Viewing all threads involving Mike Moore
Is a four ball cascade possible?
If you can answer this in under 20 minutes, you probably aren't thinking about it hard enough.
I enjoyed that! For me a cascade will always be a 2 handed pattern, but I accept your 3 handed variant is the closest match to a 4 ball cascade.
I have put in another 20 minutes of thought though & I've come up with a small nitpick which has led me to something that I'm struggling to visualise.
From your video the rules for a cascade are:
1. There is only one orbit to the pattern
2. All throws are made to an even rhythm
3. Each ball is thrown to the same height
4. No placements, holds, stalls, multiplexes, double bounces etc.
5. Each ball is thrown to the 'other' hand
My issue is with the phrasing of the last rule (which was one of the first rules covered in the video), which for me is not adequate. If left as is then a cascade must be juggled with exactly 2 hands, discounting your 3 handed pattern.
In a 3 hand pattern there are two 'other' hands, if the hands are labelled 1, 2 & 3 you could juggle a 'cascade' with the throwing sequence 12131213...
So to achieve true anal retentive accuracy rule 5 needs to be replaced with 2 rules:
5a. An N ball cascade must be juggled with N-1 hands
5b. An N ball cascade must be juggled with a number of hands (H) where N > H and (N % H) = 1
6. The hands must throw in a circular sequence eg 123...H123...H
If we use 5a then this limits us to non-numbers juggling, a cascade will always be a single 2-ball exchange flowing around a circle of hands like a wave.
Obviously the 5 ball cascade exists though which discounts rule 5a. 5b is the best replacement I've been able to come up with, but I'm having a very hard time visualising if it is correct. If N <= H then we are just holding N balls, if N % H = 0 then we have a fountain like pattern, if N % H > 1 then I'm not sure what we get.
Does anyone else remember a flash based siteswap simulator that appeared online ~10 years ago which could animate patterns for any number of hands that featured little one-eyed, one-handed aliens or am I just making that up?
I don't like to consider these things "rules" or make a hard and fast list. They are features or elements of a cascade. The canonical three ball cascade can fulfill all of them, no problem. However, it's possible to miss one and the pattern still be a three ball cascade. For example, the cascade between one hand and the back of the other hand. Both manipulators are unique, but everything else is cascade enough that nobody would be able to say it isn't a cascade.
So bringing this over to four balls, it comes down to which element of the three ball cascade you are most comfortable with changing. I like the idea of not having to stick with bilateral symmetry and allowing rotational symmetry. Others are fine with hands crossing and props changing side in the pattern, but not changing hands.
I want to avoid defining "cascade" so strictly because in the end you aren't giving a word meaning, you are just describing what comes out of a set of rules. The word is just a shorthand for the rules. But then it isn't helpful for communication unless the person you are talking to already knows and agrees with that set of rules!
5. each ball is thrown to some other hand i.e. not the hand that threw it
or something better worded, but in that vein
there's no mention about orbits crossing though, is that a signature element of the cascade ?
a 55550 could meet the "rules" originally posted (unless that was covered by the "etc" in #4)
just thinking out loud ....
if the balls were bouncy enough, 2 hands and one knee (or foot or head or floor ...) gives you 3 "hands"
By defining the floor as a hand, it would allow something that looks like (but isn't) a 5b3. I think that would be just as valid as defining an elbow/whatnot as a hand, and it still excludes the 5bb3b example.
Slightly related: 5bb3b was a great idea, I quite liked how convincing that looked.
Does that suggest you switch to a different ball for 12 and 13? What and why?
No, I just haven't tried 12 or 13 with them, or any other ball recently. I would probably want something a bit lighter for 12 or 13.
Out of interest, do you know what weight/type of ball Alex used for 14? Because the strength required with any normal ball is beyond my comprehension.
Bag lady Rag bags I assume. Around 72g. They're pretty heavy for such high numbers.
"They're pretty heavy for such high numbers."
Since (if your assumption is correct) Alex just flashed 14 of them, I think there's a pretty strong evidence-based case for saying "No, they're not". :-)
I've heard a similar argument in favour of pinkies, but they didn't seem to juggle themselves as advertised =(
Do you like \ not like to t e a c h (not just give a hint, but take the time and get involved, and real life person to person) ?
Thanks for voting!
[ #teaching ]
Competition type: Poll
Closing date: 7th May 2017
Select option to vote
BJC thread? BJC thread!
Although my stay was brief it was really nice to greet some old faces for the first time in one or two years as I've been out of the loop for so long. And it was also rather wistful and nostalgic for me. Age encroaches.
