Posts Tagged ‘screendance’

Pentacle’s Movement Media announces the First Annual UMOVE Online Videodance Festival from October 1-31, 2009 on the web and at select screening locations across the US and around the world in 2009-10.

UMOVE Vision Statement:

The medium of video has exploded on the web, and consequently, the web video format for dance and kinetic-based films is erupting within the media arts.

The web format has its own set of characteristics and conventions, and makes it possible for all disciplines and levels of film-makers to showcase their work.  Movement Media’s goals are to highlight new works and assist Internet audiences in finding artist’s videos specifically dedicated to movement and dance. We also aim to challenge film-makers and audiences regarding their ideas of what dance film or movement media can be.

To date, the web format for dance and kinetic-based film has been under-recognized and under-valued by dance film presenters and curators.  It’s time to give these videos a platform to receive both feedback and critical praise. We seek work that is strong in concept and execution, rather than sporting fancy production values or large budgets. Film-makers are free to use a variety of high and low tech media to create their work. We welcome work that is visually “moving” on intimate viewing devices such as laptops, mobile phones, and ipods.

Therefore, UMOVE is seeking interesting blends of dance and kinetic-based films that explore the full range and scope of this burgeoning genre.

SUBMISSION DEADLINE: August 15, 2009

If your submission is chosen you will be required to submit digital stills and a finished copy of your video on DVD (NTSC only) for screening and publicity purposes by September 15, 2009. All submissions regardless of selection will be made available for public viewing on our blog, Move the Frame.

UMOVE submission categories

• Animation/Gaming – including digital animation, machinima, Second life, Virtual Reality games.

• Cell phone – videos made using a cell phone.

• Gone in 60 seconds – videos under one minute long

• Low/No Budget – videos made for under $1,000

• Surprise me! – unique uses of new media or digital technology

ABOUT THE FESTIVAL

The First Annual UMOVE Online Videodance Festival will take place October 1-31, 2009. The festival will feature short dance and movement-based videos that were made specifically for the web and other new media formats including cell phones, gaming, virtual reality worlds, and mash-ups. In addition to online programming on YouTube and Movement Media’s blog, Move the Frame, the festival will include a launch party and live screenings in New York, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, UK, and other locations to be announced.

UMOVE was started by three dance film-makers: Kriota Willberg, Marta Renzi, and Anna Brady Nuse (Pentacle’s Director of Movement Media) who are passionate about promoting dance film through any means possible. We seek to find the most innovative and engaging dance videos on the web and to highlight rising talent in the field.

October  1st will mark the launch of UMOVE online, and on October 14th there will be a live screening and party in New York after which the festival will tour to select locations around the country and the world in 2009-10.

MISSION & OBJECTIVE
Movement Media’s mission is to provide services, strategies, and opportunities for artists making dance for the camera, and to help dance artists use media to promote and enhance their artistic pursuits.

For more info on Pentacle’s Movement Media project, please visit our blog: Move the Frame and our website: http://pentacle.org/movement-media.asp

GENERAL RULES

All submissions must exist online and be embeddable (i.e., hosted on YouTube or another sharable online video platform). All videos must be under 8 minutes long. Only one video may be submitted per entrant. Student, professional, and amateur film-makers are all encouraged to apply.

Please submit the following materials via email:

• URL address of your video (double check the link works).

• Short biography/artist statement.

• Clearly label which category the submission should be reviewed under (see category list below).

• Brief synopsis of the video.

• Principal Cast and production credits listing

• Include a link to your website (if you have one)

• Include your email address (if different from the one you are sending from).

• Paste in the Terms and Conditions (see below) and type in your signature

• Email all information to movementmedia@pentacle.org

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

• I/we have read all of the rules and regulations for the UMove Online Videodance Festival (hereafter called the “Festival”).

• I/we understand and have complied with these rules.

• I/we warrant the submission of my/our original work and that there are no disputes regarding the ownership of the submission.

• I/we warrant the submitted material does not defame or invade the rights of any person living or dead

• I/we fully indemnify the Festival against any claim made for such violations of law.

