Not Technology

[laserist]

it is entirely unclear to me what you're actually interested in talking about. please elaborate.

Well you could have just goggled "Design Pattern"... One of the problems in Laser Shows and many other endeavors is immediate gratification. You can make changes as soon as they occur to you, without ever considering the problem beyond a superficial level. Hacking the problem. You may even arrive at something good, but is there room for a more disciplined approach?

"Design patterns" in architecture (introduced by Christopher Alexander) and as adapted in software design the goal is to identify "Design Patterns" and ultimately results in the formation of a "pattern language".

"The elements of this language are entities called patterns. Each pattern describes a problem that occurs over and over again in our environment, and then describes the core of the solution to that problem, in such a way that you can use this solution a million times over, without ever doing it the same way twice." — Christopher Alexander

We have the million solution never the same way twice situation already. Is there any interest in finding the core of the problems and looking for deeper solutions?

[Bradfo69]

Ok... I'm starting to understand your question. I've Googled it. I've read the wiki. "Is there any interest in finding the core of the problems and looking for deeper solutions?" And my answer is, no... not really. At least for me anyway. Probably a little too philosophical and esoteric a conversation for my taste..

And yet, I keep typing...

Based on what I'm reading above, it sounds like you feel as though how one constructs a good show should have some basic elemental "rules". Sort of like composition rules for taking a good picture with a camera? Musical swells should have laser beam movements that always "sweep from bottom right to top left" or something like that? I don't know that your disciplined approach works that way. Or...maybe it does. Art shouldn't necessarily have rules yet, people still judge good art from bad and I guess that stems from "riules". It's like saying, this is a crappy Monet versus this other Monet.

[laserist]

You're not abstracting the problem. If the music has discordant notes what kind of imagery works? Worse there are piano pieces where each hand plays a different melody and the result is discordant. How do you deal with that? Is representative imagery a good thing or self indulgent crap? Should the imagery develop beyond the music? (Synchronization rights are expensive enough - do we really want to start going after grand performance rights?) What about pacing across an entire show? (Not. A. Single. Number!) Music can elicit a number of emotions - can we match that? Via imagery, color, motion, or…

I did a live show to a local Beatles tribute band a while back. One of the songs on their playlist was Helter Skelter. I listened to the Beatles version and thought, "Oh - HELL NO!" I ended up just having the star pilot bring up the red cove lights - if I was going to be transported to Hell - everybody into the pool.

[clisotope]

What's the ultimate objective? Artistic self-realization? Commercial success? If the latter, I believe the reason there are only a handful of viable laser show companies (fewer still if one looks beyond companies that are cult-of-personality shops resting on just one talented, hardworking person) is pretty clear. Lack of engaging content. Beams are great, for about 5 minutes. Abstracts are wonderful, for about 10 minutes. What is sorely lacking is story-telling, plot driven, laser show content. That's how your connect with your audience on an emotional level over the long haul. Just look at every other medium. TV, movies, etc. Take away the engaging content, and you might as well toss your 3-D TVs and 8000K x 8000K digital projection systems out the window. On the flip side, look at animation. What could have been a brief visual stylistic fad in the 1930's is still going strong because it's creators transitioned from forgettable shorts to 1st rate story-telling, all the while embracing what one could do with animation that wasn't possible with real actors. My kids love Tom and Jerry

For some reason, we as a field are fixated with recapturing the magic of Laserium in the late 70's (no disrespect, Laserist), instead of embracing the realities of today's audience. And while music is key, it's not just as simple as swapping out Floyd for Outkast and running the same general types of visuals. That approach, I humbly believe, led to the steep decline of Laserium, LFI, and AVI in the 1990's, as other electronic media really took off. One needs to understand what lasers do better than any other visual medium, and then find ways to deliver a rich experience to a targeted audience.

Regarding a formula, I think one just needs to look to big studios and networks to see pattern methodology at work on the mainstream. They arrive at a formula numerically, synthesize a solution that's semi-empirical or formulaic, and run on it for about 2-4 years until changes in popular culture shift enough, then repeat the cycle again.

Peace.

[dkumpula]

Well this was an eloquently written and constructive comment/argument!

