by on

maya_pic_6_SP18.png

Rehearsal 3_2.7.18

Two weeks of thinking and review went into this rehearsal, as we did not hold rehearsal last week due to conflicts.

The same will be true of the coming week. I will be filthy rich and boiling over with ideas by the time our next rehearsal comes round.

We began today walking through the room, again concentrating on space: the shape of space, the shape of ourselves in space, proximity to each other, the walls, the floor, the ceiling, and the like.

I brought into the room the image of google maps in Virtual Reality. This brought up discussion about
-points in space,
-sensors in space and on our bodies,
-backspace: what we see and what we sense,
-the concept of “tech-ify-ing” the space with our minds
THIS idea about tech and our minds brought more conversation about our relationship with technology and what it does to our bodies, which is much of what is curious to me about this process with the cameras. How interesting for it to show up from another angle!

We moved into some deep and physical improvisations focusing on this image of the room as a Virtual Reality space, and it brought really different kinds of movement out of our bodies. Initiations were coming from parts of the body and taking on qualities that were unusual and exciting.

Moving on from this idea, but keeping the knowledge of it in the space, we moved into duets with the cameras: both people moving but one person in charge of holding the camera: switching back and forth between who was holding the camera.

After a few rounds of this, we moved into this same exercise, improvising as a quartet. This started to happen anyway pretty quickly.

We started just improvising with the cameras on, not worried too much about considering the frame of the camera.
Then we tried making more conscious choices with the frame of the camera.

Some reflections from this rehearsal:
-Who is in charge and what do they see? (KL)
-Is this a sextet or a quartet? (KL)
-How much space do cameras take up? see? (KL)
-Heightened awareness- activating the space. We started to make some distinct choices about composition toward the end. (KL)
-I was a bit taken by being a moving frame and wanted to see it right away. (CM)
-What happens to a face when it meets a camera or looks past a camera to someone else’s face (CM)
-When there was a clear or mutually known relationship between subject and camera it was exciting to find that in moments of doing without prior planning. (CM)
-There is a specific intimacy to filming one person (CM)
-Surprised at how this version makes me think more about how I’m seen than camera in place even though both are specific and not human sight. (CM)
-reaching out and in at the same time (KM)
-Alive (KM)
-Split attention to outer and inner (KM)
-Red light beaming (KM)
-How can we connect beyond making moving lines in space? (KM)
-Something happens in a human’s body and while the actual thing wasn’t caught on camera, the movement of it was. I could be holding the camera and see someone else with my eyes, the catching of that shake in my body makes the footage shake. (BRJ)
-It’s a long game of telephone. (BRJ)
-I felt very aware of Beatrice because of her light (BRJ) (Regarding Camera B)
-I thought for a moment that all my cells were cameras, and the camera was another cell. (BRJ)

It is hard, HARD, right now to hold the camera and move. It’s too early yet in this process for us to know exactly how to compose and be moving at the same time. I am not interested at the moment as much in what kind of accidental footage we get while we are moving. I am more interested in how we can be constant fluctuating partitioners in this process of seeing what is happening in the space. I am interested in how our ideas of framing the space can be improvisational with our movement, without thinking of ourselves as “in” or “out” for moments. Can this all be a cohesive, ambiguous space of viewing and doing?

I am editing together a tiny clip from this rehearsal to be posted upon completion.

Onward.

by on

Rehearsal 2_1.24.18

We set up two cameras to record from the beginning. We repeat what may be a ritual of sitting, breathing, finding ourselves in the space, slowly evolving into walking, and then into improvisation.

We focus our attention again, and more avidly, on space, distance, and pathway.

I think that enhancing our understanding of ourselves in space, how much we take up, and our distances, is one key to understanding this idea of the frame of the camera and its specific digital space.

We measure ourselves in space walking, moving, standing still.

We reflect on the cameras, on our improvisations, on our actual feelings currently in this space and time.

I think that this is also key to the process: as my interest is in removing the feeling of necessity of pretend that can be inherent in filmmaking: we pretend that we didn’t do this take 50 times in a row in order to get this shot the way we wanted it. This is a wonderful, purposeful way of filmmaking, of course, but I am interested in trying something else for this project. I am interested in the investigation of immediate craftsmanship, of momentary problem solving, and in how we can make those kinds of choices with a camera. Within this framework, it is not actually useful to do any pretending.

The camera is there. We do not pretend it isn’t. How does that feel different?

We are choreographing for the camera frame. We do not pretend that we aren’t. How does that feel different?

What possibilities are available to us when we are making ourselves available to what is actually in the room? What possibilities are not available to us for the same reasons?

