[-empyre-] Re: shared canvas

[Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@uib.no>]

At 6:33 +1000 15/6/02, Mark Hancock wrote:
> I'd like to ask a question(s) regarding this idea of shared canvas space.
> Is this type of software best used within a live performance space?
> Allowing artists to contribute remotely to the 'happening'(for want of a
> better term off the top of my head). And how do people feel this enhances
> the performance? Can it be an open forum for anyone who wants to
> participate, or is it preferable to know the other artists work before
> hand?

the software that allows sound/image etc to be performatively 
collaborated really are designed for collaborative performance, and 
i'd expect most of it is improvisational.

in relation to text i don't know of anything that does this. i know 
software that lets me take someone's keyboard entry (ie what they 
type) and i can control colour, size, etc. but i don't think any of 
the systems let me manipulate the words you type as words.

i think this is what brandon was askign about. which is what moos and 
stuff *don't* do. in a moo i can't edit what you write, ie we can't 
improvise together in real time. however collaborative blogs, shared 
moo rooms and stuff let you share and change each other's content. 
just as sending a file to soemone else can do.

in terms of your specific question(s) mark. it does allow artists to 
contribute remotely to the happening, and the happening can also be 
remote and distributed (there are quite a few models here), ie you 
could be collaborating with an outcome at one place, or there could 
be lots of outcomes at lots of simultaneous places.

enhances performance? i think that's a different or not quite there 
question. i don't understand the point to be about enhancing 
performance if i understand enhance to be 'improving' existing forms 
of performance. i take it to be about new forms of performance, or at 
least letting performance explore some new ideas/problems and also i 
guess develop a new medium (distributed collaborative realtime 
polymedia performance).

depending on software being used it can be opne or closed, much like 
most other things online. not sure if it is preferable to know the 
artist/s work before hand but in my experience without some 
contextualisation of what is going on it's probably extremely 
difficult for an audience to know what's going on.

> Secondly, as far as non-live, collaboration is concerned. do people who
> have used this technique, feel that it has enhanced their working
> practices? Any more than passing files via email?

this i think would depend on what your work practices are aiming to 
achieve. collaborating in a moo can be very effective, as can talking 
on the phone :-) moos are most effective when they're used for moo 
relevant things.

cheers
adrian miles
--
   
+  lecturer in new media and cinema studies 
[http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog]
+  interactive desktop video developer  [http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/]
+  hypertext rmit [http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au]
+ InterMedia:UiB. university of bergen [http://www.intermedia.uib.no]