impulsive matrix bodies
(Impulsive Matrix Bodies is a working title of story development datalog of the process of artistic research of performance within the IMPULSE project's WP1.2 Performance stream)
Friday, 20. December, 2024
Plugged in the Perception Neuron 3 into the windows laptop trying to figure it out how it works. There's a Axis Studio software and 18 sensors for a performer's body, a transciever (USB) and bunch of elastic bands to fix sensors to body. Perhaps Godot Engine is our lifesaver, it can receive data from Axis Studio (via an "Axis Studio BVH Broadcast decoder for Godot") - so, in theory live data from this motion capture system could be brought into Godot Engine or its XR Tracker system. If I understand correctly, this means we could develop a 'game-like' app which could be then manipulated via motion capture and XR headsets. That means a lot of programming - most probably. I cannot imagine how it would be done, but I'm willing to experiment. I just hope I won't do actual programming. However, this all good news, new information which points at open platform, where possibilities are (in my view) much bigger because we are working with an open-source (MIT-licenced) community supported platform.
What I now can conceptualize from all this in context of recommendations - is that tools are here for institutions to either invest in world-design or even engage audiences to plug-in to the code itself. The latter is an idea to bring in programming creativity of the 'lay-woman' in a form of live-coded systems. Imagine HYDRA web interface that could simply manipulate 3D assets as part of learning exploration.
The other strand is to work with stories, the contexts of material objects that exist as 3D scans, 3D objects. T. from HM yesterday presented some interesting contexts how the sector of digitized artefacts actually work. It is extremely interesting (and somehow potent/ial) to observe all the different factors that govern possible or impossible release of digital assets (3D/2D scans or audio stories) into the public domain (that's not ever really considered as such, only as a consequence of another project/institution contact or request). Specifically, there is a huge investment into digitalisation, and despite the fact that it's often public money, it's still not enough of it, so departments that do the digitisation need to seek other funds, including streams of income from sale of recreated objects from this data. Giving this data out - especially very famous artefacts, would mean diminishing of this income. This means that decisions about which asset is given to whom under what conditions (not to mention the format and resolution) are made on case-by-case basis. Intellectual property law plays an important role here.
There are also other factors where curators sometimes reject this possibility that a digital scan of heritage object is allowed to be put into open access and reuse. Another important fact about the sector is that these objects might have their own stories - either historical facts but also subjective recollections and memories - sometimes even inacurate - that are in important and perhaps powerful context that would be important to accompany the object and somehow prevent context removal or decontextualisation.
Furthermore, it also seems there's a context of digitalisation and gatekeeping - how and why is an object (material and digital) allowed (or not) to be used by a third party (or public)?
What stories can be gleaned from that? Can we be inspired by this complexity?
There seems to be a mesh of data and material that could carry various understandings. Perhaps I can write about that. Is it possible to remix all these different intensities into multiple stories (real or unreal) which include realities, avatars, objects, metaverses, real bodies, performance, sound/music, motion capture, videos?