Scanner endurance.

[Jem]

Hey Doc...

I'd put a post in the sales section of the forum for the Widemoves. You'll probably attract a much better response there.

[The_Doctor]

Hey Doc...

I'd put a post in the sales section of the forum for the Widemoves. You'll probably attract a much better response there.

All in good time. As any old-time showman might say, there's no point setting up a pitch if you don't get so much as a look sidewise when suggesting that you might. So the best I can do, having offered to put up pics and associated design files for the system, and got no hint of interest, is to try to make myself interesting here in the meantime.

Brian, thanks. In the immortal (wry, smug) words of Auric Goldfinger: So did I. Actually I got my inspiration for that when I was at a ship festival in Bristol harbour. I'd watched the fireworks from the crow's nest of the Jean de la Lune where I was soon to be part of the crew for a trip to Dublin. Later I went to see a laser show called 'Aquabats'. There was a large (vast) frame of copper water pipe with fine holes pouring a wall of water, and I was hoping for great things, then a few flickering fish and a old-time diver showed up waddling across the screen like that hypothetical duck. Given several watts of 488 nm and what was obviously a mighty beast amongst water-cooled lasers, I was slightly shocked to find it a right thumb-twiddler. I spent more time admiring the fine lines it accidentally drew on the rigging of the Matthew, moored prior to its trip across the Atlantic. Bright yellow wood contrasting with hard argon blue lacing across white rigging, a sight to remember, for sure, but the mix of awe and disappointment told me that something was wrong. I got more fun out of an experience with just 20mW of same coloured argon but I haven't made up my mind whether to risk boring people with that story yet.

EDIT:
Brian, I like that avatar! If you did that with a laser scanner, you're doing ok. I faked mine. It's a vague idea of something I'd like to see done, but it's just layers in paintshop. Maybe the original bit in the middle was a fake-colour still from a real laser but I can't even remember, I did so much fiddling in Paintshop to make it look like that. Probably was a lens-flare fake originally, I liked the effect while playing with filters someone was trying to impress me with.

[mixedgas]

Ct knows the ILDA pattern well. They had / have Pangolin. Should be no problem getting excellent tuning from them or OSLS.

Steve

[planters]

Steve,

I'll give them a call as well and ask about tuning.

My opinion regarding the abstract approach is that there is a strong appeal to meaning. That is what graphics bring. Abstracts are like the music and graphics are like the lyrics. The music can exit without lyrics, but can be enhanced by it. However, the lyrics usually fail without the music...shallow poetry. The problem with current laser graphics is that they tend to be so clumsy.

One of the problems I have been faced with is that even the most complex hardware, once it has been completed, can run for thousands of hours. But, because good content is so limited I often see it repeated interminably and I am rarely "surprised". Again, I am attracted to the video approach because of the vast library of available material. Just think of the screen savers available for abstracts and animusic videos for graphics. Then, there are the millions of still images that can be stylized and merged. Don't get me wrong, I like lasers. I can't stop building them. But, they are really just very nice paint. Real art, to be entertaining needs to inspire and surprise. It needs to evoke deeper feelings and thought. Abstract art can do this as can realism, but even more powerful, in my opinion, is impressionism which melds these two disciplines. And then there is the whole area of sculpture ie 3D. Here the parallel is video mapping and virtual reality. Lasers can have a part here, but the field is wide open and even less explored than this already esoteric laser hobby.

I wish there were more active interest in these other technologies or at least a less ham handed approach to laser graphics.

[White-Light]

When it comes to tuning, to my understanding, Bill Benner worked as consultant to CT on servo component and amp design during several of their scanners development including the 60K 6215's.

I'm sure either company could do it well, but personally I'd find some comfort in knowing they'd been tuned by someone who was involved in their design and development.

