triggering, mapping, post mapping and fuzzy logic

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by dance-tech.net/Producer on June 11, 2008 at 1:08am

Hello Armando,
Cool,
I like thie question and the investigation in some kind of generative mapping to give the systems some kind of generative agency beyond one to one mapping and randomness.
I found this paper on the Mnm object
I think that also is very important to define how will we interface nervousness in the behavior level (sensing strategy) and also how the system will interpret the selected indicators and differentiate it from "hesitation" or "excitement". The key concepts here are interpretation as pattern recognition+inference and mapping based in generative compositional rules.
just some starting thoughts!
marlon

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Armando Menicacci on June 13, 2008 at 8:33pm

Hi Marlon,
in fact I don't think it is important here to discuss how we interface something with something. But what we interface: in fact a fex sensor can be very interesting on a dancer or... not. It depends what it does, what it is sensing. Flexion (even twenty in a certain amount of time) don't mean a dancer is reaching a nervous state. I think that looking for "states" is an interesting controller. More than any simple sensor. I think that the time factor will be very important. to control several sensors over time and to match a particular state. Mnm is interesting although I'd rather have a completely different approach. Instead of matching a figure I'd like to mach a state (wich is more od a specific set of dynamics).... Does this make sense to you?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Daniel Tercio on October 24, 2009 at 6:55am

Hi Armando and Marlon!
I have a question (in)directly related to mapping strategies. My question concerns MOCAP fundaments. Normally, people use MOCAP for building character animation and eventually for turning the results into intangible entities on the stage. However, MOCAP generates firstly a motion spectrum -- something like a human movement signature -- or, if you prefer, a mathematical equation. The use of this mathematical equation for artistic purposes is not yet fully explored at the mathematical source... Are you working on this or do you know people working on it?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Armando Menicacci on October 25, 2009 at 6:26pm

Hi, in fact some people worked on that. Scott deLahunta (a long time ago with some animation that came out more like a question than an accomplished artistic result) Then I proposed him to do a mocap workshop inside the Monaco Dance Forum in 2002 and there where very good results. Maybe I can upload it into my site. I'll post a link here. As for the equation. In fact I think a gesture as an algorithm because it is a sequence of operations in time... like an algorithm. I don't know if there are people working on that apart... me. Check this
http://www.deaf07.nl/index.php?option=com_program&act=event&...

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Daniel Tercio on October 27, 2009 at 8:03pm

Hi, thanks for the suggestion and for the link. I feel that MOCAP procedures allow a debate on hermeneutics of human movement, stressing questions such as the difference between motion and human movement, and concepts such as micro and macro scales of the human body, continuity and discontinuity of body movements, shape, structure and pattern of body movements. I am particularly interested in the motion spectrum and in the migration and accomplishment of the algorithms into synaesthetic architectures. The workshop you organized certainly was very stimulating.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Armando Menicacci on October 28, 2009 at 11:36am

I'll post more on that in the future. Now I can't, but I'm also intersted in relationships between algorithmic figures and body movement. I'm working with accelerometers to capture similarities in human walking....

▶ Reply to This