Photo: Generic or Informative?

Obviously, my blog has a lot to do with theatre. So I included this photo of an Ancient Greek Theater because it informs you as to how far we have come. But to also remember that those basic techniques the Ancient Greeks created are still used to today and still very effective. I also just happen to love this photo because it shows how much they really had to vocalize to reach their audiences, how little stage they had to work with, and how many people really appreciated the arts and showed up for events such as theatre; and it is still very much loved today. But, we have come so far with technology, costuming, lights, sound and so much more that it has become a LOT more than just this where they put on simple masks and only had 2-3 people on stage speaking (not including the chorus). Again, I chose this photo because I think it is informative of the history of this beloved art but it also helps us to appreciate what new technology we have to improve and expand on this topic as well.

2-D vs. 3-D. The New Norm?

     Combining the two topics of theatre and economics has been interesting and we have managed to find a great middle ground. We have found that 3D theater has been gaining popularity the past few years; especially with groundbreaking titles like Avatar coming out. The history of 3D theater and the technology that has evolved with it has changed quite dramatically. Along with it, many questions arise. Why has it become so popular? Why does it cost more money to see a 3D movie? Does it cost more money to make an actual 3D movie? Is this helping the entertainment business grow and make more money? Do people prefer it to the regular 2-D movies? And finally, is this going to become the new norm? 3D technology is slowly but surely moving into the household.

            When did 3D even make its first appearance or when did the idea first emerge? “Like the electric car, the 3D process has been around for more than 100 years.” (Otto, 1). This seems strange because 3D really hasn’t seemingly gained much popularity until just recently. It was said to have been “First pioneered and patented by William Friese-Greene in the late 1890s.” (Otto, 1).  But, they did not have the technology that we have today. The whole process is completely different from when it was first started because, not only do we have digital technology, but because it required two projectors and now, today, it only requires one projector. Heineman (as he is quoted in this article) states: “older 3D technology involved the use of two film projectors, one that projected a left eye image and one that projected a right eye image.” (Steenhuysen, 2). Obviously, the 3D technology has advanced quite a bit; but not enough where you do not have to wear those silly glasses!

             Since the new Avatar movie and its great popularity in 3D, this form of entertainment has taken the industry by storm! Obviously, it was not that popular in the past because there were not that many 3D movies being made. But now it seems like every commercial you see it is advertising that particular movie in 3D. Personally, I just don’t understand the need for 3D. Not only does it cost more to see a movie in 3D but just wearing the glasses are uncomfortable. I took a really quick 2 question survey among my friends and peers just asking whether 1) they would prefer to see a movie in 3D or 2-D and 2) would they pay the extra money to see a movie in 3D. The answers were unanimously against 3D. Many of them said that it didn’t make sense to have the movies in 3D and many also agreed that the glasses were uncomfortable to wear and just made viewing time less enjoyable. While the average college students here may not want to see the movie or pay the extra money it is quite popular amongst other people in general.

Avatar, and director James Cameron, can take credit for that hype. This movie raised the bar for so many different aspects of the film industry. The new technology and cameras they were using and the technique of viewing the movie. Yes, you still have to wear the silly-looking glasses when viewing the movie but it “requires audience members to wear polarized glasses.” (1). People have complained in the past about having headaches after watching a 3D movie but with these new glasses they had the audience wear they have also said, “It is a vast improvement on the sometimes headache-inducing techniques that relied on cardboard cutout glasses with red and green lenses and rose and fell in popularity in the 1950s.” (1). And yes, we all remember those glasses that we had to wear when entering the theater that just really did not make the movie better. In addition, they have developed a new, lightweight camera for when they filmed the movie. “His camera rig is now lighter — up to only 50 pounds — and the two camera lenses can dynamically converge on a focal point with the help of a computer, which is crucial for sweeping camera moves and action sequences.” (1). Obviously, this helped when they filmed the movie because then they could carry or maneuver the camera in ways that they could not before (having it in an awkward spot, having it hung for a longer period of time, etc.). Finally, it raised the bar on capturing the action needed for the movie. The new technology they used was able to “creates computerized images from real human action.” (1). This was great because, obviously, aliens are not real and having the actors in a costume and make-up would not really capture the image that he wanted for his movie. He wanted the aliens to look a certain way in this movie and he could create them using new digital technology. Judging by the box office records and the overall performance of the film, it is safe to assume the public’s response was rather positive.