[The_Doctor]

My opinion regarding the abstract approach is that there is a strong appeal to meaning. That is what graphics bring. Abstracts are like the music and graphics are like the lyrics. The music can exit without lyrics, but can be enhanced by it. However, the lyrics usually fail without the music...shallow poetry. The problem with current laser graphics is that they tend to be so clumsy.

One of the problems I have been faced with is that even the most complex hardware, once it has been completed, can run for thousands of hours. But, because good content is so limited I often see it repeated interminably and I am rarely "surprised". Again, I am attracted to the video approach because of the vast library of available material. Just think of the screen savers available for abstracts and animusic videos for graphics. Then, there are the millions of still images that can be stylized and merged. Don't get me wrong, I like lasers. I can't stop building them. But, they are really just very nice paint. Real art, to be entertaining needs to inspire and surprise. It needs to evoke deeper feelings and thought. Abstract art can do this as can realism, but even more powerful, in my opinion, is impressionism which melds these two disciplines. And then there is the whole area of sculpture ie 3D. Here the parallel is video mapping and virtual reality. Lasers can have a part here, but the field is wide open and even less explored than this already esoteric laser hobby.

I wish there were more active interest in these other technologies or at least a less ham handed approach to laser graphics.

Good stuff. That bit mentioning impressionism especially, not lost on me, it's what I was getting around to. Your point about lyrics and music fits well too.

The one real strength of a laser is that it can dance. The same could be said about other projections but they will ALWAYS look like the image of the dance at best, even when spontaneous and live. The intensity of a laser's dance is unrivaled. I won't tell the whole of that story I was considering posting last night, but I'll explain why I wanted to, the core of the thing... I built a 20mW argon laser for someone. Compared to standards here it, and its scanners (small mirrors stuck to 4" loudspeakers), were thunderously awful, but it was the best he could find for a grand. It took me a week to build, I'd tested it, liked the few Lissajous figures that were about all it could do. No blanking, never mind beam change unless you threw a switch for five more amps. He set it up in a small snooker club, and collected me later in a hurry because it wasn't working. Was just a mounting flaw for its big dodgy case on cushioned bar stools, blocked aperture.. I was left wondering what to do there. How to please a bunch of people sitting around waiting for something to happen.... The only thing I could do was make it draw sine waves by Wein bridge oscillators, and pan either axis a bit too. So I improvised. You can slow it right down in horizontal, stop it in vertical, let it draw a lighthouse beam across the bottles of spirits above the bar on the far wall. Or let it slowly weave a gentle watery surface. Or suddenly swap them and speed it up then pan a slow vertical fan. I'd already figured out a few memorised points for integer relations to get certain Lissajous figures I liked best, so could get those in an instant and set them rotating. Once that happened I started listening a bit more to the DJ because they'd started getting interested, and playing better music too. So it was like a slow dance, uncertain steps getting a bit more secure and expressive. To cut to the chase, by the end, there were girls dancing in that light (which was always on a wide high fast wild pattern at such moments, never mind frenetic expression, got to keep the dwell time right down when doing that! In the US it's probably illegal even with 20 mW.) One guy trying to get the slow beam straight between the eyes, so I sent it floating over his head and amongst those bottle again, out of reach. In short, I learned that you have to interact, work with whatever you have got, give it everything you have got, and people will respond to that.

The real power of expression has to be the way we can shape it live, small and fairly crude expressions can have deeper meaning because of the immediate context, people will understand more subconsciously than consciously, which is why this is more powerful than any consciously planned work. A bit of choreography helps, but never rely on that alone.

I have seen oscilloscope patterns like eyes, reeds bending in wind, feathers, various surprising things, and while a laser scanner can't do those fast, it ought to be able, especially given gradient control of beam power. The real question is: Can a recall of certain pattern memories be seamless and fluently fused with improvised dance? Given what many performers can do with a monosynth with a decent arpeggiator or simple step sequencer, the answer is obviously YES, but it's going to take a lot of cautious conversion of that notion to make the best of laser scanners. As to pre-made shows, it is always possible to jam, like any garage band, recording stuff. Can cut and edit later to assemble a show using whatever worked best. But if you can do it live, you'll never worry about needing the PRS, RIAA, or MPAA to protect you, you'll have something no-one can take from you, or copy, and if enough people like it they will likely pay to see it, repeatedly. And you won't be competing with me, I have far too much difficulty in social situations to put myself through that on a regular basis.

