My Personal Progression with Technology Through the Use of Media Design

-Kent Barrett

 

 

 

 

Throughout these last few months I have gained a great deal of insight, knowledge and overall personal growth from this foray into digital culture, media design, and exposure to new technology.  This development can be seen clearly throughout several aspects of my work both directly related to this class as well as in my professional work.

 

 

The first tangible change I have made as a result from this class is my switching of platforms from Windows to Mac.  My entire life I have been a die-hard anti-apple combatant.  I know a little bit about hardware, and didn’t like the idea of not being able to change anything.  I had no interest in learning a new syntax, becoming a part of some pop phenomena, etc.  However, after talking to Pat, and really exploring the options, I did find that A) my laptop is incredibly outdated and incapable of doing the kind of work I’d like to be doing, and B) Mac really does make the best computers for those in the field of fine arts.  So I took the plunge, have been re-learning the basic operating system and couldn’t be happier.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The next crucial piece of information and skill set I have gained from this class is the integration of technology for presentational material.  In my line of work, I often have to show research imagery, models, draftings, renderings, etc.  This work can be tedious, and often times not the most exciting to actually view.  In class, we were assigned a few projects, making films form stills.  This would be much like the first progression of film technology, (the nickelodeons, penny arcades, etc.)  My first attempt at this can be seen in this video:

 

 

 

 

 

 

As you can see, I stuck with black and white still images (referencing the original slides and origins of film), and chose various public figures, typically authors, artists, etc. whom I admire and look up to.

 

While this attempt is very sophomoric, it did inspire me to take this idea and push it to the next level.  At the same time that Pat assigned us this project, I had to give a presentation for a show I was working on.  I had research imagery (still photographs pulled from various sources), 3D virtual model (which Pat taught me how to export out as an object, and “walk through”) as well some written text, which I wanted to display.  I wanted this information to be exciting to watch, but also readily available, not only to the directors and designers who typically view this type of material, but also to the cast and any others who might be interested in seeing the process of how the show really comes together.  To this end, I created this video and uploaded it on the Internet:

 

 

 

As you can see, this video has been viewed multiple times and even commented on by one of the cast members.  I have had multiple people talk with me about how excited they were to see the ideas behind the set, and how this material was available to them on the Internet.

 

 

 

The next tidbit of wisdom I’ve gained from the experience of this class is the use, theoretical implications of, and practical application of open source material. 

At first, like my trepidation with the apple corporation, I was weary of all things open source.  In my previous experience with the majority of open source programming I’ve run across, it tends to be slow, unreliable, and requires a good deal of patience to master the monstrous learning curve which is the syntax of these individual programs.  However, after much cajoling and agonizing argumentation I finally ceded that there is quite a lot of open source software readily and freely available that is not only useful but also quite powerful.  The idea that the technology, information, and work should not only be shared, but also expanded upon through collaboration is an incredibly idealistic and noble theory to me.  And as for use, after I purchased the new Mac book pro, my funds were less than stellar, so instead of buying the Adobe CS suite, I downloaded Gimp and have been mastering it ever since:

 

 

While it doesn’t do everything that Photoshop does, and the learning curve is still throwing me for a loop sometimes, I do find it to be an extremely powerful program and one that I have and will continue to use over and over again.

 

The other wonderful piece of open source software that I’ve been exposed to through this class is Pure Data.

 

Pure Data has opened the doors to me to what media design truly is and can be.  Through the exploration of this program I have started to learn and understand the basic structure of most media servers including Catalyst, Green Hippo, and Jitter.  Not only is PD configured in the same basic kind of skeletal framework as these notorious servers, but also it seems to be able to function in relatively the same capacity once you start to understand how you can tweak and customize the functions of the program. 

 

The first step in using this program was to simply mix alternating media together in a relatively simple patch:

 

 

Next came filtering and effects layering.  Then recording this mixture, until I was able to manipulate real time or pre-recorded video at whatever pace need be:

 

 

I am currently working on customizing a patch which will allow me to have several different options of filters, affects, videos, etc.  While this patch is somewhat complex, I am trying to customize it with colors, labels, etc. to make it as easy as possible for a board operator who would not be familiar with the software to use.  Also, so that in dimly lit theatres, the screen itself is easy to view.

 

 

The most substantial contribution this class has imparted upon me is in the mere exposure to contemporary artists, discussions of cultural identities and how this is defined through technology, and an overall understanding of underground culture/advancement, etc.  This has been crucial in shaping my outlook on theatre as well as redefining how I approach my work, and what I plan on doing with my life as a whole.  This sounds much more melodramatic than it is, but not nearly as important to me, as it truly is.  We spent a good amount of time in class discussing various artists, different cultures as defined by their use of media technology, etc.

I found it fascinating that raps music was actually a true embodiment of the postmodern art movement, in its use of re-appropriation, collage, personal narration, etc.  Richard Prince should be proud!  I loved seeing how drugs, music, and videotape all seemed to interconnect hand in hand.  Not only that, but how art, literature, music, etc. seemed to progress along the same kind of curve.  At the same time.  Each intertwined, and yet maintaining some since of independence.  And yet, throughout all of this, I wondered how my art form of choice fits into this mix?  The answer: it doesn’t.

 

Not really.

