Working in partnership with vibrant nonprofit arts organizations across the United States to explore…

Telepresence: An Art-Making and Distance Collaboration Platform

May 2014

Contents

I. Facilitators 1

II. Technology and Program 2

III. Group I Collaboration 5

IV. Group II Collaboration 8

V. Key Findings / Lessons Learned 9

VI. Technical Findings 12

VII. Future Plans 14

Appendix A: Current and Past Participants

Appendix B: Best Practices for Technicians

Appendix C: FAQs

Appendix D: Technical Tips from Program Participants

1  

I. FACILITATORS Artspace Artspace, established in 1979, is a nonprofit real estate developer headquartered in Minnesota that specializes in creating, owning and operating affordable spaces for artists and creative businesses. Artspace is the nation’s leading developer of arts facilities – live/work housing, artist studios, arts centers, commercial space for arts-friendly businesses and other projects. Our mission is to create, foster and preserve affordable space for artists and arts organizations. Artspace works in three major areas – Consulting Services, Property Development and Asset Management. Through our Consulting Services, we share our expertise with clients across the country. In our process, we analyze and study the feasibility of new Artspace projects. Property Development creates new Artspace projects through a mix of historic renovation and new construction. Artspace’s Asset Management group ensures long-term financial stability and affordability for artists. At present, we own and operate 35 projects across the country. Twenty-eight are live/work or mixed-use projects containing more than 1,100 residential units. Our portfolio of projects is rounded out with non-residential projects that provide space for artists and cultural organizations. More information is available at http://www.artspace.org CultureHub CultureHub, based in New York City, is an incubator for creativity focused on the intersection of art and technology. We connect artists from diverse disciplines and cultures and provide them with environments in which to collaborate, experiment and explore. We serve local and global communities by providing an open space for creative research, artistic exchange and learning. Founded in 2009 by the Seoul Institute of the Arts in Korea and La MaMa Experimental Theatre Club in New York City, CultureHub currently consists of four telepresence partnerships: 1. Seoul Institute of the Arts (Seoul/Korea) 2. La MaMa Experimental Theater Club (New York City/USA) 3. CalArts (Los Angeles/USA) 4. Contact Theatre (Manchester/UK). Our vision is to bring artists from diverse disciplines and cultures together to explore art and technology as a means for developing new forms of expression, sharing creative experiences and promoting global collaboration, learning and innovation. Our mission is to provide a shared space for artists to collaborate, share ideas and create interdisciplinary works of art that explore emerging mediums and technologies. More information is available at http://www.culturehub.org Artspace and CultureHub Working in Partnership CultureHub was a participant in Artspace’s 2011/12 Distance Learning Pilot Program funded by the Ford Foundation, and came on board as a partner in the coordination of the 2013/14 Distance Collaboration Program. As an incubator for creativity focused on the intersection of art and technology, CultureHub is dedicated to using open-source and consumer-based technology to facilitate artistic interaction across distance. For this partnership, Artspace and CultureHub brought together their unique experience and expertise to begin an exploration of using telepresence technology as an art-making and distance collaboration platform for artists to further their artistic process, creativity and collaboration.

#!

II. TECHNOLOGY AND PROGRAM

Telepresence Technology Telepresence technology, more commonly known as videoconferencing, connects two or more locations virtually – for example, teaching artists or cultural practitioners at one

location to participants or other artists at a remote site. A camera, sound system, projector and a screen (or white wall) are set up at both locations for real time collaboration. The camera and the projection allow participants to see and talk to one another as if they were in the same room. These virtual connections can eliminate the time and financial barriers associated with having participants travel to engage in artistic collaboration. While this technology was developed primarily for businesses to conduct meetings with attendees from different locations, it is being

explored, tested and pushed in its capacity through work such as our Distance Collaboration Program, which focuses on artistic exchanges. Telepresence technology can and is being used to conduct artistic workshops and trainings, transmit performances, share programing, and to conduct collaborative art-making sessions, among other creative uses.

Distance Collaboration Program Our Distance Collaboration Program, funded by the Ford Foundation and executed in a partnership between Artspace and CultureHub, grew directly out of the 2011/12 Distance Learning Pilot Program, which engaged a number of the Ford Foundation Supporting Diverse Arts Spaces (SDAS) partners to explore the use of telepresence technology to work over distances.