We spent time considering our own vision as a frame. What are its limits? What can you see and what can’t you? We improvised, all considering our own visual frames as camera frames. We improvised with only two of us considering our visual frames as camera frames. We reflected on the differences.

Some reflections from this rehearsal process from all of us:

-Seeing with ‘camera vision’ does something distinctly different to my body. I started to make interesting choices about frame and movement and reveal. How and when did I want something to appear or disappear? How fast? At what angle? (KNL)
-With only 2 people as cameras, there was a disparity created between the group which was palpable. (KNL)
-Squares and lines (KM)
– the squareness of space?
-kinesphere
-square frame
-Is inspiration coming from inside or from visual field (KM)
-When I am being a camera, I lose sight of all other cameras (KM)
-I think using vision in this way might slow time and action. Something about the speed of processing… (KM)
-Having the two non-human cameras in the space was important as a mover. It made me feel like I was making important decisions even though the human camera didn’t catch them. (BRJ)
-I’m interested in why this switch from being a camera to being a non-camera was less satisfying. Was it because my task was missing a piece that was added? Was it the desire to be interesting? (BRJ)
-I went from all these internal shifts of memory and emotion to very concetrated present moment sight oriented awareness. (CM)
-Touch changed, it was easy but not as sensitive. (CM)
-The practice got easier and then harder. My limbs became ways of adjusting scale or perspective. (CM)

For the first few weeks, we are throwing out all of the footage. I think this will contribute to a slow accumulation of ease with the feeling of the camera. Eventually we will begin to review footage in rehearsal time to discuss what we are seeing, what seems to be ‘working’ for us, whatever that means.

 

by on

I dub this project ‘Maya’, hoping for the influences of Mayas Angelou, Deren, and Lin, in honor of poetry, frame, and landscape.

Maya is an investigation of improvisational filmmaking and the demystification of the making of dance films and the camera lens by incorporating the concept of the camera frame into the creative process from the very beginning. We ask questions about the philosophical nature of having the camera in the room. What does it feel like for something you’re doing to be recorded? Can we learn to use the camera frame as only a choreographic tool, demystifying any psychology we personally have attached to it, turning it into a frame, an opportunity, and not a matter of pretend? Can we train to compose within this frame immediately, the same way that we compose immediately through improvisation on a stage? Can we come to know this digital frame so well that it is just another form of space? What is it to bring forth our knowledge (make immediate choices from our embodied histories) through movement in the moment in the interest of the future (the film)? Can we consider all of this time in our bodies at once? What happens if we try?

This concept is becoming. We are developing it each minute and many of these ideas are wrong or bad or won’t work. I’m looking very much forward to the neurons we’ll gain by the failures we’ll experience.

“Indeed- you might ask yourself what it is that makes good improvisation.”
“Eschewing “product-hood” and resisting commodifications, improvisation emphasized presence and change.” (Vida Midgelow)

We calculate distances as if they referred to our own bodies”
“Any tool and its precise manipulation presupposes the space of the body.” (José Gil)

“The direction we take excludes things for us before we even get there.”
“Lines are both created by being followed and followed by being created.” (Sara Ahmed)

“When you see what you want, you’ll recognize it, but it won’t be entirely yours. It will belong to the material you’ve trusted.”
“Try breaking the rules on a ‘need to break the rules’ basis.”
“Nothing is ever wasted.”
“Choose people and trust them implicitly.” (Jonathan Burrows)

Rehearsal 1_ 1.17.18

Cameras are in the space from the start. We bring awareness to them. One only is running.

We name the cameras ‘Aye’ and ‘Bea’.

We four dancers take time to re-discuss the concept, hopes, and goals of this project. We sit in our bodies, breathe and notice ourselves in space. We open our eyes and consider how much room we take up. We walk and consider our relationship to space, our size, the distance between us and the walls, floor, ceiling, other bodies. This develops into a movement improvisation. We reflect on our improvisation, the feel of the camera frame on us: the yucks and the yums of this opening.

We do several more timed improvisations, relating to one another, considering the frame of the camera. We move the cameras to different parts of the space. We reflect on the difference between the feel of one camera and many and what it feels like when they are in different parts of the space.

What happens when we have the agency to move the cameras?

What happens when a camera is moved to focus on what we are doing?

From whence comes the instinct to make the decision to change the camera frame?

How much do you consider what you’re doing and how much do you consider what you are seeing?

Is the camera “downstage?”

What can we do that the camera can’t?

What can the camera do that we can’t?

What can we all do?