skip to main content
research-article

Interactive Visuals as Metaphors for Dance Movement Qualities

Authors Info & Claims
Published:08 September 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The notion of “movement qualities” is central in contemporary dance; it describes the manner in which a movement is executed. Movement qualities convey information revealing movement expressiveness; their use has strong potential for movement-based interaction with applications in arts, entertainment, education, or rehabilitation. The purpose of our research is to design and evaluate interactive reflexive visuals for movement qualities. The theoretical basis for this research is drawn from a collaboration with the members of the international dance company Emio Greco|PC to study their formalization of movement qualities. We designed a pedagogical interactive installation called Double Skin/Double Mind (DS/DM) for the analysis and visualization of movement qualities through physical model-based interactive renderings.

In this article, we first evaluate dancers’ perception of the visuals as metaphors for movement qualities. This evaluation shows that, depending on the physical model parameterization, the visuals are capable of generating dynamic behaviors that the dancers associate with DS/DM movement qualities. Moreover, we evaluate dance students’ and professionals’ experience of the interactive visuals in the context of a dance pedagogical workshop and a professional dance training. The results of these evaluations show that the dancers consider the interactive visuals to be a reflexive system that encourages them to perform, improves their experience, and contributes to a better understanding of movement qualities. Our findings support research on interactive systems for real-time analysis and visualization of movement qualities, which open new perspectives in movement-based interaction design.