We observed the three dimensional thrill sweep through movie theatres all through the last year. More expensive 3D movie tickets triggered an emphasis on 3D showings, bringing forth more profits for theaters throughout the nation. In March 10^th of this year, the Motion Picture Association of America released a press release making reference to the newfound success of three-dimensional technology and its importance to the long-term success of the movie industry.  Bob Pisano, president of the MPAA, mentions in the press release: “Digital technology is the foundation on which 3D has been built. Together, digital presentation and 3D hold the promise of a dramatic game change in moviemaking and movie going. The global film audience is voting with its feet, and those feet are planted firmly in the direction of local cinemas that have the latest technology.” Having the “latest technology” is the driving force, and it was here that we decided to take a look at this evolving force as it begins moving into the household. 3D television has seemingly gained more steam in the past year and a half than it ever had before. The spike in popularity of hit 3D movies like Avatar has the nation buzzing about the technology, and the business world is listening. Samsung and Sony are leading the push for production of household 3D TV sets in the United States, with Toshiba not far behind them. Time Warner and DirecTV have caught the 3D fever and have launched 3D networks in ESPN 3D and Discover 3D. In a nutshell, the functionality of 3D televisions revolves around tricking your brain. As Jonathan Strickland explains: “…by showing each eye the same image in two different locations, you can trick you brain into thinking the flat image you're viewing has depth. But this also means that the convergence and focal points don't match up the way they do for real objects. While your eyes may converge upon two images that seem to be one object right in front of you, they're actually focusing on a screen that's further away” (1). We mentioned the “silly glasses” you must wear to get the full 3D effect when watching this content, and it’s not much different with household technologies. Strickland continues: “The LCD lenses in the glasses alternate between being transparent and opaque as the images alternate on the screen. The left eye blacks out when the right eye's image appears on television and vice versa. This happens so fast that your mind cannot detect the flickering lenses. But because it's timed exactly with what's on the screen, each eye sees only one set of the dual images you'd see if you weren't wearing the glasses” (3).

            Understanding how the technology works, we set out to interview area experts about the technology and its impact on our immediate market. Mr. James Thomas, a senior home theater specialist at Best Buy, spoke about the buzz being created by home theater technology. When asked about the marketing efforts of his company centered around the current technology, Mr. Thomas explained how Best Buy has significantly picked up its marketing of the technology “because it is very profitable and brings a lot of customers into the store.” Going into the local Best Buy stores we noticed quite a number of people frequently huddled around the 3D demos, eager to experience the technology first-hand. With previous technological trends, we had similar experiences in the way excitement was being generated surrounding the technology. Much like the latest Apple products, we suspected there would a group of individuals who just had to own the technology upon its release based merely on its potential. Mr. Ted Hinden, a home entertainment consultant for the same company, confirmed our suspicions as he explained: “early-adopters have had the technology in their hands, and are most excited about the buzz in recent months, as it will be the driving force for the release of more content.” Both Thomas and Hinden explained the differences between customers who might be more likely to pick up one of these handsets. Thomas mentioned: “Families with children and movie lovers love 3D and are willing to spend the premium to make the family happy, whereas older couples generally do not see much benefit in it. For some it is rather inconvenient, especially if they have to wear 3D glasses on top of their normal glasses.” After conducting a brief survey, we confirmed what Mr. Thomas had mentioned. 3D appeared to be a hit mostly to the younger crowd, especially the students we surveyed on campus. Some of the older folks we spoke to were rather indifferent about the technology, with some wondering about whether it was worth the money, and others confusing it with high definition television.

After conducting our research along with interviews and surveys, we found the prevailing sentiment to suggest that 3D technology is here to stay and it represents the (not so distant) future of home entertainment technology. Both Hinden and Thomas spoke about the profitability of this technology, and as we know, money makes the world go round. With this in mind, providers are only going to supply more and more 3D content, subsequently driving up the demand for the technology, and eventually bringing down the cost, which is what will propel the technology into more households around the nation. As Hinden said: “for the longest time, 3D has been looked at as the future of home entertainment technology. The future is now here and it is only a matter of time until 3D televisions are a part of our everyday lives.” 