• To the best of my/our knowledge, all of the statements herein are true and correct.

• I/we understand that failure to adhere to Festival rules and regulations will result in disqualification.

• I/we hold the Festival harmless from and defend against all claims, demands, losses, damages, judgements, liabilities and expenses (including attorney’s fees) arising out of or in connection with any all claims of third parties, whether or not groundless, based on any film/video submitted to the Festival or on any film/video developed out of such submission.

• By submitting this entry, I agree that the UMove Festival may publicly screen my work as well as use stills and descriptive material in the official program and any other publicity efforts.

• In the event that I am selected as a Finalist, I will provide a finished copy in the format indicated no later than September 15th, 2009.

• I agree to hold the UMOVE Festival harmless in the event of loss or damage to my entry tape or material provided for Festival screening.

We are about to embark upon the fourth week of our Videodance Contest, and as always, we greatly appreciate all the creativity and effort given by the artists who have submitted so far. If you have yet to participate, we strongly encourage you to do so, or nominate the work of others for a chance to receive publicity and feedback among this burgeoning community. Scroll below for information on next week’s theme, “Summer or Winter.” Submissions are due by Tuesday June 23rd, and the contest winners will be announced here on June 26th.

Modern or Classical

This week’s theme was Modern or Classical as it applies to the styles of filming, choreography, and music. We discovered in viewing the submissions, that there were a great deal of gray areas in trying to categorize a piece under one specific style. If a piece was comprised of both choreography and music that was highly classical, but used a filming technique that was hi-tech or contemporary, which category did it fall into? What about if the dancing style was modern, but the piece was filmed using a strictly classical technique? We found that it was often tricky to determine which style predominantly overshadowed the other in each work. Out of this ambiguity one submission emerged that we felt represented both styles strongly and in equal measure.

Our winner for both categories this week is…

“Arabesque” by Peter William Holden

Arabesque

While the complicated technology used to create the kinetic sculpture in this video seems to categorize it as a modern work, other aspects of the film are highly classical. For starters, the piece is choreographed to the renowned Blue Danube Waltz by Johann Strauss. Additionally, the kaleidoscopic choreography that Holden creates with the mechanical arms and legs, as well as the aerial camera view, are reminiscent of Busby Berkley’s classic films. Holden’s innovative dance video combines classical film and choreographic styles with modern elements such as the technology needed to operate and coordinate the sculpture. Therefore, this video is both highly modern and classical.

Refreshingly, this is the first video we’ve showcased that was made by an artist from a visual arts background. We love to see artists of all disciplines working with kinetic forms and media. Video artists, animators, installation artists, and film-makers of all kinds are encouraged and invited to submit their work!

About the artist:

Peter William Holden was born in a decaying post industrial town in Northern England in 1970, and from an early age became fascinated with moving imagery, transformation and technology.

The abstract pixels of the 1980’s home computer gave him a glimpse into the wonderful world of mathematics. Early Electro and Hip-Hop with its synthetic sound introduced him to the complex dance routines of break-dance and acquainted him with the beauty of choreographed movement. These and countless more experiences are incorporated in his installations in a collage of movement, light and sound.

His work has been exhibited at various international events Ars Electronica, Linz. Technologically Expanded Dance, Lisbon. Kapelica Gallery, Ljubljana. e-Arts, Shanghai. boDig 08, Istanbul. Vooruit, Gent. Cinéma Le Miroir, Marseilles. More info: www.peter-william-holden.com

We would like to open up some questions to our audience regarding Classical versus Modern Styles.

• Do you prefer Classical or Modern Styles?
• Do you feel that you work in a particular style, or a combination of styles?
• Do you think that videos of Classical styles or Modern styles work better for online viewing?  For example, Classical dance styles often value symmetry and a balanced composition, and tend to be more story-based.  On the other hand, Modern dance styles often showcase abstract themes, such as social and political views, and movement that is based in individual expression and having the artistic product relay that intellectual or emotional process.
• Do you find more Classical style dance companies using technology to post their works online than Modern styles?  Why might there be a difference?