Widemoves. Just thought I'd mention those again, purely gratuitous...

[The_Doctor]

I post a lot, but I think I found something else worth risking more.
I was looking at DZ's analog console thread, and it's impressive in a crudely old-school kind of way, then I had a look at the tiny console I still have, used for the single show I described in the post before this one. Doesn't even have pan! Just frequency and amplitude, per axis. So damn basic that the memory of what I acheived with it led me to believe it was capable of more. Which is my point. Maybe less IS more, here! Maybe what's really needed is someone to figure out how the mix of dance, texture, visual timbre, is most easily and powerfully combined, and to create a console that becomes definitive. Bob Moog did that, with the MiniMoog monosynth. It's limited, too limited for me, (I prefer the SCI Pro One), but it has become a standard by which all others are judged because its power to ease ratio, in terms of live expression, is so good. Pro One adds a step sequencer that can be transposed live, a notion that I think can inspire some way to fuse graphic frames with improvised beam shows. And so it goes... And it will take the right mix of artist and scientist to make that definitive instrument. Unlike the MiniMoog, I'm not sure that the laserist equivalent has ever existed.

[laserist]

To date the definitive live performance console would have to be the Mark 6 designed and built by Laser Images. Nobody else to my knowledge came close in terms of live performance. Nobody else embraced live performance the way Laser Images did. Perhaps we need a sucessful economic model to bring Laser Shows much farther. Art for art's sake doesn't seem to have much of a following...

I believe that it's through live performance that this art form should be expressed. As a laserist evolves his performance eventually he gets ahead of the audience in complexity and pacing and he needs to dial things back a bit. The audience response let's you know how and how much to dial it back. I understand the wish to equate a laser console with early synthesizers, but the synth had previous musical instruments to emulate - laser imagery is completely new territory. Perhaps there are some lessons from the visual arts, but they too are mostly produced offline, and any insights might have to be abstracted beyond recognition to influence console design. The ability to record, playback, study, and critique music lends robustness to the art. Most laser shows today are at the early garage band stage, and aren't up to serious study.

[The_Doctor]

Perhaps we need a successful economic model to bring Laser Shows much farther. Art for art's sake doesn't seem to have much of a following...

Given the amount people will spend if they have it, and the ratio of that to what they expect to get back, I disagree. What does help is some cheap way for people to try things. I think ILDA might hold things back more than advance them. The best it has to offer is basically a form of notation, but that can't be expected to hold people back. Human language has taken some time to settle on which alphabets best create the most useful phrases of words.

I imagine that consoles may be further defined, and the cheapest way I know of to aim at some consensus is by MIDI because it's a strong protocol with lots of cheap DIY-based tools. Dieter Doepfer's 'Pocket Electronics', for example. A few pots or rotary encoders on a blank panel are alone enough to find the most effective instrument for them, and share ideas. The rest can be software, just needs MIDI input. Far more scope for extensive cheap experiment than DMX, I imagine..

About lack of prior references, that's less of a problem than it appears. Impressionism in music and visual arts already recognises that most people have synaesthesia to some degree. Any stage magician can tell you how effective is the power of suggestion, too. Most of the language of art is about shared consensus, and repeat experience. I have found that if I talk about 'visual timbre' or 'audible texture', people don't usually get it, but when hearing what I can do with a DX7 they do! One guy who dismissed the DX7 and all its works, citing how a guitar was better because you could take it up a mountain, came to visit me once, and I'd been making a keen sound with high mod index that slowly dropped the fundamental out leaving a sonic texture like that thin band of sky seen in near Earth orbit photos. I called it Violet Sky after that notion... None of which immediately grabbed him until I played it. He literally broke out in a cold sweat! He said it was like iced air off a mountain. There's real power in this game. I'm sure that fast scanners and colour gradients can make equally suggestive and powerful synaesthesiac textures, and modify them swiftly enough to form dance or narrative. Most people will get it, like that guy did, never mind conscious thought. We just have to use whatever references we get. I long since quit worrying if it all seemed a bit mad. What useful art or science doesn't?