I only stayed one night, was exhausted when I arrived, and even deader when I left, but I enjoyed myself in the glorious spring sunshine. Not gonna do a HLSGCBUTCAA because they're daft. But I have a few obsevations/questions :-
And finally ...
Oh the show. Was a bit odd initially as we were sat near a guy who clearly had learning disabilities and was occasionally loud and/or inappropriate - that wasn't a problem but the annoying kid who thought this guy was HILARIOUS was certainly an issue.
So the acts then - it seems I liked more of it than Jay. The "Paganini" act I thought was a highlight - funny and interesting and well done. Guillaume was fantastic - brilliantly choreographed and technical and I loved it. Cyr wheel was good too I thought. To give the hat duo credit they did actually have a sense of fun about them. Having said that the guy moving curvy sticks around awkwardly was a little weak - and there was to be a workshop the following day where you too could learn to move curvy sticks around awkwardly. There was a moment during this act that reminded me of watching modern jazz live - people just started applauding at seemingly nothing - I just didn't get it.
Actually after the first half I was wondering if this was one of those inspirational shows where people in the audience could see the acts on stage and definitely think "One day I'll have an act good enough to grace the BJC Gala Show stage." But the second half saved it imo (and Guillame absolutely hit the spot).
Just got home!
I am aiming to have my full report on your desk by Saturday evening. Jon Peat was also taking extensive notes so we should have at least two long form accounts of the festival. I have unanimously decided that Jon Peat's will be the official review though.
To quickly address your points though:
You mean #Lestivalx on Saturday 29th April at Brockington College? Alas no, but I can highly recommend it to everyone who wouldn't have to spend more time travelling than attending.
> Some people acted like dicks during the first business meeting. So no, nothing new.
But ... but ... Ewan wasn't even there!
Well that looked just fine in the preview. Fuck knows where those tags-not-tags sprung from.
Haha, The Edge is being a dick. First it showed my message with extraneous FONT tags, now it's rendering correctly. Either way, I'm pretty sure it would be better if it would stick to just one method of rendering.
I removed them before your second post. I really don't know what you are doing that everyone else using the WYSIWYG editor is not!
Stop posting bugs for a couple of days I'm trying to write a review!1
1 Actually at the moment I'm trying to decipher my notes, but as soon as I've done that I'll start writing.
Someone explained the difference to me as "a gala show is pitched at festival attendees, a public show should be pitched to attract the general public"
I'm not entirely sure I agree with the distinction
My take on it...
For jugglers, "the public show" makes perfect sense. But if you're then describing it as "the public show" to "the public", then it sounds a bit silly. "The gala show" sounds more like a celebration than simply a description.
I know I'd be more likely to fall for a show called "gala show" than "public show".
BJC 2017 HLGBC
H The pool party.
I know it's not juggling.
However, it was fun which is what a BJC should be all about.
L I can't really think of anything.
Having to return to the real world is always a shock to the system.
G To run a workshop at the BJC for the first time.
Tick and goaaal!
I was happy with how walking football was received. It was mutually agreed after half an hour that we were all cream crackered so the workshop was terminated ahead of schedule.
B Again I can't really think of anything.
C Not telling you!
Another thing from Rebecca Lyon, this one really captures the atmosphere well.
To answer some of the questions you posed:
The numbers did seem on the low side for a Nottingham convention but I'm wondering if that was due to having a BJC in Perth and people not being good at attending things after they have had a break. The next one will be in Canterbury which I have never visited so am looking forward to.
I thought the gala show was somewhat monotone and wasn't helped by having two slow acts at the start. I found the bound girl with the single club had a very interesting act and that the diabolo act was extremely controlled and slick but left me a little cold. I have seen duelling hats a number of times (including at MKJC where they stole the show) and thoroughly enjoyed them every time but thought the energy had gone from the audience by the time they performed. I have been told that the cyr wheel girl was extremely good but there were a lot of normal cyr wheel tricks that weren't performed (e.g. cartwheels, penny drops) which made me suspect that she was weaker than others have suggested she was. I think the hula hoop act would have fitted better into a more diverse show.
The business meeting was actually two business meetings. In the first two bids emerged, the Kent one which I mentioned previously and one from Rosie Kelly in Cumbria. at the end of the first meeting (which ran out of time) I thought that Rosie would be running the convention in Appleby next year and that Canterbury would run 2019. By the start of the second meeting it appeared like a lot of conversations had happened in the background and Rosie was not offering a BJC but rather a BJC extra to be held in the summer and the Kent bid was the only option. This greatly disappointed me. Not only because I thought that a lot of what Rosie was bringing to the table was coming from a completely different direction to the normal bids, which would have led to a different and interesting convention; but also because we would have had two years sorted and now we have only one. Whether I will be able to attend her BJC extra in the summer will depend on work and dates which would not be an issue at Easter.