 

No seriously, theatre seems to be this dinosaur of an art form.  Not only is it old, decrepit, and basically extinct, but also it progresses slower than anything I’ve ever seen.

Our audiences are getting older and older (they’ll be dead soon, I promise), and with it smaller and smaller.  The art form itself is stuck in this formulaic awful perpetual motion device, that just can’t seem to break free of this one antiquated style: realism. 

 

Really, how many shows can you really do about families set in living rooms or kitchens?

 

While art and music and literature, and poetry and all these other glorious cultural achievements are racing towards new goals and higher planes, experimenting with different styles, and breaking down barriers and walls of the basic construct of their form, all being fueled by the integration or at least exposure of new technology, theatre sits there idly by, slowly chugging away, trying to pretend like film, and television, and the internet doesn’t really exist.  Saying, “come on guys, why don’t you come in and take a load off.  Sit down and let me show you what it’s like to actually see a radio drama.”   The problem is nobody’s listened to radio dramas in 50 years!

 

I have been struggling with this revelation for a long time now.  Questioning why I pursue a career or lifestyle or whatever you’d like to call it, dedicated to an art form, which by most accounts is already dead…

And yet, through this class, I think I’ve found where the future of this dying beast could be headed.  The way in which it could actually gasp for air.  A light at the end of the tunnel.  OK, enough metaphors.  Or are they similes?  No definite metaphors.  Regardless, the answer and savior of theatre will come from technology. 

 

In the late 1800’s when the daguerreotype came out, everybody said painting would be a dead medium.  Because in the past, the primary function of painting was to replicate reality, to put realism on a canvas and present it to the viewer.  Once the camera cam into existence, there was no need for this type of form any more.  Yet, instead of dying, the medium completely transformed itself, starting with the impressionists, to the abstract expressionists, to the post-modern painters of today.  It no longer tries to recreate reality, but rather presents so many varying and complex subjects, messages, and theories.  Yet, when we look at theatre, and put it next to painting, it seems as if one has learned nothing from the other.  In just the same was the camera and still photography has replaced realism in painting, so does film and digital imagery beat out theatre.  Yet, instead of transforming itself into a completely different and wonderfully exciting and experimental medium, theatre has tried and tried to pretend like movie theatre and television programming and the computer don’t exist at all. 

 

 

The key is not to pretend like film and television and the Internet don’t exist, but rather to embrace that they do, and use them to further your own art form.  What is it that film can do that theatre can’t?   What is it that the Internet achieves that theatre wills never being able to touch?  What does television offer people that theatre has never been able to?  The answer to these questions is endless.  Which makes the potential for the integration of this technology into this antiquated art form not only incredibly exciting, but at this point, it is necessary.  As our audiences become older and older, we will need to still fill those seats with somebody.  Who will that be?  Why not the twenty something crowd?  Those in there thirties or forties?  The kid who comes into star bucks with his ripped up jeans and converse, and just happens to have a Rolex on his wrist and drive a Mercedes because he’s a software programmer.  The idea that the younger generation isn’t a marketable audience base is absurd.  The ipod phenomenon should be proof enough.  And what does this younger hipper audience want to see?  Not fifty-year-old men who mourn the loss of their jobs.  They want to see the integration of technology that they have become so familiar with and accustomed to.  Not only should it be a technical presence, but also it should help to define the very structure of the work itself.

 

There was a day in class in which Pat and I got into an argument about the work of various video artists such as Brian Eno, Yoko Ono, etc.  The exact expression which I delighted on was “artist as author”.  In media art or most fine art forms actually, there tends to be one person in charge of the material presented in that graphic space.  Whether it be Mathew Barney’s warped visions on film, or Richard Serra’s massive steal structures.  While each of these artists has teams of people who work to make their product a reality, they themselves are the artist and author of their work.  Pat explained to me, that the reason theatre was so slow to progress; why we’re still stuck where painting was nearly 100 years earlier is because theatre requires so many different people to make it happen.  What I don’t understand is why?

 

This is the key to me.

 

This is what this class has taught me, that no other class ever has or ever will and why I feel so inspired. 

 

This class has shown me exactly what I want to do with my life.  I want to start a theatre company that uses and fully integrates technology into new works that appeal to a younger contemporary audience.  I want this work to be wholly mine, as an artist and author so that what you see inside the graphic space of that theatre is my idea and vision.  I want to write the script, direct the play, and do the lighting design, set design, sound design, and projection design.  I want these elements to all work seamlessly with one another and I want it all to deal with contemporary issues and functions of the present today that we are all living in and dealing with.  To this end, I have written my own play, I have gained experience in directing and different aspects of design, and next semester I will be putting on a show called Scorched Grounds in which the chorus of actors will not only function as players who move the action forward, but also as moving projection screens for the digital art that will be displayed across them.  I’m planning on designing every aspect of the show, with projections as the key central figure.  Not only as the key figure of design, but as the principle actor of the play. 

 

This project is so thrilling, and exciting and terrifying to me, and it is exactly what I feel like I should be doing right now.  Because I truly believe that the future of this art form, which I love so much, must be tied into the use and complete integration of various technology.  Because I feel the medium itself is so far behind the times, I think the only way to make the art form progress quickly enough, is by simplifying the hierarchal structure that has typically been used in traditional theatrical environments.  This is how I think this class has inspired me to try to change the future of theatre.