The purpose of this year’s Distance Collaboration Program was to implement the various discoveries of the pilot program, furthering the artistic interactions of selected Ford SDAS participants and Artspace organizations to develop a more sustained, meaningful artistic exchange among participants.

In the Pilot Program, the key question for us

!"#$%#&%'()*'+',-)"#$.*'/011#20&#"-0$'3&04&#5'6*"70&8'9**"-$4'0:';<=><>?@'=;'A#&"-.-A#$")'B)-$4'>;'%*C-.*)'"0'.0$$*."!

9-#5-'D-4E"'3&0F*."'#$%'/B1"B&*GB2'+'H*)"-$4'.0$$*."-0$)!

$!

was whether this technology would help facilitate authentic artistic exchanges across distances. We learned that the use of this technology was a meaningful tool for the partnering participants. In this year’s Distance Collaboration Program, the focus was no longer “if” but rather “how” to explore the use of distance technologies, including livestreaming and teleconferencing systems, to further the artistic process, creativity and collaboration. Our purpose was to take our exploration deeper and see how we could work collectively using this technology to do genuine collaborations and to examine whether this platform would create a new art form.

Our work began with the parameters of inviting a select group of participants, the Ford SDAS Cohort and specific Artspace projects tenants, to participate in part of a three-track program:

1. A one-year program of collaboration, open to the Ford SDAS Cohort, among a selected group of organizations that would result in a shared production or event to showcase the use of telepresence technology as an art-making and distance collaboration platform. The participants would determine the specific type of the collaboration.

2. A one-year program of collaboration between two Artspace artists/arts organizations to create programmatic and complementary opportunities to enhance their mission delivery using telepresence technology.

3. Network meetings to share with a broader group the technical information, offer examples showcasing uses and discuss how this technology can be used to further the artistic process.

Seven organizations (see Appendix A) were selected to participate in this year’s program through an RFP process. The process included having the organizations complete a thorough questionnaire about their goals and intentions for the distance collaboration, and provide technical and personnel capacity to identify opportunities and potential challenges for the program. After the participants were selected, we synthesized the findings of the surveys with in-person conversations. CultureHub and Artspace worked together to assemble custom packages for the infrastructure and needs of each organization. This customization was a direct result of the discovery made in the Pilot Program that a “one size fits all” approach to distance collaboration is less effective than a more individualized equipment plan. Site visits were conducted with each of the participants to set up, install and train them on the functions of the equipment.

9-#5-'D-4E"'3&0F*."')-"*'C-)-"<"&#-$-$4'7-"E')"#::'#$%'"*.E$-.#1':*1107)'

4  

Our collaboration began with program-planning meetings to discuss ideas for possible collaboration. There were two groups:

1. Five social justice arts organizations from the Ford SDAS Cohort that would create an opportunity for collaboration

2. Two established organizations from Artspace’s projects that would partner exclusively with each other to expand their programing

Both groups worked together with the desire to learn about telepresence technology through this program.

5  

III. GROUP I COLLABORATION The Ford SDAS participants met to discuss possible plans for their collaboration. Their activities primarily centered on telepresence exchanges around one organization’s annual festival (i.e. La MaMa’s fourth annual Human Beat Box Festival). In addition, each of the participants sought out opportunities to explore other types telepresence exchanges with one another and experimented with exchanges and livestreaming that would support their vision and plans. Their strong desire to see how they could use telepresence technology to further their artistic process, creativity and collaborative work resulted in unique exchanges that offer a model for future uses and allowed each participant to test this technology in practical ways that fit within their current programs and long term needs. When the SDAS group held their first planning meeting, it was clear that Pregones Theater, as a veteran of using distance technologies with partners throughout Europe, the Caribbean, and South America, and the creator of the “Carousel” model for distance collaboration, brought insight and expertise to initial collaboration between otherwise unconnected groups. Pregones became an important contributor to the overall vision and structure of the project. Jorge Merced of Pregones spent a considerable amount of time and attention drafting a “playing rules” manual to help guide the collaboration, as well as a work plan entitled SOUND•MOTION•STORY: Creative Relay for Diverse Arts Spaces, modeled on their existing Worldwide Theater Carousel international collaboration model. While the work plan was perhaps more ambitious in scope than the Distance Collaboration Program, it nonetheless proved a valuable starting point and source of inspiration throughout the program period. The oldest of the participating organizations, La MaMa, eagerly embraced the use of telepresence, working in tandem with the Seoul Institute of the Arts to found CultureHub in 2009, and installing the technology in the Ellen Stewart Theatre to livestream performances around the world. La MaMa and CultureHub have engaged in telepresence exchanges both together and independently for nearly five years. For the Distance Collaboration Program this year, La MaMa structured their exchanges around the fourth annual Human Beat Box Festival, a celebration of the unique American art form of Beat Boxing and Beat Rhyming. Events were held with partner collaborators over distance surrounding the Festival. Because the collaboration was structured around a unified theme and set of activities, and had sustained interaction with the partners, the exchanges reached the level of depth and complexity intended to further develop the program. For Pregones Theater, the collaboration with the La MaMa Human Beatbox Festival capitalized on the two organizations’ presence at opposite ends of New York City to take on a live dimension: after beatboxing over telepresence, Pregones invited audience members at the theater and watching online to board the downtown 6 train. Beatboxers at La MaMa boarded the 6 train near their venue heading uptown. Everyone met at the 125th Street Station and the exchange continued live for approximately 30 minutes on the subway platform for delighted onlookers. They then “took over” a subway car heading downtown and continued the exchange until reaching La MaMa’s Great Jones studio for a pizza reception and gathering of artists.