The BYJOTY became BYCPOTY or ?bick potty? and included circus people (which meant aerial acts). There was an extremely good silk act and two other aerial acts. Most of the audience were wowed by a 13 year old doing some two diabolo tricks finishing with three diabolos. His act was slick but wouldn't have been considered if most of the other acts hadn't lacked something. The technical acts were highly technical and highly droppy (nothing new there) and most of the other acts weren't acts. I voted for a 3 ball juggler who had an act but could easily have voted for a staff manipulator with a well choreographed routine and believable character. I missed out on the drop count by 1 grrr.
I think the other panellists on the Old Skool were all much better than myself and interesting to listen to. I would happily have sat in the audience and listened to them but I had the offer of beer :-) I don't think that the Old Skool has run its course but I would like to see a panel which had a different make up at some point e.g. Jane Randall, Mamph, Amanda Drabble and Jay Linn as the panellists with Emily Winch as chair.
Alas I will miss Lestival again.
> Jane Randall, Mamph, Amanda Drabble and Jay Linn as the panellists with Emily Winch as chair.
I am deeply flattered, thank you Nigel. And I suspect Emily would be chortling at the idea of me - me! - being on board as the token man.
Slightly more seriously, I love the idea of a mostly women panel but it's bastard hard getting women to join in, at least in the current format. Rhonda quite rightly made a tart remark about her reason for being there, but the alternative is to let the panel pick itself, and that's pretty much a 100% guarantee of blokishness. It's a really tough square to circle, and personally I don't know a better way than deciding that you're going to find a woman regardless, long before you get all meritocratic about it.
Getting panellists isn't easy, and I saw first hand how hard you had to work to pull a panel together on the day.
I think Rhonda being overlooked at times was probably less to do with her being female and more to do with you being less familiar with her history than the others on the panel. The same thing happened 2 years ago, with the chap whose name escapes me (he had a goatee, and his wife had been involved in organising a bjc?) and I heard similar comments about that years panel bring uneven.
It's a shame, as her childhood sounded fascinating!
I talked to a few people who had never seen an old Skool panel before, and they seemed to think the idea still had legs. I think, if anything I'd like to see the idea extended - perhaps spun as a "new Skool panel" where the hot young things of today face questions about what inspires/drives them, where they get ideas, where they see juggling going etc.
Also, several people suggested to me that (at least one of) the bells should be under the direct control of the audience - something I definitely agree with!
Pulling it together on the day is the problem. That's why I said no when you asked me.
If you can't get (haven't prepared) a quiet space where panelists can be heard by the audience more than 6 feet away, then get some microphones.
The latter is why I left after half an hour.
Greg was hilarious.
> Also, several people suggested to me that (at least one of) the bells should be under the direct control of the audience - something I definitely agree with!
I already have a deeply stupid idea about this ...
On the subject of morphing...
Some years ago, I had a bit of an idea about a HIGNIFY-type panel quiz show to take place at a BJC. In essence it would probably have to be primarily Old Skool-ish to be entertaining. Although a new school team vs an old skool team would also work pretty nicely (or mixed old/young teams, and mixed modern/historical questions).
Anyway, I have several ideas, and if anyone is interesting in making something happen one day, or if the old skool wants a year off, then I'd be happy to discuss possible ideas.
I still reckon a "Would Jugglers Lie to You?" for met would be great. Lots of potential for showing off and great stories from the past being discussed.
attended the Old Skool talk for the first time, despite always wanting to go see what it was all about I've never managed
(usually because renegade..or just juggling, not like a major avoiding reason)
short answer; loved it.
didn't realise exactly what it as, had in my mind it was like a game show style, panel thing...dont ask why.
But basically I think if it was "advertised" more before BJC or at the event, more people would attend and know what it was. I felt liek you had to know in advance (oh god dont reply on someone shouting in the hall to announce any show or event)
I loved hearing stories and details that are more gossip than much else. I loved peoples back stories. Only being involved in "convention world" for few years you feel like you've a lot to catch up on, so thats why I think The Old Skool is needed!
I do have some things that I didnt like about it... some questions were super interesting, and obviously asked because of the reaction they would get. it was great! (jason/ija/etc.) and I liked crowd questions, circomedia clearly was a hot topic and would have been nice to hear either of the internationals thoughts on it.