We would love to hear your comments.

Next Week’s Categories for Movement Media’s Online Video Dance Contest

Theme Four: Summer or Winter

Submissions are due by June 23rd.

Winners will be announced on Move the Frame on June 26th.

We felt that in honor of the first day of summer, it would be fun to explore the theme Summer or Winter, and if you live in the Northeast U.S. it is actually feeling more wintery these days than summery…This is a theme that can be very literally interpreted, but at the same time presents the potential to inspire a vast array of site-specific works. We are looking for any interpretation that you may have of summer or winter. Does a film fall into the category of summer simply because it is filmed in a warm location? Can a sense of warmth between individuals evoke a feeling of summer? Does cold weather immediately classify a film as winter? Often a site specific piece can unintentionally be classified into one of these two themes. While we created this theme with the intention of focusing mostly on the location of each film and how it is incorporated into the piece or why it is chosen, we are open to any interpretation that you may offer us. Just make sure to tell us which category the work falls under and why.

HOW TO SUBMIT

* Submissions may be made by anyone – artists, film makers, and anyone who knows of online videos that fit the weekly themes.
* The video submitted must be under 10 minutes long.
* Pick/Submit one video to represent only one of the weekly themes.
* Send the link of the video to Movement Media
* The video submitted needs to be embeddable, ie hosted on YouTube or another sharable online video platform.
* Include a short biography/artist statement (if it is your work).
* For every submission, include a short summary that describes why you have chosen a particular video for the contest and describe how it relates to the weekly theme.
* Include a brief synopsis of the video.
* Include a link to your website (if you have one)
* Include your email address
Email all information to movementmedia@pentacle.org
If your submission is chosen for the weekly contest, we will contact you directly

Impetus for Contest Participants

* Have your videos seen by an online audience who’s interested in movement-based video.
* Receive publicity for your work/work of others
* Receive comments and feedback
* Automatic consideration for live screening at Kinetic Cinema in NYC.
* Automatic consideration for Movement Media’s Online Dance Film Festival in September 2009 (information and submission guidelines to be announced in late June).

Thank you to everyone who submitted or nominated work for the second week of our videodance contest. We enjoy getting a chance to see your own interpretations and explorations of this week’s theme.

If you didn’t get a chance to participate this week, fear not! This contest will be happening every week so there are plenty of chances to submit your work or nominate the work of others. Our next theme is Modern or Classical. All submissions are due by June 16th, and the contest winners will be announced on June 19th. Please scroll to the bottom of this post for more details on next week’s contest.

This week we explored the theme: Improvised or Choreographed. As we looked at the this week’s submissions and nominations, many questions came up for us about what makes a work primarily improvised or choreographed. Could a piece be considered improvised if the dancing was choreographed but the camera work was improvised? What if only one performer was choreographed while the rest are improvising? Does a planned and highly structured improvisation fit better in the category of choreographed? While there may be no definitive answers to these questions, the winning videos this week were chosen in part because they seemed to fit together as a contrasting pair, like two sides of the same coin. Both were shot in site-specific locations, and involve pedestrian spectators reacting to spontaneous performances by trained dancers. There is an element of surprise in each, but the level of control and pre-meditated planning seem to be vastly different.

Without further adieu, this week’s winners are….

“Contrust” an excerpt from Chapter 4, by Elad Weissman and Teddy Productions in Israel.

And

“Sound of Music | Central Station Antwerp (Belgium),” produced by Vtm in Belgium.

IMPROVISED

“Contrust” an excerpt from Chapter 4, by Elad Weissman and Teddy Productions

This video is an excerpt from Elad Weissman’s 2007 film about ten dancers dealing with love and fear in an ultra-urban world. (Fun fact: The dancers in this film are famous in Israel for being contestants in “Nolad Lirkod – Born to Dance” a reality tv show, similar to America’s “So You Think You Can Dance.”) While the dancer in this excerpt may have had some choreographic direction, for the most part his movements look improvised. Additionally, the camera work is reactive to his movements and has an unplanned, spontaneous feel. One gets the sense that this shoot was set up on the street with very little premeditated planning, except to capture a dark urban street environment within which to improvise. We get to see real spectators’ reactions, and their surprised faces tell us that this performance is strange and spontaneous. This excerpt is one of several chapters from Weissman’s 42 min film that are viewable on YouTube. Each are site specific, and consists of a dancer or dancers interpreting and embracing the mood that the music and location exert.