Here are the sources we used (I'm going to include a couple other articles that I found interesting):

"Avatar Raises the Bar on 3D Technology - Entertainment - Movies - TODAYshow.com." TODAYshow.com: Matt Lauer, Meredith Vieira, Ann Curry, Al Roker, Natalie Morales - Video, News, Recipes, Health, Pets. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32127705>.

Steenhuysen, By Julie. "For Some, 3D Movies a Pain in the Head | Reuters." Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News | Reuters.com. 09 Jan. 2010. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. <http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6080XO20100109>.

Strickland, Jonathan.  "How 3-D TV Works” 23 June 2009.  HowStuffWorks.com. <http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/3d-tv.htm>  14 October 2010.

http://www.reelzchannel.com/article/816/a-tour-through-the-history-of-3-d-movies

Mr. Ted Hinden. Home entertainment consultant, Best Buy.

Mr. James Thomas. Home theater senior specialist, Best Buy. 

http://www.buffalonews.com/entertainment/television/article103454.ece

Do Security and Privacy Really Exist?

     In terms of my topic, I feel that security and privacy exist in the theatre. In my experience so far in college, I have found that security and privacy are pretty important. In addition, I have looked at professional theatre companies privacy and security rights. Mostly, it has to deal with the people coming to see the performances and how the box office will not share their information or ask for major personal information. In addition, the audience members cannot tape performances or take photographs (and that is more than just for not blinding the actors). It's because, normally, a theater will hire someone to take photos or videotape a show so that they can put the show into their archives and normally that information is available online to the public or displayed inside the building.
    Speaking from personal experience (and it's not that much so far), we have a lot of security in regards to keys and gaining access to rooms and other supplies in the building. Theatre does use a lot of technology nowadays and that technology is usually very expensive (i.e. sound boards, genies, projectors, etc.) How it kind of works (from how I have observed it) is that if you work for a shop or in the building you can have access to certain keys and you get a certain code where the lock-box will recognize who you are. Each key is numbered (for specific rooms) and it recognizes when the key has been removed or replaced and who has the key if it is removed from the slot. Clearly, technology is key in regards to the issue of security because you don't want anyone to be able to have access to these rooms. Even in high school only the advisor for our club could have keys to the auditorium where we had meetings and rehearsed because it was a school building; and because keys can fall into the wrong hands. Obviously, at professional theaters there is a level of security such as swipe cards, codes, or keys that are only given to certain people because security is important and vital.
    The other issue is privacy of performances and not having anyone videotape or take photographs that isn't asked to do that for the theater. Theaters keep an archives of previous performances and that usually includes who was in the show, dates of the show, and photos and/or performances. Obviously, audience members aren't allowed and shouldn't be taking photos or videos of the performance because it's distracting to the cast members but because it is a privacy thing. Yes, it is a publicized event but at the same time it's respect for the theater. And looking at security/privacy policies on professional theater websites it talks about, mostly in regards, to customers buying their tickets from box offices and how much personal information will be needed/shared with them. For example, on this website it gave you a detailed list of questions and answers for certain issues such as security. “Security. We have security measures in place to protect the loss, misuse and alteration of the information under our control. These security measures include a firewall to prevent unauthorized access to our systems and maintenance of registration information in a separate database.” It’s just comforting to a customer to know that security measures such as this are in place on websites; even if you’re just ordering some tickets for a show.

To see this website’s information here is the link:

http://www.5thavenue.org/about/legal.aspx

Good vs. Bad

Hey guys! It’s been awhile since I updated but here we go! Keeping in mind with the fact that technology is constantly changing and affecting the ways of the theatre. For the past couple of weeks, I’ve been thinking of how you can define a good source from a bad source; and it seems pretty easy. Right? As long as it seems like they know what they are talking about you should be able to trust them and be allowed to cite them. But, it’s actually not that easy. You should be able to analyze and read the information given to you and know that it is valid. So as you do research you should be able to identify information that is valid and that you can trust from those that aren’t as trustworthy.