Some questions were major yawn-fest..like i think they got asked whats the worst show youve ever seen..then...whats the best...like it was super boring. its liek someone telling you about their dream they just had. you're super into it. but no one else really is. (ok dont get me wrong there was the odd moment, but general those questions had a terrible word count verses funny ratio)
It was super annoying the bell wasnt used effectively. I think the host guy..you gotta learn to read a crowd better. every time you did press the bell people clapped..i think that means you wait to long and dont press it enough, because clearly people are so relieved when you do press it you get applause.
I'd also like to suggest the bell is put into the audience, or entrusted to a table of people. they can feel the crowd better maybe? Or they have one and you have one?? It just ruined it how someone can go on and on and on....
I do think Rhonda was almost cut out of a lot of questions, twice she began to speak, and once the other guest greg was about to tell a story and they were interrupted. I dont see how a host should let that happen. Theres a skill to allowing a conversation to flow naturally between people and controlling it enough to allow the laid-back or quieter guests moments to shine through.
thanks for reading the long answer when the short one would have sufficed
Thank you Rosie, long answers are always welcome here!
It has always been intended to be a panel show of sorts as can be seen from Emily's announcement of the first Old Skool in 2012.
For me part of the Old Skool's appeal has been that it is an intimate affair. If the audience was much bigger I think it would lose some of that charm.
Interesting that you didn't feel it was advertised beforehand. It was also in the info booklet & on the workshop board :P This probably highlights two different ends of the spectrum of how people plan their time at a BJC. I generally look at all the events going on & then go juggling if there is nothing I fancy going to. Whereas I think your default position is to hang out in the main hall & it takes something special to pull you away from it, does that sound correct? What would be the best way to let you know about events happening at the BJC?
Also for your info Cedric Lackpot here is the Old Skool host guy!
I will also add that there was a sandwich board placed just outside the entrance to the main hall throughout the evening to advertise it.
As it happened, the venue for the old skool this year was not great, and I think most people struggled to hear what was going on. Particularly whenever oblivious people noisily wondered past, or whenever the mop-on-wheels frequently rattled past.
My favourite* Old Skool was in Pickering, where I think Steven and Andre had some particularly interesting stories which fed well of each other (Disney & alligators spring to mind, as does the story of a fire juggler somewhere).
*The number that I've actually managed to watch is not a particularly large number.
The Pickering one benefited from being in an appropriately sized room without being on the way to/from anywhere or in a space being used for anything else.
The cafe area was the least worst place we could have held it this year, I'd have favoured one of the dance studios, but we were told they weren't available for some reason?
I do agree it could be advertised better, some of the descriptions I heard in advance of the show this year made it sound more like a juggling show than a panel show.
Oh, I agree that it was one of the least worst places.
Some venues are just more suited to talky events than others.
Was it originally called "Grumpy old jugglers", or was "Old Skool" the name from the start?
A little TOS history :-
The original idea was conceived by Ben Cornish and Dave Jellybean, and IIRC was going to be a more or less straight lift of BBC2's Grumpy Old Men called, predictably, Grumpy Old Jugglers. For reasons I wasn't told or do not remember, Ben and Dave chose not to develop the idea for BJC Southend 2012, despite them both attending.
Subsequently, sometime in late '11 or early '12 Emily Winch approached me to enquire whether I might be interested in taking the thing on. I listened to the proposal as it then stood, but was a bit concerned about making anything too derivative of an existing format, so went away and ruminated about it for a bit, after which I came to realise that getting jugglers with long experience to share their stories was a great idea, but simply copying another format was probably too restrictive. Consequently I came up with a loose panel format, and a name that did not suggest anything much in particular, other than punning lightly on Old Skool/Old's Kool, with the hope that we could just get interesting people squiffy and letting them babble. It seemed to work.
So, in brief, the conception was indeed Grumpy Old Jugglers and the germ of the idea was not mine, but once it fell into my lap I tried to knock it into something workable.
Which reminds me.... http://www.capsule39.com/tlmb_oldsCool.php is still available!
If Old Skool ever recorded and posted? I'm interested to see what it's all about.
So far, no. I image that if panelists knew they were being recorded, we would get far fewer stories full of potentially slanderously entertaining dullskuggery.
After the Steve mills one, I wished I had recorded the pre-show prep chats as although the show was interesting, the pre-show prep was more interesting.
I forgot all about my plan to (audio) record the pre-work this year until it was too late - but I'd love to do that and put it out as a carefully edited (to avoid too much scandal) audio release.
Perhaps next year...
pre-show prep chats?
Unless you were talking about us introducing ourselves at the start of the panel then this didn't happen for me. It may be because I have known Jay a long while and he probably thinks he knows quite a bit about me. However as I totally failed to mention that I was a performing juggler in my self-introduction or explain why I am called It's Him when he mentioned it in introducing me, it was a fairly poor example of talking about myself.