'!

The Alaska Native Heritage Center’s collaboration from Anchorage with the Human Beatbox Festival at La MaMa was cited by both organizations as a success of the program. While the students at the Alaska Native Heritage Center were initially shy and hesitant, by the second workshop they were fully engaged, dancing and singing along with the beatboxers in New York. In their report, Alaska Native Heritage Center wrote, “The students were excited and anxious to see how they could incorporate the lessons they learned with the traditional songs and drum beats of their Alaska Native cultures – fusing old and newer traditions.” La MaMa added, “The piece came together beautifully, and everyone from both sides was fully engaged and participating with focus and openness. It was a striking moment. After it ended, everyone was silenced by its impact for a few seconds, until someone said, ‘Let’s do it again!’ ” The Alaska Native Heritage Center also used this

technology in a unique way to address their needs and offerings. While not held directly with a participating organization, they held a Sm’algyax talking circle, intended to keep people actively speaking the Tsimshian Native language, to engage their elders of a town nearly 1,200 miles away from the capital, and difficult to reach during winter. They noted this as “one of the many benefits” of the technology.

Like Alaska Native Heritage Center, The Longhouse Education and Cultural Center based at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, enlivened youth programming by bringing in workshops over distance from the La MaMa Human Beatbox Festival. Held as part of Longhouse’s long-standing “Generations Rising” event for local and regional Tribal youth, there ultimately were five generations of participants in the beatbox workshop, including family members of the late Bruce “Baoosh” Miller, a Native performer who worked at La MaMa in the 1960s. The event provided a window into the rich environment of the

Longhouse’s facility, with La MaMa’s participants noticing, “The (Generations Rising) festival was held in a beautiful hall, and just from seeing their environment on our screens we felt immediately immersed in the event.” The Longhouse too worked beyond the collaboration and found the telepresence technology a rich way to encourage meaningful engagements. The Longhouse found particular successes solving some managerial and logistical

I1#)8#'6#"-C*'G*&-"#4*'/*$"*&J)'K$"*&"&-2#1'L#"E*&-$4'

'

HE*'D0$4E0B)*J)'L*$*&#"-0$)'M-)-$4'*C*$"'"E#"'-$.1B%*%'#$'*N.E#$4*'7-"E'D#'9#9#!

7  

challenges. By using the teleconferencing technology to show artwork during a meeting with their advisory board, the Longhouse was able to have a more “substantive conversation on awarding grants,” and by linking the National Museum of the American Indian with the Yakima Valley Museum, the Longhouse coordinated an applied research opportunity for Yakama Tribal Elder and Adult artists to view historically and artistically significant pieces in the museum collections that would be made accessible via the technology. Despite their enthusiasm and willingness to collaborate, The Miami Light Project did not have a natural crossover to La MaMa’s Human Beatbox Festival. They successfully tackled a number of unique technical challenges via telepresence, by livestreaming several programs for their 2013-14 Contemporary Performance Series, including their Global Cuba Fest and Thaddeus Phillips’ solo theater production “17 Borders Crossings.” And they stand to address a number of logistical needs, such as their collaborations with Cuban partners, via telepresence technology while expanding their technical fellows program. Miami Light Project demonstrated a particularly promising application of distance collaboration technology by using the system to demonstrate the work of Miami-based artist Rosie Herrera, who could talk and show the work in progress of her new solo dance piece, “Cookie’s Kid,” allowing both MLP and Dance Place to co-commission her new piece. It is hoped that organizations can master distance collaboration as a powerful marketing tool, using it to show work to funding, commissioning, and presenting organizations.