CHOREOGRAPHED

Sound of Music | Central Station Antwerp (Belgium)

This video documents a publicity stunt that was used to promote a Belgian television show looking for non-actors to audition for the “Sound of Music.” Like the famous “T-Mobile dance” that took place in a crowded London Train station, this piece simulates a flash mob convening to perform a choreographed routine to the Sound of Music. What makes these kinds of stunts so brilliant is that no one knows who is a real innocent bystander, and who is in on the act. Throughout the piece almost two hundred performers pop into the dance, all disguised as pedestrians from all walks of life. The element of surprise in this piece gives it an improvisational feel, however the coordination necessary to pull off such a massive stunt is only possible through meticulous choreography.

Now tell us what  you think! We look forward to hearing your thoughts on what is “Improvised” and “Choreographed”.

NEXT WEEK’S CONTEST

Theme Three: Modern or Classical
Submissions are due by Tuesday June 16th. Winners will be announced on Move the Frame on June 19th.

Modern and classical – what do these terms mean to you? For classical dance you may think of ballet or other traditional and highly refined styles such as Baratya Natyam and Kabuki Theatre. Modern dance may be anything that came after Isadora Duncan or, you may think only post-modern/post-Judson Church dance is truly modern now. Film also has modern and classical styles such as the Silent era and Hollywood classics versus the French New Wave and New American Cinema. For next week’s theme we want to examine both the styles and execution of dance as well as the filming techniques used. What is it that differentiates them? Submit or nominate a film for one of the categories and tell us why.

HOW TO SUBMIT

* Submissions may be made by anyone – artists, film makers, and anyone who knows of online videos that fit the weekly themes.
* The video submitted must be under 10 minutes long.
* Pick/Submit one video to represent only one of the weekly themes.
* Send the link of the video to Movement Media
* The video submitted needs to be embeddable, ie hosted on YouTube or another sharable online video platform.
* Include a short biography/artist statement (if it is your work).
* For every submission, include a short summary that describes why you have chosen a particular video for the contest and describe how it relates to the weekly theme.
* Include a brief synopsis of the video.
* Include a link to your website (if you have one)
* Include your email address
Email all information to movementmedia@pentacle.org
If your submission is chosen for the weekly contest, we will contact you directly

Impetus for Contest Participants

* Have your videos seen by an online audience who’s interested in movement-based video.
* Receive publicity for your work/work of others
* Receive comments and feedback
* Automatic consideration for live screening at Kinetic Cinema in NYC.
* Automatic consideration for Movement Media’s Online Dance Film Festival in September 2009 (information and submission guidelines to be announced in late June).

by Dawn Paap, Mollie Shapiro, and Anna Brady Nuse

First of all, we want to thank everyone who graciously submitted their work for the first week of our videodance contest. We appreciated getting to see the variety approaches you took to capturing dance and movement on screen.

If you missed out this time, don’t dismay! This contest is happening every week, and there are plenty of chances to submit your work, or nominate the work of others. Please scroll to the bottom of this post to read about next week’s contest.

Amateur or Professional?

The theme we chose to kick things off first with was “Amateur or Professional.” For most of us, these words are loaded with connotations, many negative. Most often they are used to pass judgment on one’s job, performance, attitude or work. On the other hand, concepts about these terms are changing rapidly in the age of Web 2.0, as open access to social media is ushering in the rise of amateurism (and the fall of many old media industries) in what some sociologists and trend-spotters are calling the “Pro/Am” revolution. For our purposes, we hoped this theme would provoke an interesting discussion in the dance/film community about what these terms mean, and what the merits are of both approaches.