What's the ultimate objective? Artistic self-realization? Commercial success? If the latter, I believe the reason there are only a handful of viable laser show companies (fewer still if one looks beyond companies that are cult-of-personality shops resting on just one talented, hardworking person) is pretty clear. Lack of engaging content. Beams are great, for about 5 minutes. Abstracts are wonderful, for about 10 minutes. What is sorely lacking is story-telling, plot driven, laser show content. That's how your connect with your audience on an emotional level over the long haul. Just look at every other medium. TV, movies, etc. Take away the engaging content, and you might as well toss your 3-D TVs and 8000K x 8000K digital projection systems out the window. On the flip side, look at animation. What could have been a brief visual stylistic fad in the 1930's is still going strong because it's creators transitioned from forgettable shorts to 1st rate story-telling, all the while embracing what one could do with animation that wasn't possible with real actors. My kids love Tom and Jerry

For some reason, we as a field are fixated with recapturing the magic of Laserium in the late 70's (no disrespect, Laserist), instead of embracing the realities of today's audience. And while music is key, it's not just as simple as swapping out Floyd for Outkast and running the same general types of visuals. That approach, I humbly believe, led to the steep decline of Laserium, LFI, and AVI in the 1990's, as other electronic media really took off. One needs to understand what lasers do better than any other visual medium, and then find ways to deliver a rich experience to a targeted audience.

Regarding a formula, I think one just needs to look to big studios and networks to see pattern methodology at work on the mainstream. They arrive at a formula numerically, synthesize a solution that's semi-empirical or formulaic, and run on it for about 2-4 years until changes in popular culture shift enough, then repeat the cycle again.

Peace.

[laserist]

What's the ultimate objective? It's to get the people who should be on the same page - on the same damn page. For example, "What is sorely lacking is story-telling, plot driven, laser show content." This has been seen by some as the laser Holy Grail for about 15 years, or put another way - just about since Pixar started saying it in an entirely different context. Music already connects with the audience on an emotional level, and it's been doing exactly that - practically forever. Think of this as a sanity check - if you keep doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result - well you may not be insane - maybe just a little befuddled?

I haven't noticed anyone "fixated with recapturing the magic of Laserium in the 70's". I've no doubt plenty of people have been fixated with recapturing their success. So I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Those early Laserium shows still work. What caused the slow slide in the 80's and what you describe the steep decline in the 90's? Two major things went wrong. Their marketing model began to break down, and not realizing what was happening in the marketing arena - they tried to chase the audience, and moved further and further away from what worked in the first place.

You mentioned "Artistic self-realization". Okay - let's go with that. Sometimes the audience is wrong. They can lead you astray. They can lead you down blind alleys. And once we accept that the audience can be wrong - it's not a big step to the realization that sometimes we're wrong too. Stravinsky's "The Rite of Spring" wasn't well received at it 1913 Paris ballet premier, and according to Wikipedia, "…is widely considered to be one of the most influential musical works of the 20th century." I'd love to say that Laserium was influential, but Laserium is more like Jethro Tull - lots of people like them, but nobody emulates them…

Oh by the way, I completely agree on your comments about 8K in planetariums. But even with great content - it's the rare planetarium that has a clue how to market itself today.

[Bradfo69]

Story telling. I think there is a mixed feeling about that. There are only a few shows I can think of that really tell a story. "Rhapsody in Balloon", and (I think) AVI's, "I'm a Believer". Recently at FLEM I discovered that (even after having seen it several times) that "Born To Be Wild" was also a show that tells a story. There does seem to be a lack of that sort of content.

Not to particularly single him out but, I've heard many people discuss the fact that many of Mike Dunn's shows are very literal with imagery matching the lyric. Yet, they don't "tell a story". There is a certain contingent that gets somewhat bored with that. Some people gravitate towards beam shows only, others prefer graphics and some would rather just sit and watch abstracts. I like to mix all three personally.

Now... I "think" perhaps you're also discussing something a little deeper and working towards getting lasers to affect the mind and brain more in sync with the music. Sort of what Remy Chevalier is/was attempting with the Big Igloo project:

http://www.remyc.com/bigigloo.html

Am I off base here?

I DO think, and I've mentioned it in other threads, that the audience is changing from the 70's and 80's and that "we" may need to do a better job of educating people as to what a laser show "is". Shortened attention spans, 3-D, crazy screen savers, cutting edge video gaming, over the top concert effects have all contributed to the need to rethink the way lasers are presented perhaps. Good discussion.

[swamidog]

you don't need literal imagery to tell stories, convey moods, and form emotional connections. properly done, even lumia can trigger emotional responses.

i find most literal imagery in laser shows to be absolute mood killers. there are too many laser shows that are "abstract/abstract/clip art/abstract". there's a problem when the hardest part of your show creation is selecting which clip art to use.

