Navigation:
Documentation
Archive



Page Tree:

Child pages
  • SN-0057 Promoting a Digital Performance

This wiki space contains archival documentation of Project Bamboo, April 2008 - March 2013.

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Promoting a digital performance

Collection Date:
Scholar #1 Info: (if more than one scholar's process is described, copy this set for each scholar)

  • Name: Lisa Wymore
  • Email:
  • Title: Assistant Professor
  • Institution/Organization: UC Berkeley
  • Field of Study/Creative Endeavor: Department of Theater, Dance and Performance Studies: Modern Dance Technique, Choreography

Collector Info (can be the same as "Scholar" above):

  • Name: Rich Meyer
  • Email: rtmeyer@berkeley.edu
  • Title: Project Bamboo Program Manager
  • Institution/Organization: UC Berkeley
  • Name: Connor Riley
  • Email:
  • Title: Graduate Student Researcher
  • Institution/Organization: UC Berkeley

Notes on Methodology:

The collectors recorded this interview; delineated various workflows discussed in the interview and wrote them using quotes from the interview. These were then reviewed and edited by the interviewee before being posted.

Scope

The scope section is provided by the collector, with input from the scholar(s), and attempts to estimate the scope of the group that performs the processes described: How broadly do the practices described in this narrative apply to others in same field, in related fields, etc?

  1. In the opinion of the scholar, who participates in the process the story describes?
    (e.g. "just this scholar", "many people in the scholar's field of inquiry", "all academics", etc.)
  2. What is this process intended to accomplish for the scholar?
  3. Who is the intended audience of the processes described?
  4. Is this the only process the scholar uses to accomplish his/her goals?
  5. What "shared services" would help transform the story into something of more benefit for the scholar or his/her audience?  What process or processes in the story could be automated?

Keywords

Please provide some keywords that will allow us to group or cluster related stories--or aspects of stories.

1. Was this story collected for a particular Bamboo working group?  If so, please include, as keywords, the appropriate group(s).

  • Scholarly Narratives

2. Suggested keywords: Does this narrative contain elements that could be mapped to these keywords?  If so, please indicate which ones and briefly describe the mapping.  Add any additional keywords in #3. (These are global keywords from this page keywords)

3. Please list additional keywords here:

Narrative

An edited package of video, metadata and descriptive text that represents a performance has already been produced. It must now be made available on the web. I would also like it to be part of a larger scholarly network where dance faculty from other universities can post their creative/research work and have it shared visually as well with meta-data.

Performances are made visible by capturing them in a digital medium and uploading them and other descriptive content to websites, at once preserving the descriptive vision of the performance and making the materials as accessible as possible.

The central goal of promoting a piece is to make it visible outside of its limited temporal scope. I would like to see my pieces reused in educational settings, have scholarly discussion around them, and see my company invited to present the piece for new audiences. Also, it is important for the work to be able to be cited. This is new for dance, how do we cite dance performance? If the performance piece can be referred to and if I can track who is citing the work, in various capacities from written citation to performed citation, that would very useful. This is new territory in the realm of dance performance within the academy. There are no protocols for this now that I am aware of.

I publish the digital representations of my pieces to my company's website, which is hosted outside of the university, with the aim of having my performances as widely visible as possible. It's difficult to economically host and share high-resolution video and photos with my current hosting solution, but I feel that high-quality video is really the only way to give a viewer a real sense of the performance.

If I wish to share my work for grant-funding or other purposes, I may have to use YouTube to showcase my work, although in specific cases I may be able to upload high-resolution video and photos to and external server. I would prefer not to have to use YouTube due to the low quality of the video.

Currently, a dance performance does not receive feedback or criticism in any kind of codified or university sanctioned sense. For example, a festival curator can see a performance for and the choreographer's work can be invited into that festival. This would be similar to a peer-reviewed journal, but it is not exactly the same because a curator is not a peer. Other types of feedback include critical reviews in newspapers and online in various capacities. What is missing is more collegial review - from one faculty to another, or within a forum setting or some kind of setting that would allow peer discussion/review of the work. Also, if creative/performance based research could be part of a catalogue of sorts so that dance artists working within Universities could more easily see/share/respond/keep track of/cite/communicate about/peer review each other's work that would be really helpful. Again there is no model for this currently. Dance research/creative performance in the academy does not have a history tied to traditional scholarly practice, so this idea would be quite ground breaking.

Needs
Embedded metadata in the edited file so that it does not need to be redundantly entered.

As the promotion of the performance is the only form of publication available for dance performances, I would like to make this promotion

  • richer and higher-quality,
  • generate more dialogue around the piece, and
  • generate linking and opportunities for myself and other collaborators.

A central problem is the unavailability of high-quality hosting resources; I would like to be able to share high-quality video with colleagues and potential future sources of funding, but often YouTube is the only available solution.

Ideally, I would like to see a central repository for university dance pieces which would enable more intellectual review of pieces and allow her to present high-quality video along with the full metadata and description of the piece.

As journal publication is not an option for dance, I sees enabling peer-review of dance pieces and the ability to track access and 'citation' of her work as important.

She would like to be able to see when others use her work for research, inspiration or classroom use.
 

Other Comments:

The information below was comprised when transcribing the interview, to make sure pieces were not missing.  If it is unhelpful, please disregard.

Ingredients: Tools and Content
Digital Performance
YouTube
Web domain space
Web host
Web storage space
Html markup tool
Resolution formatting tool
Server media player software / plug -in
Discussion thread software / plug-in
On-line annotation tool

Recipe
Collect promotion metadata
Annotate edited production with promotion metadata
Create / embed citation for creative work
Format various resolution qualities (contingent on user capacity)
Place files in hosting environment
Link files to web page
Option 1
Aggregate list of interested parties
Inform parties of updated material
Option 2
Disseminate updated promotion page via feed (RSS or ATOM)
Request input/feedback: formal (peer-review) and informal
Allow community tagging
Log / view transactions where work is used or cited


Link

Notes

Example Link

 

1 Comment

  1. Unknown User (pearce.judith@gmail.com)

    I wonder whether the key issue here is finding a permanent home for the performance such as an institutional repository or a discipline-specific repository where it can be deposited via a standard packaging format that includes the descriptive metadata and any required preservation metadata. Once deposited, it can then be cited through a globally unique persistent identifier and preserved for future access. This leaves the scholar free to promote it by any means, by just linking to it. The descriptive metadata can be made available by the home repository for aggregation in federated or specialist registries where other scholars can discover its existence and take the descriptive metadata down into local research management systems, or obtain a copy of the performance itself for local use. Annotations made in a range of places where local copies have been made for research purposes and re-use may, if permitted, be shared with the home repository and the federated or specialist registries through syndication and harvesting processes.