References

  1. B. Bermudez, S. Delahunta, M. Hoogenboom, C. Ziegler, F. Bevilacqua, S. Fdili Alaoui, and B. Meneses Gutierrez. 2011. The double skin/double mind interactive installation. Journal for Artistic Research (JAR).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. B. Bermudez and C. Fernandes. 2010. Inventing the interactive glossary: An approach to documenting contemporary dance. Arti Journal 2, 2, 29--31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. F. Bevilacqua, F. Guedy, N. Schnell, E. Flety, and N. Leroy. 2007. Wireless sensor interface and gesture-follower for music pedagogy. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. 124--129. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. L. A. Blom and L. T. Chaplin. 1982. The Intimate Act of Choreography. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. D. Bouchard and N. Badler. 2007. Semantic segmentation of motion capture using Laban Movement Analysis. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents. Springer, Paris, France, 37--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. A. Camurri, S. Hashimoto, M. Ricchetti, A. Ricci, K. Suzuki, R. Trocca, and G. Volpe. 2000. Eyesweb: Toward gesture and affect recognition in interactive dance and music systems. Computer Music Journal 24, 1, 57--69. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. D. Chi, M. Costa, L. Zhao, and N. Badler. 2000. The EMOTE model for effort and shape. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH). ACM, New York, NY, 173--182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. G. Corness and T. Schiphorst. 2013. Performing with a system’s intention: Embodied cues in performer-system interaction. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition. ACM, New York, NY, 156--164. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. S. Delahunta. 2007. Capturing Intention: Documentation, Analysis and Notation Research Based on the Work of Emio Greco | PC. Emio Greco | PC and Amsterdam School of the Arts.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. S. Fdili Alaoui, F. Bevilacqua, B. Bermudez, and C. Jacquemin. 2013. Dance interaction with physical model visualization based on movement qualities. International Journal of Arts and Technology (IJART) 6, 4, 357--387.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. S. Fdili Alaoui, B. Caramiaux, M. Serrano, and F. Bevilacqua. 2012. Dance movement qualities as interaction modality. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS). ACM, New York, NY, 761--769. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. S. Fdili Alaoui, C. Henry, and C. Jacquemin. 2014. Physical modeling for interactive installations and the performing arts. International Journal of Performing Arts and Digital Media (IJPADM) 10, 2, 159--178.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. J. Georgii and R. Westermann. 2005. Mass-spring systems on the GPU. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 13, 8, 693--702.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. P. Hackney. 2003. Making Connections: Total Body Integration through Bartenieff Fundamentals. Routledge, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. W. N. W. Hashim, N. L. M. Noor, and W. A. W. Adnan. 2009. The design of aesthetic interaction: Towards a graceful interaction framework. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Interaction Sciences: Information Technology, Culture and Human. ACM, New York, NY, 69--75. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. C. Hsieh and C. Luciani. 2005. Generating dance verbs and assisting computer choreography. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia (SIGMM). ACM, New York, NY, 774--782. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. C Jacquemin. 2008. Allegra: A new instrument for bringing interactive graphics to life. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia (SIGMM). ACM, New York, NY, 961--964. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. C. Jacquemin and S. de Laubier. 2006. Transmodal feedback as a new perspective for audio-visual effects. In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. 156--161. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. M. W. Kernodle and L. G. Carlton. 1992. Information feedback and the learning multiple-degree-of-freedom activities. Journal of Motor Behavior. 24, 2, 187--196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. J. Kjolberg. 2004. Designing full body movement interaction using modern dance as a starting point. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS). ACM, New York, NY, 353--356. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. R. Laban. 1994. La Maîtrise du Mouvement. Actes Sud, Arles, France.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Y. Lee, D. Terzopoulos, and K. Waters. 1995. Realistic modeling for facial animation. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH). ACM, New York, NY, 55--62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. A. Lockhart and E. Pease. 1982. Modern Dance: Building and Teaching Lessons (6th ed.). William C. Brown, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. D. S. Maranan, S. Fdili Alaoui, T. Schiphorst, P. Pasquier, and L. Bartram. 2013. Designing for movement: Evaluating computational models using LMA effort qualities. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (SIGCHI). ACM, New York, NY, 991--1000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. H. Mentis and C. Johansson. 2013. Seeing movement qualities. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (SIGCHI). ACM, New York, NY, 3375--3384. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. J. Moen and J. Sandsjo. 2005. BodyBug-design of KinAesthetic interaction. In Digital Proceedings of NORDES In the Making.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. A. Momeni and C Henry. 2006. Dynamic independent mapping layers for concurrent control of audio and video synthesis. Computer Music Journal 30, 1, 49--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. F. Pachet. 2006. Enhancing individual creativity with interactive musical reflective systems. I. Deliège, and G. Wiggins (Eds.), Musical Creativity: Multidisciplinary Research in Theory And Practice. Psychology Press, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. X. Provot. 1997. Collision and self-collision detection handling in cloth model dedicated to design garment. In Proceedings of Graphics Interface. 177--189.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. T. Schiphorst. 2009. soft (n): Toward a somaesthetics of touch. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (SIGCHI). ACM, New York, NY, 2427--2438. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. T. Schiphorst, N. Jaffe, and R. Lovell. 2005. Threads of recognition: Using touch as input with directionally conductive fabric. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (SIGCHI). ACM, New York, NY, 2--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. P. Subyen, D. S. Maranan, K. Carlson, T. Schiphorst, and P. Pasquier. 2011. Flow: Expressing movement quality. In Learning, The User in Flux Workshop at the ACM International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (SIGCHI). Vancouver, Canada.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. D. Swaminathan, H. Thornburg, J. Mumford, S. Rajko, J. James, T. Ingalls, E. Campana, G. Qian, P. Sampath, and B. Peng. 2009. A dynamic Bayesian approach to computational Laban shape quality analysis. Advances in Human--Computer Interaction 2009, 1--17. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. G. Volpe. 2003. Computational Models of Expressive Gesture in multimedia systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. InfoMus Lab, Genova.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Interactive Visuals as Metaphors for Dance Movement Qualities

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems
      ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems  Volume 5, Issue 3
      Special Issue on Behavior Understanding for Arts and Entertainment (Part 2 of 2) and Regular Articles
      October 2015
      181 pages
      ISSN:2160-6455
      EISSN:2160-6463
      DOI:10.1145/2821459
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 8 September 2015
      • Accepted: 1 April 2015
      • Revised: 1 February 2015
      • Received: 1 April 2014
      Published in tiis Volume 5, Issue 3

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader