the creator": could we be the product of of an alien civilation's genetic experiment (that failed it seems) or was the earth created in 7 days by some god with an aboundance of facial hair?
-Using e.t. footage instead of a 3d rendering of more or less the same thing is also an enlighten and artistic choice (as opposed to lazyness): e.t. being an 80's pop icon it triggers in the audience a whole set of feelings and memories to create that "nostalgic" mood which i seek, bringing the issue closer to home.

6. a could also have drawn the michealangelo layer myself just to say "i did it all myself" but hey, pigment on a church ceiling has that hard to reproduce texture. maybe i'm ripping off the photographer but really there are so many prints and files of this detail that it would be hard to tell who actualy took the picture.

7. where would the music scene right now if Mr Akai never invented the sampler?

So, this is an example where there's obviously copyright ect.. issue.
Sampling is healthy, sampling is good, so is making all original sets. The truth is the some people are good and some suck whether they sample or not (yes, I know it's all a matter of taste and perspective blahblahblah but still....)

Last thing I wanted to ad:
-all you out there preaching law and order and copyrights and IP ect... you must be perfect citizens: never breaking th law in anyways. or does it just apply to visuals? never smoked a joint, never ever used a pirated software or plug in, never had sex with a minor, never drove without a sit belt, never attended "an ilegal meeting of more than 10 people".......

[Rovastar]

Originally posted by spaceman
-Using e.t. footage instead of a 3d rendering of more or less the same thing is also an enlighten and artistic choice (as opposed to lazyness): e.t. being an 80's pop icon it triggers in the audience a whole set of feelings and memories to create that "nostalgic" mood which i seek, bringing the issue closer to home.

No you are being lazy and want cheap recognition of others work in your set.


Originally posted by spaceman
-
Last thing I wanted to ad:
-all you out there preaching law and order and copyrights and IP ect... you must be perfect citizens: never breaking th law in anyways. or does it just apply to visuals? never smoked a joint, never ever used a pirated software or plug in, never had sex with a minor, never drove without a sit belt, never attended "an ilegal meeting of more than 10 people".......

I have no idea what your background is and I see the point you are making impliying that we have al;l done the above things. BUT ' never had sex with a minor' wtf are you on sicko?

[Amukidi]

Well, I've always been ambivalent about this issue - in as much as I know that there are some folks sampling out there that really hit the spot - please note the use of the word "some"! Most, however, don't do it for me as there does seem to be a lot of confusion over what "sampling" actually means, and for many VJs, it seems to mean wholesale use of whatever they can lay their hands on, which, in this digital age is everything! Space man said: "The truth is the some people are good and some suck whether they sample or not (yes, I know it's all a matter of taste and perspective blahblahblah but still....) and I feel there is a lot of truth in that. What is really odd though, is that, if anything, I'm being moved more towards the "anti sampling" fold purely from the desperate, shady and thinly disguised justifications that some folks are coming up with to defend their practice.
This topic will not resolve itself, here or anywhere else for that matter. It is a bit like debating politics in a pub - a no hoper and all will have to settle for agreeing to disagree. The only thing that I'd say to those who've never tried the "Blank canvas" approach, is try it! (yes - I have tried sampling, fun for a few days then I got bored).

[littlecatalyst]

i tried painting for a few days..... it was really boring
i tried sculpture for a few days.... it was not all that
i tried guitar for a few days, its a pretty lame instrument
i tried sex a few times.... its a little dull
i spoke italien once, its a pretty lame language

that is a really funny thing to saY John, i mean it often takes a little more timetodeveliop skills with any medium, you know?

perhaps the samplers arguments are turning you off, but it also may be that no other aspect of VJing gets as much shit hewn on them, and every sampler even if they dont have great polemic skills, feels a need to-- at some point-- defend their work (even with desparate shady justifications)... hell i dont even gat nearly as much flak for using an ancient piece of hardware....

as for justifications, its funny, some just want samplers to say "i just like doing it" (even if they feel like they are media hactivists, on a mission, if you dont buy that; you say the justification is lame) and i am behooved to mention that there will never be one reason for anything. we live in a multicausal universe, people com eto things for whatever reason they do, but i would be shocked if 20 years ago there would be such a heated debate in the art film world between people using found footage and the abstract or formalist filmakers. there woudl be no point.

its actually annoying to hear so much blather from the antisampling word.

and i would like to find one selfrighteous antisampler who can honestly tell me that they have no burnt CDs, no mixtapes from friends, no copied movies, no photocopied articles, no intellectual property that belongs to anyone but themselves..... that they have never taped recorded or otherwise duplicated any worlk, and no said objects in their possession....

[Rovastar]

Littlecat,

I am not claiming that I have never doneanything wrong likeyou say.

