I think I can better describe Groover now. Been fiddling with assets for this gig. A lot of the files I've been given to mix with are rather low-res. It's made me dig up one of my old quicktime files, one of the first I consciously filed away. No watermark. Let's see who claims her. Let's use her as the example
Click and drag.
Chick pose
OK now obviously you can waggle her. But notice how the granularity of movement isn't good enough. Moving the mouse hand does change her but it's a bit blocky. Put on any music you like and you can make her groove to it with a bit of wiggling.
What I'd like for groover is a very low latency control interface so you can get more fluid movement. I'm starting to think that the actual movement of the image in response to your input can be extremely minimal. As long as its there and has a narrative context. The mental state of the film is very erratic so it doesn't have to be too obvious as long as its coloured a certain way.
e.g.
The default visual aesthetic can be quite low-res in places because either the State is having trouble getting a fix on Blake's mind or because Blake's systems themselves are humorously primitive. Bedroom computing kept simple.
I'm listening to Daft Punk (Rollin' and Scratchin') and giving myself heaps of mouse space to make patterns.
Taking the DVD multi-angle one step further. Would it be possible perhaps to seamlessly switch between 8 different video tracks all the way through the film? If so then the user could be given a very simple interface, a scrubber like, that let you fiddle. That alone with interactive audio might do the trick.
Posted by .M. at September 25, 2003 11:48 PM