After viewing this week’s video submissions, it became apparent that the distinctions between amateur and professional are blurry at best. A professional can create an amateur film by incorporating the lightheartedness and innocence that an amateur film often possesses. Conversely, a professional video may include simple everyday movements that are universally used by individuals as they conduct their daily routines.

Therefore, this week’s winners are… (drum roll please)

‘Snew’: Videodance representing the Amateur Category, Co-directed by Jody Oberfelder and David Lachman

AND

‘Drive’: Videodance representing the Professional Category, Choreographed and directed by Jane Osborne.

Snew

Although this video was made by professionals, it embraces the essence of amateurism, which is something made purely for the enjoyment of it rather than for professional advancement. The tone of the film is extremely playful as it explores the joys and nuances of life that the media overlooks. The film’s directors used Snew to delve into the connections that are made through language that is not yet tangible. Director Jody Oberfelder wrote that the film, “focuses on the life that happens in between bits of information in a media saturated world.”

Snew also gives an intimate and highly entertaining look into the creative process. Long before a work reaches the stage or screen, it is formed slowly and inconspicuously through long sessions of play, experimentation and [what looks like] pure silliness in the studio. Snew embraces this process, and that unselfconscious state where all the best stuff happens.

Drive

Jane Osborne’s ‘Drive’ takes us on an exploration of daily routine from both micro and macroscopic viewpoints, which illustrates the subconscious force that propels us through our days.  It is clear that a lot of planning was involved in making this film, from shooting to editing, resulting in a high quality production.  Elements of professionalism include the variety of locations used to shoot the film, sophisticated choreographed movements, multiple camera angles, and detailed choreography done with the camera.  We found this videodance to be both creative and stylistic, and an excellent example of Professional work.

Not only is the work professional, it is also a commentary on professionalism itself. On the one hand, being a “professional” is a badge of honor in our society, and an expectation for being a good citizen. However as we see in ‘Drive’ the daily reality of being a professional can be dull and mind-numbing. The characters’ lack of purpose and self direction to make choices is characteristic of the stereotypical “wage slave” in which a person’s livelihood and identity is completely dependent upon earning wages. In his 1791 book On the Limits of State Action, the classical liberal thinker Wilhelm von Humboldt said, “whatever does not spring from a man’s free choice, or is only the result of instruction and guidance, does not enter into his very nature; he does not perform it with truly human energies, but merely with mechanical exactness.” No one wants to admit they live in this place, however a majority of people persist in unfulfilling jobs, feeling powerless to leave a regular paycheck in pursuit of “frivolous” dreams.

The Artist’s Path

Fifty years ago in France, there were a few film buffs with desk jobs in a magazine who picked up 16mm cameras and shot personal films with tiny budgets, completely outside of the mainstream industry. These characteristics would make them fall in the hobbyist or amateur category in the eyes of many people. Yet, these filmmakers revolutionized the medium with the French New Wave and achieved the highest stature in movie history along with their more “professional” peers and idols. I wonder who could dare call Godard and Truffaut “amateurs”?

Cameras don’t make films; film-makers make films. Film-makers improve their abilities not by adding more equipment and personnel but by using what they have to their fullest capacity. The most important part of a film-maker’s equipment is oneself: one’s mobile body, one’s imaginative mind, and one’s freedom to use both.

Part 2 of ‘Drive’ is available on YouTube, and you can learn more about director Jane Osborne on her website: http://janeosborne.com/drive/

Learn more about ‘Snew’ and co-director Jody Oberfelder on her website: http://www.jodyoberfelder.com

We would love to hear your comments on the contest winner’s work.

Submit videos for next week’s videodance theme:

Theme Two:  Improvised or Choreographed

Submissions due by Tuesday June 9th. Weekly Contest winners will be announced on Move the Frame June 12th.