Why are you called It's Him! ? Partly because of the anagram. Partly because I was in a double act called Him and Me.
Nigel, for various boring reasons I elected to be pretty slack about The Old Skool prep this year, so did very little of the homework I have previously done. Usually I have spent half a day doing informal individual interviews/chats with the panellists as a way of a) gleaning useful information and background; and b) giving them the opportunity to ramble on and talk freely, by way of acclimatisation. It has usually been a wonderful experience.
This video came out today and I found it bizarre. The beginning somewhat reminiscent of the old (and long) act where the performer balances what look like bones on top of each other.
The end...I'm not convinced by. I think I would've found it more interesting, more powerful without it. It seemed like he was blazing new ground, then relapsed. My feelings went from, "this is slow and unexciting" to "oh, this is building into something interesting" to "of course, he does what every devilsticker would do."
I'm interested to hear what the Edgians (do we have a name?) think.
Yeah, the ending doesn't have the same impact as Miyoko Shida Rigolo's act. Miyoko's balance is obviously much bigger & spectacular, but it also collapses in a very pleasing chain reaction. This construction just falls apart in a very unsatisfying way.
I've always gone with Edgenaughts.
That's the one I should be using yes, but a search says that I yo-yo between the two!
I saw her perform this during a Cirque show and I've never heard such a quiet crowd, in a good way. Everyone was so anxious the whole time. Everything wiggled just a little more than you thought it should.
I quite enjoyed it. He foreshadowed the ending by dropping the sticks out of his hand one by one, and then the whole thing collapsing paid that off. One final drop, and the routine was done. Cool.
I worked on an act which involved a sculpture made out of many clubs, rings, balls and two diabolos. Pretty much all the main props in my show. I think I juggled three balls when it was balance on my chin. I only ever performed it once because there was no non-messy but still dramatic way out of the end of it. It's fine if that's the entire act, and you have stage hands to clear up after you, but I felt stupid collapsing the thing and then having to pick everything up again. Maybe I should work on it again, and work out a better ending.
I've got a vague feeling that I may have seen that. Do you remember where you performed it?
It sounds familiar to me too, and something is nagging me saying renegade at the Scottish juggling convention?
My memory is terrifically easy to confuse though, especially when it comes to late night shows I saw after drinking with Ewano & Matt hall...
No, the only time I performed it was during a cruise ship contract which, to be honest, isn't the best place to be trying new material. The tricks were good, but the presentation just didn't work out. There was too much swapping between different sets of mixed props, and nothing I could do made it look elegant.
However, as my own memory of what I've performed on stage is often less reliably than other peoples' memories of what I've done on stage, especially in Renegade shows, the distance roots of this act may very easily have began in material I tried back in 2003 or 2004. I know a lot of other things in my current show come from random ideas that worked better than I thought at 2am in a tent when half the audience was drunk and rowdy.
You are a judge for a 3 ball competition where competitors are allowed an entry of a maximum 90 seconds. Points for difficulty, creativity, and choreography. Two questions:
1 - What would you want to see in a winning entry?
2 - How would another entry beat that?
Looking forward to hearing what y'all have to say.
Live, or on video?
Errr, didn't you just set the criteria as "difficulty, creativity, and choreography"?
1: difficulty, creativity, and choreography
2: better (difficulty, creativity, and choreography)
Or are you asking for ideal/fantasy tricks & routines? Or simply which type of (difficulty, creativity, and choreography) we individually like?
If the latter, something McKinney or Menes-ish would float my boat, but even better yet, something unexpected and fab.
Looking for something more specific than exactly the wording I gave. For example, how would you show difficulty? What are some very difficult 3b patterns/tricks that you can think of, especially ones that aren't mainstream?
What are some examples of 3b creativity that you've enjoyed? Were they creative in their juggling, their presentation, in some other way? What made you enjoy them?
I can brainstorm on these all day/week/month by myself, but I find that I most enjoy specific parts of juggling. I'm interested in reading others' thoughts about these.
Oops, I missed replying to the second part of your comment.
For Sean McKinney and Michael Menes, what about them do you enjoy? With such orthogonal juggling styles, I think they're interesting choices.
If a trick of one were to be done by the other, do you think you'd enjoy it as much?
Sean: Energy, attitude, standing apart from the crowd. Michael: Perfect choreography, variations, elegance. They're very different to each other, but they're each very much themselves. So, to the second question, probably not.