EDIT:
Important, this one... 'Abstract' is a funny word. People use it arse over tit, base over apex, etc.. Most people seem to think that prosaic things like cups, trees, lightning, bags, are the reality of life, and that notions of branching and close containment are the abstractions! Reverse that. And keep it that way. That's the key to this (and a whole heap of understanding and science, art, etc). Branching, containment, capture, release, stasis, flux, these are the core of life, and all the bags, trees, cups, etc, are the abstractions. They are the things the core of life might express in any number of arbitrary ways. The trouble with most laser graphics is it tends to agonise over the last point detail in expressing a form that IS actually an abstraction, and having trapped itself there, has no easy way to fluently change. It's hard enough I imagine to DRAW Donald Duck let alone animate him! Better to find expressions to the core notions of travel on water, of flight in air. And to do it in ways that other forms of projection cannot compete with. The closest to any solid abstracted form it should go to is something analogous to a stem cell, from which easy changes in configuration can shape other forms. Fluid dynamics is easy. Less so is crystaline forms. While frosted glass can render things of huge power, getting somethign stable, repeatable, is all but impossible and needs a whole different sort of laser projector. But we can at least move between curves and hard angles to suggest such changes. In the end it will be the simplest and most expressive instruments that will win, the stuff people can form a band with. That won't happen until controller and lasers and scanners can all be bought for the price of a guitar and an amp. And that won't happen until some consensus on form has arrived. The only other way in is to deliberately exploit the synaesthesiac bit so that a symbiotic strength can be built between music and a solo laser show. The idea is old (Samuel Delaney wrote of a notional instument in 1968, he called it a 'sensory syrinx', in a book called Nova...), but as far as I know, no-one has taken the idea beyond a few rare avant garde experiments. I was hoping that small laser-based projectors made for mass production might change this but amongst all the iPads and tablets and laser-based keyboards, signs of this mythical beast are still conspicuously absent. Certainly there doesn't seem to be anything people can get cheap and adapt. So the only way might be the top-down method of building some consensus on an instrument, then eventually larger scale production will make them cheaper and more widely used.

[laserist]

Ah you seem to be a member of the "toil in magnificent isolation" school. I'm not. I'm a believer that it's the return of the audience that validates what I do. Getting them to come once is about the words/advertising. Getting them to come back is about the experience. Once you figure out what you need from a performance point of view you can implement it using whatever technology you like. I feel the attraction to jumping to a computer because *then I can do anything that I can ever imagine* (within the limits of my opto mechanics, programming skills, and/or the soft/hardware tools I've simply purchased...). But that direction also leads to just screwing around - look at this, isn't this cool, this is a constantly evolving n-dimensional wire frame projected into 2D, and other pretentious screen saver crap, but unless you're incredibly disciplined it won't lead to a user interface that maximizes live performance. It will almost always lead to a canned "performance" that will run afoul of the musician's synchronization rights and the record company's mastering rights. Unless you're the musician as well as the laserist, or at least partner with the musician(s) - synchronization rights are the brick wall across that path. Your friend wasn't wrong - of course you can make sounds or images that have never been seen or heard before - and evocative as hell - the trick is putting it all together in a performance that leads the audience where you want to take them in a way that makes them want to go. The way to learn how to do that with an audience is through performing live. You have to own the performance. You have to put yourself out there. You have to discover all the ways that don't work just as much or more than the ways that do.