Choreography vs. Improvisation, what is the main difference?  When improvising, decisions are being made every split second, while during a choreographic process a choreographer may have days, weeks or months to work on a sequence of movements.  For this week’s theme we are looking for any type of improvision or choreography, from the movement of the dancers to the camera work and editing. Perhaps the dance is choreographed and the camera movement was improvised, or the movement was improvised and the camera work and editing was highly choreographed. Any variation will do, but be sure to tell us which category the work falls under and why.

We look forward to your submissions.

Submission Requirements

* Submissions may be made by anyone – artists, film makers, and anyone who knows of online videos that fit the weekly themes.
* The video submitted must be under 10 minutes long.
* Pick/Submit one video to represent only one of the weekly themes.
* Send the link of the video to Movement Media
* The video submitted needs to be embeddable, ie hosted on YouTube or another sharable online video platform.
* Include a short biography/artist statement (if it is your work).
* For every submission, include a short summary that describes why you have chosen a particular video for the contest and describe how it relates to the weekly theme.
* Include a brief synopsis of the video.
* Include a link to your website (if you have one)
* Include your email address
Email all information to movementmedia@pentacle.org
If your submission is chosen for the weekly contest, we will contact you directly

Impetus for Contest Participants

* Have your videos seen by an online audience who’s interested in movement-based video.
* Receive publicity for your work/work of others
* Receive comments and feedback
* Automatic consideration for live screening at Kinetic Cinema in NYC.
* Automatic consideration for Movement Media’s Online Dance Film Festival in September 2009 (information and submission guidelines to be announced in late June).

By Dawn Paap

Given all the possibilities of dance on screen, choreographers for the camera have a multitude of ways to keep us astonished.  Fortunately, the creative interaction between film technique and dance are endless.  In the emerging field of Cinedance, filmmakers or video artists create works that use dance as raw material, and now, choreographic achievements are being made available to the video artist for artistic exploration.

At the last Kinetic Cinema screening on May 13th at Chez Bushwick, curator Victoria Murphy showed a video by Matt Tarr and Ami Ipapo entitled ‘Little Ease (Outside the Box)’ that was a screen adaptation of Elizabeth Streb’s iconic solo ‘Little Ease’. For the film version of the piece, Streb company member Ami Ipapo reconstructed the choreography off-stage in an urban landscape.  The choreography of the live piece on its own is powerful, but the film was able to capture more action and intensity in the piece. I felt more connected to the dancer by being able to hear her breathing, and see her minute facial expressions as she powerfully pushes through the movements. The film took me “inside the box” with the dancer, and I forgot that I was a voyeur watching a choreographed work, something that rarely happens when watching a live performance. My favorite element of this Cinedance was the artistry in editing together of the shots of choreography, which to me added a new specific cinematic “pulse” to Streb’s dance.

Fortunately, other dance icons are lending their choreographed works to video artists to create cinedances. For instance the Martha Graham Company recently released videos of several dances from Martha Graham’s Clytemnestra to be remashed and reedited by contestants in their Clytemnestra Remash Challenge. The contestants displayed a huge range of styles and approaches to remashing the choreographic material, and all of the contest entries are available for view on the Clytemenestra Remash Challenge website at http://clytemnestraproject.com.

I am a personal fan of taking choreographed works made for the stage out into the world to be performed, so I was very pleased to see so many  video artists take Martha Graham’s choreography and characters into new environments off stage.  To me, it made the characters more appealing and more passionate. As a result, I found myself enjoying and connecting with Graham’s work on another level.   The following submission was my personal favorite in the Remash Contest.

The winners of the Remash Contest for Martha Graham’s Clytemnestra have been announced.  Check out their videos and look at some of the other contestants as well. Voting is still open for the popular choice awards! Regardless of the winners, I am thrilled to see new film-makers responding to choreography and furthering the development of cinedance.

People all over the globe are now able to share and collaborate on artistic works over the Internet. Dance innovators would be wise to tap into these new possibilities and use today’s networked media technologies to make the works of dance masters more accessible. In so doing, like Martha Graham and Elizabeth Streb, they would ensure the cultural significance of their work over time, while also enabling to new works of art to be made and contributing to new developments in cinedance.