If you're unfamiliar with them, folks, treat yourselves:
"very much themselves" is a sentiment that's come up from a couple people. I wonder if there are many people who juggle in a way that's very much themselves that nearly everyone doesn't like watching. When I think of someone juggling in a very much themselves way, I think of people who excel at their area of juggling: Vova, Murakami, Pavel, etc.
I wonder if there are people who juggle in a way that's very much themselves, but it doesn't seem that way.
Not sure if you waited for an appropriate day to post that, or if it were a coincidence...
The ultimate (in my mind) would be a 90 second piece that was alive and playful without being too physical. The overall 'shape' would be balanced and beautiful. It would have to be made up of many original parts.. the more unrecognisable but less complicated the better. A couple of unbelievably difficult body tricks would be nice too.
"the more unrecognisable but less complicated the better."
I've been trying to move down this road. Do you have any favourite patterns like that?
Kouta Ohashi's juggling is like this I think. Modern, technical, beautiful, playful etc. It doesn't get much better (in my mind).
Very hard question(s). First, I don't feel expert enough to be a good judge. First, I wouldn't want to rate other's achievements (but well, they go for a contest, they should be prepared to win or lose, and it's more than okay to have some competition). The winner should deserve his victory, else I'd rather have two, three, or more winners provided the field is big enough.
Leaving all that aside and assuming I were among the best available judges ..
it's very hard to tell without a distinct example, without concrete compare .. it's art after all, and as a judge, how to cope with personal preference versus objective rating. difficult, dilemmic. I don't really feel competent to answer, so only brainstorm anyway:
Subsequent assthrows to catches in front shower. °°° I like the juggler to move, not stand straight still only (and be it no steps, but then moving hips, torus, waving arms, bending knees, .. stuff). °°° Surprises are very welcome. °°° I love outstretched arms windmills, preferably front to back or vice versa (not front only). °°° .. ?
For "difficulty", I'd like to see skills that reveal a lot of time invested and-or a lot dealt with, it to look poised somehow.
For "creativity", I'd like it to show ``him-her-themself´´, it to be authentic, show someone doing his-her-their (intrinsical) ``thing´´.
show more than required e.g. artistic expression, show some fun, presenting in an original way, an awesome setup ..
But I really don't know.
Thank you for your thoughts!
How would you recognize someone who would, "show ``him-her-themself´´, it to be authentic, show someone doing his-her-their (intrinsical) ``thing´´.?"
.. or "selfmade". Yes, not all clearly definable, but often, you can see it, see, that an act, a show, a presentation, an ado, is not copied, not imposed by a teacher or coach, not ``learned by heart´´, not strictly after a concise choreography (or maybe it is, but you can't tell, cos' it's professionally high-class performed), .. but you see joy, fun, moves, bodymovement, flow, originality, that all fit together naturally. Still unclear, but I'm thinking of that act of the other guy performing and juggling with clay (he forms a mask, takes part off it to juggle with) or e.g. well choreographed acts by Stefan Sing, the DRUGS video, jugglers moving freely, doing freely, not strict and sterile like Boitzov troupe doing their puppet triple salto on a sustained balance beam, not technical only (like e.g. the Scheffler video going through all front juggling 3b tricks in a row) .. those latter examples aren't ``bad´´, but "creativity, authenticity, expressing yourself, stuff" just don't apply - they take value from skills and technique mainly.
But it's thin ice and - regarding art - I don't feel well rating words and notions after scales, or trying to define. ( but it needs examples and compare ((and an idea of what one's even exactly talking about lol)) )
maybe: sometimes there's a spark, that goes over .. passionate ado that comes from inside, from the heart, or soul or one's own style or uniqueness .. or maybe: when it's there, you can see and feel it ..
Thank you for both messages.
It's funny to imagine someone like Falco Scheffler "moving freely", almost in a Stefan Sing-ish way. My major influences when I was a wee juggler were Falco Scheffler and Murakami Tsubasa - both often admired for having such control over their patterns that they looked like gifs. I practice in that way often. I don't think that's a good way to perform. Perhaps I should review Murakami's old JJF performances: he did move, though from memory I don't recall any of the movement having special meaning.
To then think of myself making a free-flowing act...it's difficult. There are certain body throws that seem to ask for movement in a particular direction. They're always forward or back, though, not side to side. Perhaps I'll have to loosen my rule about practicing practically only ambidextrous patterns.
I do practice improvising juggling a lot, but that's an area that only my club members see. I wonder if it would be interpreted as "not me" if I were to do it on stage.
To then think of myself making a free-flowing act [..]
Do I read between the lines, that you think it might ``add´´ or ``be necessary´´ to and are in search of a way to ``add ´´ to your appearance, to make the performance of your high technical skills ``more pleasing´´ for an audience, for show, acts, onstage?