BUt then agian I do not go around pretending that it is all my own work.

I don't go selling copied CD's on street corners or even give them away free. There are levels to it.

There is little/no respect from the sampling community for the people that create that content in the first place.

If samplers paid for the work I would have no problem with it.

They never put the money where the mouth is. Recently Ecelectic Method have doen something for Addictive TV I beleive for a DVD or something.

Suddenly there hardcore tactics of using others hard work without permission changed.......funny that isn't it. The 'I just like doing it' attitute disappered.

hehe LittleCAt and you talk about non samplers being hypocritical. :)

To be fair what have samplers got without stealing of others to further advance there careers/status. Ummmh nothing.

[Amukidi]

"that is a really funny thing to saY John, i mean it often takes a little more timetodeveliop skills with any medium, you know?
"
Oh come on Lee - at least credit me with a little nous gleaned from 20 plus years as a professional artist. We're surely not going to start claiming that sampling footage and adding some filters/effects is rocket science are we?! Making exact copies of the old masters would take a bit of practise too, but I don't need to put all that practise in to work out that I don't want to make that my "artform". When I said a few days, I meant quite a few, in fact, I produced a whole series of images based upon "The Beauty Myth" that have subsequently been published, 'twas but a figure of speech.

[holly]

Sampling = using a short clip "as is", representative of the whole source (ET's finger and Michealangelo's God were perfect examples of samples that represent the whole!)

Piracy = duplicating the whole and trading or selling it on the value of the original

Copying = Duplicating the whole or part for personal use

Stealing = unlawfully removing something from it's owner with no intent of compensation or return

Found Footage = using obscure, mostly unrecognizable footage from various sources with little or no implications of the source.

Rip Off = to imitate or reproduce a signature idea, concept, or image without using any physical elements of the original (What Spielberg did to Michealangelo). Also called homage.

Seeing Thinking Feeling = What humans do on a daily basis, NOT sampling.

Other unrelated criminal acts = sex with minors, et al.

[holly]

LilCat, that has to be a textbook example of using two samples to create a greater whole (and new) work. 100% unquestionably valid as a statement and protected by all copyright laws. In otherwords, THERE IS NO CRIME.
:yep:

But smoking pot and sex with minors isn't helping any sampler issues.

[Amukidi]

Interesting set of definitions (read: interpretations) there Holly - packed to the gills with get-out clauses, e.g. "Found Footage = using obscure, mostly unrecognizable footage from various sources with little or no implications of the source." - That word "Obscure" - bit of a broad word on a global platform?

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by Rovastar
BUt then agian I do not go around pretending that it is all my own work. collages that i have done that have won awards in festivals have never been misinterpreted as anything but collages..... at least let me speak for myself, I have never even TRIED To hide the fact that these are collages..... that is not the point of collage

if youre pissed by someone passing off a dvd with yoru work in it, yes that sucks but could we please separate piracy form sampling??

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by Amukidi
We're surely not going to start claiming that sampling footage and adding some filters/effects is rocket science are we?!

have you bee in in the studio of a serious archivist John? sure we can always go to the lowest common denominator (stolen matrix with a filter) but, be they 2-d or video a serious collage artists will have as many variations as anyone else who is serious about their work. it is so easy to crap all sampling to gether, but it simply is not like that. i refuse to believe that i am the only one though i have only met a few in my life (people who can pull out a 1972 documentary on the drop of a dime from umong their 5-10,000 videotapes)
and while painting, sculpture and collage are not rocket science... they all do have their aesthetic formal qualities, they have their own languages, and they have thier own value systems, and it just drives me wild that this one mode pisses so many people off

[Amukidi]

So how come all I'm seeing is the stolen Matrix (or whatever) with a filter? I don't think you've been listening to me Lee - I have (more than once) acknowledged that there are some great samplers out there - they're just few and far between compared to the plethora of bozos who are just whacking a few filched clips through a cracked copy of "After Effects".

[holly]

Yes obviously interpretations Amukidi. We should be defining what we do, not the dictionary. If you have a better definition then please add it, but if you just want to argue what is "obscure", then go to BrainStove's SURREAL THREAD.

I used "obscure" to define Found Footage to differentiate it from a Sample - which according to the dictionary a Sample represents a whole. Copyright laws take into account (or expect a judge to take into account) whether the "heart" of the original work is captured within the sample. ET's finger is clearly a scene from ET, and even the artist (LilCat) says he deliberately chose ET because it was a recognizable image that evoked warm feelings from the famous film. The "heart" of ET is clearly captured within the sample because the source is easily recognized, the scene with the finger is a memorable scene of ET using his messiah powers to heal. Even someone who has never seen the Spielberg film could recognize the source from this footage, therefore ET is certainly NOT obscure. The scene is a Sample and not simply random "found footage".