Story telling. I think there is a mixed feeling about that. There are only a few shows I can think of that really tell a story. "Rhapsody in Balloon", and (I think) AVI's, "I'm a Beleiver". Recently at FLEM I discovered that (even after having seen it several times) that "Born To Be Wild" was also a show that tells a story. There does seem to be a lack of that sort of content.

Not to particularly single him out but, I've heard many people discuss the fact that many of Mike Dunn's shows are very literal with imagery matching the lyric. Yet, they don't "tell a story". There is a certain contingent that get's somewhat bored with that. Some people gravitate towards beam shows only, others prefer graphics and some would rather just sit and watch abstracts. I like to mix all three personally.

Now... I "think" perhaps you're also discussing something a little deeper and working towards getting lasers to affect the mind and brain more in synch with the music. Sort of what Remy Chevalier is/was attempting with the Big Igloo project:

http://www.remyc.com/bigigloo.html

Am I off base here?

I DO think, and I've mentioned it in other threads, that the audience is changing from the 70's and 80's and that "we" may need to do a better job of educating people as to what a laser show "is". Shortened attention spans, 3-D, crazy screen savers, cutting edge video gaming, over the top concert effects have all contributed to the need to rethink the way lasers are presented perhaps. Good discussion.

[laserist]

There was an early Laserium attempt at story telling (to classical music) called "Crystal Odyssey". It was interesting, but hardly a homerun.

The audience has changed a bit over the years, certainly at least I've gotten older, but people haven't changed remotely as much as the market has changed. I'll give you an example. When Laserium opened in St. Louis in 1975 they bought some ads on KSHE radio and did a ticket give away. They sold out the premier shows and were still selling out the same show on the weekends 92 weeks later. (385 tickets was a sellout) Fast forward to 2013 - we did a KSHE ticket give away and 3 people with KSHE tickets showed up.

Yes, I'm hoping for something a little deeper, but I've been hoping for that for a long time. I saw a show way back when at Six Flags outside of St. Louis done by Laser Media. It was in a theater. It was day time and the exits opened into direct sunlight. They made an announcement at the beginning asking that anyone wishing to leave during the show please exit at the rear of the theater and not use the side exits opening into sunlight. The show opened literally with a bang as a number of flash pots went off, and we were off to the races. Beams, and scans, and more flash pots - Oh My... It was - "energetic". It was also uninspired. The first person who opened a door into direct sunlight got an energetic BOO from half the audience. Not so much for the second infraction. Shortly people were bailing through those doors in droves. There were three other guys there from Laser Images. They we're laughing. "This is the competition?" I said, "Hold on - they've got the technology - they just need to figure out how to use it." I have to admit I'm tired of waiting…

[discothefunkyhippo]

Thanks for the great topic laserist.

The laser show that made me fall in love with lasers made me laugh, cry, sentimental, and ecstatic all in the same show. I am sure part of it had to do with the music (Yes, it was a Pink Floyd show). The audience’s mood also played a huge part in my experience. Everyone was having a good time and it was OK to be silly. It also had to do with grand nature of the orchestration of events/ effects. The laser show included lumia, beams, abstracts, graphics(some very cheesy), text, video, a confetti canon and wacky arm waving inflatable tube man. Not to mention the show used ion lasers and I wish I could have seen the projector.

When I create something, I know where it falls on my scale of quality. I generate my scale from a sample of the entire set of all products ever created. I select products that are similar to what I am trying to create for my sample. Obviously, there is an inherent bias to my selection process. I only know about products that I know about. I highly value collaboration and critique because they allow me to slightly overcome that bias. By increasing the range of my the scale, I increase the room for improvement.

I want to create laser shows so I can share the experience that I had that one time with others. I feel as long as I strive for quality and to give the audience the best show possible thats a good start.

I have a few practical suggestions for our community to increase the level of quality of our laser shows. The first one isn’t my idea. Swami came up with the idea of getting a bunch of people to create a show to the same song. I thought it was a great idea. This would give us an opportunity to see what works and what works better. Here is another spin on that idea. Take an existing show and have a remix competition with real prizes. Another idea is have section on the forum that is dedicated to show critiques. This already tends to happen, but maybe we can get more than a few people to participate if we formalize it and post guidelines for provide constructive criticism.

These suggestions only address one aspect of a show, content creation, but its a start.