Well, it's for the individual prop competition, which is limited to 90 seconds. I think a full out costume would be overkill.
But I'm certainly not going to only drill fast patterns on stage, because heck, I can't follow my faster patterns on video. I can't ask others to be able to!
I think I'll limit the fast stuff to a few punctuation points. In my choreography, I'm trying to focus on phrasing and buy-in. In phrasing, I often forget to build in parts where people don't need to pay particularly close attention (i.e. everything being done is obvious). With buy-in, I need to do some highly relatable patterns/tricks that are widely acknowledged as difficult or interesting (then make them more difficult/interesting!).
Olivia Porter is "creative, inventive and authentic" merging footwork with contact, with stalls, with juggling, with comedy, with expressionism in an unique, "her own" way. Gilligan is "creative, inventive and authentic" .. they both in an original way, making up completely new ways, finding what they like, want and want their juggling to be and discovering the possibilities, opening any new doors cross their way. (as appears to me from what bit I've seen so far)
noslowerdna, or also you, as appears to me so far (but I haven't seen all), are "creative, innovative" in a technical way, noslo in a systematical way working off on siteswaps that develop from the ones he already knows and has perfectionned. Both you also "authentic" in doing exactly what you want, but not "creative" in longing for the completely new, but mostly building up on what you already can, creative in finding new branches off both your repertoire trees.
Different approaches, i think.
Let's take Delaney Bayles - awesome very high class master juggling - but utterly "technical", (Albert's and known siteswaps and numbers' backcrosses, numbers' flat fronts and all, aren't "innovations"), not meant to be "creative" or "authentic" in any way.
Can hardly tell myself, cos' nothing I juggle is really safe to not fail early before I get a good long lucky run in an attempt. (Guess, I'm doing at my limits too much, instead just "juggling" also easier stuff).
Going over endurance in order to then after that get a pettern safe enough for a short run to show, with 5b cascade, I feel pretty comfortable now (>1,000 catches), but doing the 5b reverse cascade lucky over 100 c a few times lately is still way from "solid, stable or safe", so I think, I need 250-300 catches (?) at least to feel like "I got that halfway down" with then still lots'a practise ahead to really "own", somewhat "master" it.
So, "solid" for me, at my current level, a lot means like being able to vary a pattern, bail out drifts, turns or lost timing and rhythm, and find back to comfortable fluent controlled pattern. (Yet that's still not "utterly controlled, mastered, rock solid", let alone "performable on big stage" as long as I get early fails a lot and longer runs luckily onlöy or after longer warmup anew on every single pattern).
So, (I'm aware it depends on the goals, on the difficulty of the pattern, on if to perform it for vid or onstage, but) how about your best patterns or tricks, .. are you okay with a few rounds (periods, cycles), with 50, 100 catches, or do you want them to last 300, 500 catches? When do you feel "safe" with them?
I should be able to:
Do it while talking to friends (and others, I suppose)
Do it whenever I want for however long I want
Rely on it completely when trying to do harder versions
^At least 95 % of the time. To me, if it feels good and has low variation, it's solid. Even inverted box I drop somewhat oftenish, and I'd consider it solid.
Solidly, with a club balance? If so, how do you know when you have that solid?
Obviously not otherwise it becomes recursive. Normally a qualify would be enough, or a bit more. Solid is such a vague word that I'm not sure I'd ever claim to have any trick solid to be honest.
"Solid for you" would like mean when you're satisfied with it far enough to stop practising it intensely for example.
.. or also when you feel it's ``ripe´´ to increase its difficulty and dare a harder version of it for example.
Hehe, I was imagining a progression of objects of decreasing length, ending with the silly end behaviour of no object at all.
I consider a trick solid when I can do it at least 9 times out of 10 in practice when combining it with another trick.
I will then introduce it into my show and if I am still dropping it too much I will revise my belief that it is solid until I can reproduce the same consistency in a show.
That - even though mine's different and much lower level - reminds me of wanting >10 rounds of a single extra throw in e.g. 5b practise, like #5-count backcross or reachover or 4b + one very small club, before I attempt on faster #n-count or add a club to 3b2c. Or >10 times "per run" (no matter how much cascade only in between). Same for e.g. 3b single behind back looking in about a #5-count.
Hey! There's a juggling fest in Ontario, Canada coming up March 24-26:
Is anyone coming from Montreal/Quebec area, and can drive two jugglers?
I recently acquired a set of juggling magazines from the 80s and 90s which inspired me to reassess the state of my collection.
Has anyone got a spare copy of The Catch, issue 13, from April-May 1995?
