Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Michael speaking about his concert: >>> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/mpeters/hop.htm >>> HOP is more interesting for animations though. I'll use it to do a live >>> fractal lightshow (using a video beamer and live PC) for a concert this >>> saturday. Anyone in the Cologne, Germany area is invited to come! <g> > >> How was it? > >people generally like it but I'm growing more critical of it - it is very >difficult to find abstract animations which fit the music played - >sometimes >it works but sometimes it doesn't and then doing it anyway is too >arbitrary >to be really satisfying. I'm still dreaming to do a solo project with my >own >music and my own images, but I'm still far from this point. > >Computers will eventually be able to successfully do this thing - produce >live visuals for music played by humans or played by software or both. A old dream of mine too. I do not understand sufficiantly. The most looplike pictures I have seen so far was a video demonstration by some californian called James Levis I met in Rio de Janeiro. (I lost his contact). He uses mirrors and films the screen through them and its incredible how natural the forms and movements of these sinthetic pictures turn out. Some have regular patterns. Maybe he uses certain arangements of several mirrors, too. >Generative music (in the Eno sense) accompanied by generative visuals, >maybe >with genetic algorithms which could be influenced by the audience (as in >the >computer graphics installations of Karl Sims who uses a Connection >Machine). >Concerts possibly without musicians, the music being played by the >audience >itself, starting out from initial conditions set by a composer, and >evolving >like a living being. Nono, it takes an artist to create art. Accident is great, but only if an artist interpretes it. Public envolvement is fun but not satisfactory, lacking straightness or purity or something. I may be totaly wrong here, would need to see the result. Matthias