Theories about RE:Mixing and Sampling

[dansmachine]

Originally Posted by sleepytom

remixing is somewhat different and to be honest has not really happed in film yet - the process of remixing in music is to take the original recordings and restructure them into a different piece of music - to remix a film one would need access to all the rushes (and possibly the cast and crew to enable new scenes to be shot) - you would then reassemble the shots in a different order to change the narrative of the film. to simply remove the narrative and chop it up into a rythmical audio visual piece is not so much a remix more a cutup.

Already in 1997 I remixed 'Wasted!', a fast-paced drama movie about techno and drugs by Ian Kerkhof, the director, who gave me copies of all rushes. It took me a couple of weeks to sort everything out (pre-computer age for me) but it was worth the effort: over 350 people attended at first performance (Effenaar/Eindhoven) and because of that it could be done a second time at a local festival (Virus, at the City Theatre; 500+ att.). Very unfortunately that was the end of this story, because when I was invited to do it again at the Dutch Filmfestival, Ian asked me not to do it since he wasn't the copyright-owner and he wasn't allowed to give me the rushes in the first place. Pity, I could have been world-famous for that in the Netherlands
Looking back at it I don't think it was very good, especially not according to present standards. Still I think it was pretty original and I don't know if anyone else has ever done a feature-remix using all rushes. The following movies I had to make at filmacademy I shot with the remix allready in the back of my head; I even took a vj on set to make premixes of the scenes that were being shot (I used 2 cameras). The edited result never was as exciting as the live remixed performance.

Nowadays I still use samples, besides self-shot material. It has developed though from AddictiveTV-style loops and scratches toward organic compositions in which the original material is still recognizable, but processed in such way that a complete new esthetic and/or meaning arises.

[vjklik]

what used to bug me to no end back when I was doing visuals was how I spent countless hours creating my own images and content to put up on the screen while DJs were becoming FAMOUS and raking money to bring in someone else's music which they played through a sound system on turntables which were set up before they arrived. But over time I came to realize that a lot of what made a good DJ had a lot more to do with how much time he or she spent scouring record stores and digging out the great tracks or the funky remixes that nobody else had. I think the same is probably true of VJs to an extent.

If you're going to be mixing "sampled" content into your mix it would probably be to your benefit to use those samples in a way that brings out some special quality that redefines it in some way, but is not familiar or instantly recognizable. It still seems somewhat unfair in retrospect but I'm of the opinion that those who just mix samples run the risk of being no different than the next guy unless he or she is able to work them in ways that make the mix more than just the sum of its parts. A DJ who merely plays the recordings that are readily available may be able to get gigs and keep the dancefloor moving doesn't stand a chance against a well-connected vinyl prospector who manages to stay on the cutting edge with fresh sounds that make other DJs jealous.

I remember seeing video projections of "Fantasia" or "The Mind's Eye" at parties and thinking, "Hey thanks for taking something I've seen elsewhere and putting it on the big screen for whatever reason, way to stop at blockbuster before the show." But there was a time when I was fond of using a luma key on merrie melodies and betty boop videos over the eye candy I'd made because I liked how all the dancing cartoon characters from the 30's and 40's seemed to sync with techno so well. That makes me a hypocrite I guess.

[fALk]

sleepy: For an upcoming article I need to portray different "forms" - or "tools" (as in content not in gear) if you want - of VJing and since there are so many VJs always arguing in favor of sampling (and therefore remixing as a subform of sampling?!) I think its vital that I write about it - since I am not into that even the slightiest bit and can?t get any insight from former postings about the nitty gritty ideas (people must have thoughts when they use samples) I thought I ask.

On a side note: the best "remix" "sampling" I have ever seen personally was at the first AVIT in Leeds at the "30 screen party". There was someone doing TV News anchors from all over the world with that well known screen behind them showing a picture and then the line below the picture was altered. Anyone knows what I am talking about? Who that was? If they are still alive and doing that?

Thanks for your thoughts throughout: nice quotes to be derived

dans: you have any example (can be a pic or a shitty short 10 second recording or whatever) that underlies your last line?

in which the original material is still recognizable, but processed in such way that a complete new esthetic and/or meaning arises.

And for cat: I really just look for examples and thoughts that somehow classefy under the VJ umbrella.