            As you guys know, my topic is technology in the theatre. For the past couple of days I’ve been doing some research on the advances it has been making and trying to find examples of both good and bad resources. Like I have said before, it is not always easy to identify one from the other. Obviously, the site should know what they are talking about or have valid information to back themselves up. Since I have been blogging, I have also come across other blogs that have been solely dedicated as “theatre blogs.” They are actually pretty great and very interesting. They have given me a new perspective that I would not have thought to look through. For example, this one blog discusses the issue as to whether theatre is really dead or not. It is a very opinionated blog and while it does have some resources; it’s still just an opinion. You would not want to quote them in a research experiment or paper. Another example of a theatre blog, discusses how theatre should be embracing new digital technology.

            Then, I also found some great articles about the advances that theatre is making with digital technology. A news article I found from Science Daily talks about how two universities used 2-D and 3-D technology, scenery, and actors to put on a show. Actors were used from both Canada and Florida and put on a show together without leaving their respective campuses. “That’s how his body was ‘beamed’ onto the stage where he joined live actors from Bradley and another virtual actor from Canada. It was all done in real time and merged with 3-D and 2-D sets on multiple screens.” (ScienceDaily). You know that this is a valid source because it has research from universities and scientists. The other article that I found as a valid source for this topic came from BBC News and talks about a new device in the theatre where audience members can scroll through captions about the performance while sitting there as an audience member. This is also another example of a valid resource because it is from a news station and you most definitely can trust those at all times for their valid resources and trustworthy sites. 

If you want to visit these sites they are available down here when you click on the links:

Blog #1: http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblog/2010/feb/04/noises-off-theatre-dead-blogs

Blog #2: http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblog/2010/mar/23/stage-theatre-digital-technology-ished

News Article #1: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8380266.stm

News Article #2: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070322105323.htm

Do People Use the Internet to Make Their Lives More Satisfactory?

     In class, we each had to read an article that was related to the Web in general. My group was assigned an article named, "Does Using the Internet Make People More Satisfied with Their Lives? The Effects of the Internet on College Students' School Life Satisfaction." The article presented a study that is still fairly new today and it examines different personalities such as introverts and extroverts; and has the students filling out a questionnaire about how the Internet makes students feel. It discusses self-efficacy, self-esteem, social outcome expectations, behavior, and environment. The summary of this is basically the more extroverted you are in your "real life" the more extroverted you are more likely to be on the Internet. But, also keep in mind that you can be a completely different person on the Internet and that plays a factor into this as well. The other observation was that introverted people didn't use it for social activities but more for games and information; or if they felt like they couldn't socialize in their "real life" they could socialize on the Internet. Another factor taken into account with this was their environment and how college students and how this affected their use of the Internet. Towards the end of the article, since this is all very new, they mentioned that they had limitations and not everything was taken into account. So, they stated that a good way to see if their lives are more satisfactory with the Internet is to take into account how they use the Internet. What websites are they visiting? Do their personalities come into play? Are they the same on the Internet as they are in their "real lives?"
    I found a paper that was written in 2003 by two different authors. It's titled, "Individual Differences in Internet Usage Motives," written for a conference. They take into account three different personality types [psychotic, neurotic, and extravert] and have the students fill out a questionnaire about their personalities, their habits, and what types of devices they use on the Internet. So, while this paper is not venturing far from the previous article I was given, it is looking at it from a slightly different perspective. It's looking at specific types of personalities (and while it may be a little outdated) it's still pretty relevant to this day (you would just need to add in many more new devices that have come about since 2003). They hypothesized the usual predictions one would have about these different personalities and then they had the students fill out the 3 different surveys. They were asked to report on a scale of 1 to 9 their computer expertise (1 being the lowest and 9 being the highest). Then, they were asked to report on how much they used certain Internet applications (they were supplied with a list) and had to rate on a scale of 1 to 9 how often they used them (same scale rules apply). Finally, they were asked to report on why they used these different technologies (their motives) and these were divided into 4 categories (interpersonal/communication utility, entertainment, information, and convenience). They also took gender into account when taking these surveys but gender didn't seem to prove significant in this research.
     The results of this survey were not the same as they hypothesized and not what you would normally expect out of the different personalities. The extraverts seemed to "reject" the Internet for personal communication and socializing. "Instead, those scoring high on the extraversion prefer to voice their opinion. Moreover, extraverts tend to use the Internet to do research and to share music with others." (Amiel, Sargent, Page 13). Although, those that scored high in neuroticism tended to be females. In addition, these people are quite the opposite of the extraverts and want to use the Internet to "escape loneliness" and "belong to a group." However, they do not use it to take part in one-on-one discussions or online chat groups. "Finally, those scoring high on N demonstrate an interest in alternative news and a need to learn about potential threats ("so that I can learn about what could happen to me")." (Amiel, Sargent, Page 14). And finally, those scoring high on the psychoticism side displayed just generally uninterested in communicating with others on the Internet. These people had more interesting motives, "including pass time,  nudity and pornography web-sites, and file-sharing services." (Amiel, Sargent, Page 15). They also use it for finding information about people and what could happen to them. One could also make a guess that they could be the people to create fake websites since this type of personality in a person usually disregards the rules in society.
    This article seemed to go more in-depth about what types of websites people used based on their personality types and if that was really helping to satisfy their lives. In this perspective, these people are, in general, using the website to enhance their lives and hopefully making it more satisfying. They are able to use the Internet for several different motives and can accomplish many different goals on it. Students can share music, files, find out what's going in the world, socialize with their peers, and many other things. So it's taking a look at the patterns of what different types of students use the Internet and their patterns of Internet usage. Unless, a student is completely disinterested in technology and does not like it; the Internet can only enhance your life with the buttload of information at your fingertips and different social networking sites.

