In my own work i am uninterested in the label of video artist because my interest in video is actually more based in the physical presence of the projection. This then works to define my Visual Art.

The process of this work is based more on a physical concept then on the materials used but the process is defined by the materials used. To make a projection video sculpture there has to be a lot of experimentation included to see what effect the viewers eye will have on the whole process.

Since Juniper and I have referred to technology in a generalized manner, I think it’s good to give a few examples of artists employing technology in specific ways:

(I’ve stolen text from the following websites that describes each project)

Kurt Hentschlagger/FEED

http://www.epidemic.net/geogb/art/gs/kurt/feed.html

In Feed, "3D real-time characters, human figures, “reside” in a flickering world on a panoramic screen - a projected window completely filling a wall in a physical space. They are driven in their emotions and motions by behavioral procedures or algorithms, realized for the most part by a real time physics engine. All motions, proceeding from such physics simulation are "procedural" in the sense of programming, and like in nature, are unpredictable within their own milieu or “action space”. Motions are not hand animated, captured or looped in any way but are constantly being generated and regenerated, taking on different paths until the system eventually is shut down. Because the figures are animated in this way they can interact or “live” with each other in their screen world "independently", causing additional commotion.

Bill T. Jones, Paul Kaiser, Shelley Eshkar, and Marc Downie/22

http://www.openendedgroup.com/artworks/22/22.htm

In this live performance for the stage, three elements interact: the physical performance of Bill T. Jones, who dances while telling two intertwined stories; the virtual music of composer Roger Reynolds; and the virtual spaces and movements of 3D projections by Downie, Shelley Eshkar, and Paul Kaiser. In actual performance, Jones is motion-captured in real time, allowing our imagery to respond to – and even intervene in – his story. The imagery neither “illustrates” the stories nor duplicates Jones' figure; rather it evokes odd parallel spaces and dual figures (boy and man) which inter-relate complexly with the stories and the stage space. The 3D scenes are rendered in real-time, with timings, durations, and placements determined autonomously by the underlying AI program.

Mikel Rouse/ THE END OF CINEMATICS

http://www.mikelrouse.com/cine.html

The End Of Cinematics is a dreamlike meditation on the history of cinema as well as a reflection on corporate entertainment and its transformation of the potential art of cinema. Suggesting that plot and screenplay have become artifice (while corporate entertainment continues to insist on its supremacy), The End Of Cinematics captures mundane scenes ("pictures of people talking" as Hitchcock would dismiss) of its characters and surrounds them in a world dominated by music and random sound. While the plot revolves loosely around a death threat (the MacGuffin, if you will) and the chance interaction of a man and a woman, these seeming threads of continuity are, in reality, a tool to draw the viewer into a new way of experiencing movies (though, admittedly, the effect can be disconcerting at first). By reversing the traditional hierarchy of dialog, image, and sound, The End Of Cinematics offers the opportunity to examine but one of the many possibilities afforded filmmakers and videographers at the beginning of the 21st Century.