Would anyone like issues of The Catch, Kaskade or Juggler's World to fill gaps in their collections? I've got lots of spares.
Post a message here or email me on <my user name on this site>@juggler.net and we'll sort it out
Sadly I am also missing issue 13 of The Catch. If you spares of issues 5, 6, 19, 21, 22; I would be interested (was 24 the last issue or were there more after that?)
If you have spares and could bring them to Chocfest on Saturday, that would be neat.
I'll bring copies of 5, 6, 19 and 21 on Saturday. There was no Catch 22 (for literary reasons) but there was a 23.5 - have you got that?
would you consider digitalising "the catch". the digitalised versions of kaskade and jugglersworld are a great source of inspiration and information and i believe for many of us a print magazine collection is not really an option. i know i would be a shitload of work but maybe if some "catch magazine owners" would collaborate it could be done
Watch this space!
http://online.fliphtml5.com/lsvq/djcl/ is a test that might whet your appetite...
Well done for getting started on something which we've talked about doing for over a decade.
Have you had any more thoughts about how to overcome the OCR problems? Last time we talked about it, I think we decided the easiest way to deal with the use-every-font-in-the-box design was to copy type all the articles (ignoring the adverts)
I ask mostly because I have a huge stack of other non-juggling documents which are proving difficult to OCR, and any ideas I can pinch to make them easier to deal with would be appreciated!
For the moment I've decided to ignore the OCR problem and just get something scanned and uploaded. Details have derailed this too many times before!
http://booksorber.com/ might be worth a look as a quicker way to do bulk scanning of stuff; I've tried it with old children's books and it works pretty well for flattening things out, at least. (though for things where the entire page is coloured it can get confused by white balance, unless I'm missing something)
I think the best case scenario would be for the text to be recognised as text not an image of text, which would enable the text to be searched for specific words.
Unfortunately, given the design choices made by the catch the text is very difficult to extract automatically. This is the OCR problem I mentioned.
Feel free to experiment with different tools for doing so, if you find one which works great!
Otherwise, I think mikes approach of "worry about that bit later" is a wise one :)
Huh. Taking a look at the scanned version from above, they do not look insurmountable if there is good OCR software out there that can do OCR in a column. I have no idea if such things exist, or if I am just being naively optimistic.
But yes, just getting it scanned is an excellent step to be going on with. Well done, that man.
The thing that trips up every OCR approach I've tried so far is that in some issues every article is in a different font, some times multiple fonts in the same paragraph, with odd shaped columns that flow around a breakout quote...
However, if you've got access to OCR tooling that I don't (I've only got free stuff, iPhone apps and a really old version of acrobat), and are willing to try, please do so!
If you can report back with something that works I'd be extremely grateful as I have other documents that have so far evaded my attempts, and would be willing to spend money on the right tooling!
Unfortunately, given the design choices made by the catch the text is very difficult to extract automatically. This is the OCR problem I mentioned.
This with bells on. Which is why I've decided to 80/20 the hell out of it this time and just produce something.
It was a few years ago that I last looked into OCR software I couldn't find anything that was even remotely successful. Correcting dodgy OCR is considerably more time consuming than just typing up the article manually.
I got permission to type up a couple of articles from the Catch for the IJDb: The business of shows by Steve Rawlings & Juggling & Puppetry by the Parachute Theatre Company. Which is a start...
Back in 2010 I had the job of translating physical paper from Russian to English. I didn't/don't know Russian, and the instructor's advice was to use Microsoft Word's insert->symbol to manually insert each character in this 10 page paper.
Took some doing, but I found a multi-language OCR program (free trial) that must have had an amazing success rate. When I put the file into google translate, I had a fully-English document, with the only mistakes being around specific jargon!
It was that day that OCR impressed me.
Thanks Dan, I'll have a look at this - though the scanning isn't the problem for this job. I can remove two staples and put them through the photocopiers at work; it's the OCR bit which proved problematic in the past
If it's not playing nicely with OCR and is publicly available, could the copy typing be outsourced to the wider community? I'm sure there are a few of us who could spend the odd half hour on an article, and would spread the burden somewhat.
Thanks folks, I'll get the basics done and up somewhere and then be I'll be in touch with the wider community about making it better
I have a spare copy of issue 9 (but without the cardboard unicycle cover bonus). That's because the unicycle was missing on my subscription copy, so Stuart gave me another copy that did have the unicycle.
For collectors, it's worth noting that issue 18 was confusingly numbered "Issue 1 Spring 1996 Volume 2" instead of issue 18. They seemed to revert to the old numbering scheme for issue 19!
Whenever I see this kind of action I have to think of this:
View older threads
Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post
Green Eggs reports