Here's the link to the paper if you would like to take a look at the tables generated from the results of the surveys. Or if you wanted to read the paper, it really is interesting to see how different personality types can use the Internet.
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&hid=113&sid=daff3596-fd6c-481e-94d0-6dcd2304dcb0%40sessionmgr114

Shakespeare's Globe Theatre

So, I'm pretty sure that everyone has heard of a guy named William Shakespeare. Right? He's pretty famous not only for his amazing plays, sonnets, and poems but also for the Globe Theatre where all of his plays were performed in Elizabethan England. It was built in 1597 by Shakespeare's acting troupe called: The Chamberlain's Men. It burned down in 1613 during a performance of Henry VIII due to a cannon being fired off; this was their version of special effects. A year later, it is rebuilt on the same grounds or very near to them and this time they decide to tile the roof instead of thatching. By 1642, a Civil War breaks out between the Puritans and the Royalists and they have to close the Globe (or rather demolish it) in 1644. This is just a basic and very brief overview of the timeline of the old Globe Theater.
Back to when it first burned down, it was during a performance of Henry VIII. The Globe Theater was very much known for being a place where the upper class of society would go to just be seen in the box/balcony seats and the lower class of society were there for the entertainment. Basically, it was a place to socialize and mingle. Anyway, being that the Globe was there for entertainment they liked to use very realistic special effects and wanted to keep the audience engaged and entertained as much as possible. The way it was designed as a building was that it had a roof but it was "open" so that it could allow for smoking effect, cannon firings, fireworks, entrances that required "flying" from the Heavens. The floors had trap-doors which also had the advantages of adding surprise entrances for certain characters (for example: the ghost of King Hamlet in Hamlet). As you can see, the special effects they had were very real/literal and very primitive compared to all the crazy special effects that we have today. Obviously, it was not a good idea to have a thatched roof when they had special effects such as cannon firings. That's just asking for a fire. Am I right? But what was also unique about the Globe was the architecture and design of the building. It was built to be like an outdoor theater where the Sun could come in and light the stage. They didn't have all the sophisticated lighting techniques we had today.
But, since the old Globe Theater was torn down by the Puritans they decided to rebuild it. The idea came up in the 1970's from Sam Wanamaker. In 1989, they established where the old Globe possibly could have been and had to get an idea as to where to put the new Globe. When they were building the new Globe they found bits and pieces of the foundation from the old Globe and discovered that they were only about 200 yards from the previous location. The new Globe Theater officially reopened in the year 1999 (so pretty recently) with the show Henry V.
How did they know where to build the Globe? How did they know what the Globe looked like? How did they get the dimensions? Should they use artificial lighting? What modern adaptations could they add to make sure another fire didn't occur? Obviously, a lot of questions and research went into rebuilding the Globe. But what modern technologic modifications are there in this new theater? They didn't have cameras back in Shakespeare's time so they didn't have to pictures to look from when rebuilding the Globe so they had to look back at descriptions written down in books. One of the books mentioned that has a description is Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction where there is an interior and exterior description. But there is also a picture of the Swan Theater (another theater in London at the time) that was built similarly to the Globe and architects most likely branched off of this as well. It's also known that the theater was based off of a Roman amphitheatre; although it's also said to be an octagonal shape as well. When they built the new one they went off of a landscape picture where you can see the top and exterior of the Globe Theatre but they also went off of an interior picture of the Swan Theatre which was assumed to be very similar to the Globe. So, judging by how seating was and the style of the inside (amphitheatre) the Globe could house a good amount of people. But, the new modern, technological aspect of the reconstructed Globe include having the thatched roof be covered in a fire-proof liquid (the first thatched roof in London since 1666). So, the goal was to rebuild the new theatre but to make it as authentic as possible. While they may have achieved that in making it look as authentic as possible there are still some major modern changes (although there is still no heat or air-conditioning). They use natural lighting but they obviously have artificial lighting to enhance it as well. Technology really comes into play during the process of rebuilding the Globe and just measuring out the dimensions but doing those based off of old paintings, drawings and descriptions. But, obviously, the lobby of the reconstructed Globe will be cleaner than what it was back in Shakespeare's time and much more modern looking. Also, I'm pretty sure that the new museum, restaurant, gift shop, and lecture hall was not included in the old Globe and have modern twists to them as well.