When I say "obscure" for Found Footage, I do not imply that a film geek like you would not be able to name the source from minimal frames of the film (like the gameshow "Name That Tune"). It is used to differentiate Found Footage from a Sample. FF is obscure unto its own source, and a lay person would not recognize the whole from the part. As an example: crowd shots from King Kong of people running away (without showing the title monster) might be considered "Found Footage" because it is generic to all crowd shots of people running away. The average lay person will not be able to discern the source from any of a dozen similar movies.

The law seems to make this distinction between a recognizable Sample and "obscure" Found Footage (it doesn't use those words), but there aren't guidelines as to which would be safer for an artist to use.... The law wasn't written as a how-to manual! Samples that are recognizable seem to rely on the parady clause (clearly LilCat's exSample above could be considered parady). Found Footage would need to rely on recontextualization to be a legal artistic use of copyrighted material. A short artfilm of only generic scenes of crowds running away cut from various movies and never showing what they are running from might be deemed recontextualization (I'm not sure, it would be up to a judge).

The long and the short of it is, some Sampling is protected by copyright laws, and I suggest all those bleeding-heart anarchists discover whether or not the law covers their usage ALREADY before they insist on a complete dismantal of the laws as written. And LilCat, since your example (IMO) would be perfectly legal and valid, there is no reason to start pointing fingers at drug addicts and child molestors to hide your own shame
. :o :D :eek:

[fluchtpunkt]

Originally posted by Amukidi

Space man said: "The truth is the some people are good and some suck whether they sample or not (yes, I know it's all a matter of taste and perspective blahblahblah but still....) and I feel there is a lot of truth in that. What is really odd though, is that, if anything, I'm being moved more towards the "anti sampling" fold purely from the desperate, shady and thinly disguised justifications that some folks are coming up with to defend their practice.


i don't get this. sampling (NOT piracy) has been likened to sexual abuse countless times by certain self proclaimed guardians of artistic integrity & quality on these forums. yet somehow in your view it is samplers that use shady and thinly disguised arguments to defend their position!?? :bullshit:

such slander won't make anyones arguments any better (on the contrary!), they won't get the debate anywhere productive & most importantly they are very disrespectful towards samplers & especially towards people who have been sexually abused!

[Amukidi]

Err - I never made ANY reference to sexual abuse, nor used it in any of my arguments - at all, so I have no idea wtf you are talking about - shady has other meanings you know. I'm absolutely outraged at this statement - all I meant was that there have been some silly and floppy rationales given in this thread (which has long since disappeared up its own capacious asshole - dunno why the fuck I thought I'd share my views on it). Read what I've said - some sampling is fantastic, most of it is cliched. Simple enough?

[littlecatalyst]

Originally posted by holly
And LilCat, since your example (IMO) would be perfectly legal and valid, there is no reason to start pointing fingers at drug addicts and child molestors to hide your own shame
. :o :D :eek:

....wasn't my example.... think it was spaceman's.... when i asked that rhetorical question back there (media critique using stuff we don't get permission to use especially in an AV piece) i was trying to hint that there are already WAY many legal precedents that justify (at least one part of) samplemania..
i am not ashamed or feeling guilty about what i do, i have said it before, holly said it quite eloqiently before, all samples arenot created equally some are valid to steal* (fair use), some are available (loop servers, perlinger..) and some are good to ask the creator for permission (the one who made the film/video/cgi, not God per se) there's an etiquette involved that is not needed with DIY work (which prolly has its own code of etiquette if we scratche at that surface for once)... and for the record i never brought up drug dealers child molesters cheescake beefcake or anything like that...

and amukidi, alls im tryin to say is that there might be a lot of shiite in vjs whore lost in samplorama, but are they newbies? i hadnt seen 1 frame from the matrix at all of AVit, but did see lotsa samples i'd never seen before... some really rich stuff also saw samplers saying things like "oh you use that sample too-- where's you get it from? that's wild that we both have that (very obscure) shot" and didnt see that much overlapping in clips (though saw quite a variey of images, even sometimes in similar themes, but not the smae clips).... however in the massjam there was-- even you said it to me-- a lot of similar things happening...

i once had this nameless vj crack me up by taking a clip and then putting one filter or BPM effect on at a time and pretend that he was other local VJs using their 'signatuer style' these are DIY vjs im talking about... there's lots people who ride the techs both sampler and DIY, i just see a funny bias and i would rather encourage the kids to mess aorund with everything, and point out the pitfalls of bad samplorama but include it as a respectable option in the mix, than be the judge of what is good and what is bad





8 and i use "steal" only in the most lovingly fraternal way

[syzygy]

Originally posted by Amukidi
Err - I never made ANY reference to sexual abuse, nor used it in any of my arguments - at all, so I have no idea wtf you are talking about - shady has other meanings you know.