http://www.globe-theatre.org.uk/
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/history_for_children/18004
http://www.william-shakespeare.info/william-shakespeare-globe-theatre.htm

At the start of it all...

Yay! It's my first blog post of the semester! I haven't blogged since middle school when I had a live journal so just stick with me while I figure it all out again and get it set up. Anyway, the topic I will be researching throughout the semester will be related to theatre and technology. This is my primary major and when we were asked to pick a topic related to our field of study I could not wait to get started. Focusing my major towards the technological side of theatre such as design, stage management, lighting, sound, scenery, and painting. There are so many options and so many ways that theatre itself has advanced tremendously over the years. 
As a theatre major we have to take all beginning classes to each aspect of theatre (no matter your focus) such as acting and performance, stage design, history of theatre, and stagecraft. In each of these, you get a little brief history/overview of that aspect and usually they are all related to each other or repeat one another. But, when you get these brief histories you can really see how theatre has advanced throughout the years technologically speaking. We no longer have only one actor on the stage for the whole show, we don't use the traditional masks like the Greeks used to, we have different types of stages (proscenium, experimental, etc.), and today a lot of shows try to use as much technology (light effects, sound effects, etc.) to put on a "spectacle" and a lot of people get distracted from the actions and emotions being conveyed on the stage. It all depends on the designer and director usually to make decisions about what is going to happen during the show artistically speaking; and then there are shows who don't use as much because they are trying to focus on the acting. 
Anyway, the point that I'm getting at is that it is very clear that theatre is not the same as it used to be and in many ways has been enhanced because of these technological advances. What are some of the benefits and consequences? Shows also have to be advertised and promoted; so how is that being accomplished in today's world? Can you go online to pre-order tickets instead of going to the box office at the last minute right before the show starts? You can also (in most cases) probably choose where you would want to sit during the performance when you order the tickets online. Then, you have the obvious sound effects, lighting effects, and costuming techniques as well. The book I'm reading in my Stage Management class is even outdated and we're looking at it in class, and the professor is obviously going to show us how they do it today versus in the past, but it is still interesting to see how technology has changed the way we do things now.  
I'm really excited to get started and to start researching about my topic. I hope you guys enjoy this! Like I said before, it's going to take me awhile to get everything fully set up because I don't know all the "ins and outs" of this blogging site or even blogging in general. But, I'm looking forward to the research ahead and I think that I will find it interesting and I hope you guys do too!