Err... I don't think anyone is saying that you did make any reference to sexual abuse - fluchtpunkt was just pointing out that "certain self proclaimed guardians of artistic integrity & quality on these forums" have used that highly shady argument and yet you only label the samplers arguments as shady.

I think you're maybe getting a bit paranoid if you think that all the comments are directed at you. No need to get enraged if you read back and see what people have really said.

Dan.

[syzygy]

Originally posted by littlecatalyst

i once had this nameless vj crack me up by taking a clip and then putting one filter or BPM effect on at a time and pretend that he was other local VJs using their 'signatuer style'

Hmmm, VJ impressions - I like that idea.

"Tonight, matthew, I will be WellRedMan" ;)

Dan.

[fluchtpunkt]

Originally posted by Amukidi
Err - I never made ANY reference to sexual abuse, nor used it in any of my arguments - at all, so I have no idea wtf you are talking about


...i didn't say you did! (reread the post please)

i only wanted to point out that i much disagree that it is particularly 'the samplers' that have been using shady & thinly veiled arguments. actually i have got precisely the contrary impression!



all I meant was that there have been some silly and floppy rationales given in this thread


...thus i perfectly agree with you here ;) .

[Amukidi]

Fair play fluchtpunkt, apologies for mis-reading.:o

[fluchtpunkt]

:love2: :D

[holly]

The only time I used the non-consensual sex example was NOT as a metaphore to sampling, it was a direct response to why everything does not need to be shared. There are limits to what people can expect to get for free and without commitment. But that wasn't a metaphore about sampling, it was an example of why I don't feel I need to share everything with this group.

In the silly metaphore department we've had
cheesecake,
armchair quaterbacks,
printed stills,
sculpture,
civilization,
fish (mine),
dragqueens (also mine),
opensource software,
Andy Warhol (not exactly a metaphor),
HipHop2Jazz,
Mt Everest (highest peak in the world),
vegetarians,
horse taking a shit (actually not a metaphore, but an example worth repeating),
bad remakes of old tunes,
bloodsuckers,
magic acts,
quoting literary or song sources,
Rape pilliage maim and mutilate (first mentioned by Unj on the "pro" side),
Mythology,
Faith + Enlightenment,
childhood,
"Jive Bunny" (whatever that is),
Longterm World Cycles (I think "era" is the word for that),
Children (again),
Children bragging about the size of their dad,
Cloning by aliens,
....

Gah... I'm on page 8 and am losing interest, but the evidence shows:

First use of RAPE metaphore goes to TEAM PRO?SAMPLING!
Bing!

:yep:

[Lucidhouse]

.

[spaceman]

"I have no idea what your background is and I see the point you are making impliying that we have al;l done the above things. BUT ' never had sex with a minor' wtf are you on sicko?"


ooopps.....

I was thinking about high school days there (when i was a minor myself)
sorry about confusion caused

(something else thu. beyond sampling or not, how about preset patches, now that real juice, like motion dive's goldfishes mixed with motion dive's pink dots with a layer of motion dive's falling flowers :yep: )

[mondo]

wow

am i sure glad i am on teh otherside of teh planet and missing this mega-arguement

i thought we hammered out most of this stuff in threads years ago.

if we all spent the same effort creating instead of debating this topic we might have something to be proud of....roll on summer

yours
cynical in shanghai with a cheeky grin

<gosh i miss you lot>:love:

[wellREDman]

Originally posted by syzygy
Hmmm, VJ impressions - I like that idea.

"Tonight, matthew, I will be WellRedMan" ;)

Dan.

and tonight mathew i will be dan syszygy,
no make that tom,
sorry, no dan

aaargh

tonight mathew i will be *spark

[wellREDman]

:-offtopic

on a side not a bit of trivia

Underworld were gonna call their last but one album
"tonite mathew we will be underworld" but the lawyers wouldnt let them cos Stars in their Eyes
has rights to it as a catchphrase

[syzygy]

shit, we've both stolen their intellectual property in this thread then.

At least I only did it once - you did it twice ;)

Dan.

[sleepytom]

Originally posted by wellREDman

aaargh

tonight mathew i will be *spark
don't be stupid - no one will belive you with that mountain of gear you cart around!

[syzygy]

The makeup and costume people will find a way to nip and tuck all that gear away so that when red appears out of the smoke, it looks like he has just a laptop ;)

Dan.

[Lucidhouse]

Came across this website...sheds some interesting light on this debate...


http://mirrors.creativecommons.org/