)!

IV. GROUP II COLLABORATION

The Artspace participants, The Cowles Center and Dance Place, formed a partnership to expand their programing. The Cowles Center, located in Minneapolis, Minnesota, is a catalyst for the creation, performance, education and celebration of dance and the performing arts. The Cowles has been using telepresence technology for ten years with K-12 students across Minnesota and the world to bring quality dance education into distant classroom. Dance Place, located in Washington, D.C., builds a community of artists, audiences, and students through high quality performances, commissions, training and educational programs, and is committed to enriching the field of dance locally, nationally and internationally.

The Cowles and Dance Place worked with the Fair School in Minneapolis to create a new educational program called “Dance Pals.” They utilized the distance collaboration to provide further opportunities for educational and artistic exchange for their constituents. These two organizations share a similar mission and vision, including a commitment to providing access to quality arts education and vital home/work spaces to diverse dance companies. Their education focused program included students ages 6 to 16 learning original choreography by Minneapolis and DC-based dancers that will be performed simultaneously at Dance Place’s final after-school program in June 2014.

Through the process of dancing together, students found new friends and expanded their concept of dancing beyond the confines of their classroom to dancers, choreographers, and teachers in Minneapolis. Dance Place states, “It’s been so wonderful to see the smiles on the faces of the Energizers Afterschool Club students every Wednesday of Distant Learning.”

O#&5PBA'"0'"*)"'.0$$*."-0$'2*"7**$',#$.*'31#.*'#$%'HE*'/071*)'/*$"*&''

*!

V. KEY FINDINGS/LESSONS LEARNED

1. Breaking down the barriers of distance through telepresence technology has a profound impact on the ability for artists to share their art forms with each other and to new audiences providing access and opportunities that would otherwise not be possible.

For La MaMa’s work in this program they state this example: “Beatboxing transcends language and creates a common ground to easily incorporate rapping, indigenous art forms, humming, spoken word, singing, whistling, and more. The Distance Learning Exchanges

resulted in striking hybrid performances, created collaboratively between the participating organizations and performed live over distance.” The Longhouse states, “Our participation in the Distance Collaboration Project has allowed us to work with organizations that we would have been unable to without the telepresence equipment and support of the program. We gained new technical proficiency with the equipment and technical problem-solving skills that will continue to

serve us in both our day to day work and with our future programming. Having access to, and basic proficiency with the equipment has allowed us to consider new possibilities for meaningful exchange beyond the limitations of space and distance.”

2. Telepresence technology can be used as an art-making and distance collaboration platform for artists to further their artistic process, creativity and collaboration.

As stated by Pregones Theater, “Collaboration between Pregones and La MaMa as part of the Human Beatbox Festival. We were able to combine point-to-point live connection, simultaneous live streaming from both venues, live audience participation, live artistic collaboration/creation before both virtual and live audiences. Event transitioned smoothly from the two live physical spaces to the shared virtual platform and later to an actual subway platform, where collaborating artists met in person for the first time and performed live once again, but this time sharing the same physical space.” This type of collaboration was possible because of the technology.

Miami Light Project says they were “exposed to a different art form. The Distance Collaboration Program educated local artists and technical fellows, and engaged them throughout the season… The telepresence technology has opened up interest in distance collaboration in our community.”

I&")A#.*'Q&*#8-$4'L&0B$%'/*1*2&#"-0$'7-"E'#$'*N.E#$4*'2*"7**$'HE*'/071*)'#$%',#$.*'31#.*'!

"+!

3. Put into the hands of creative artists, this technology becomes a powerful tool for future new work.

La MaMa says “Teaching beatboxing to Native American youth provided a dynamic bridge between current youth culture and cultural legacies that expanded the work of all participants.” And: “The Distance Learning Exchanges were positive experiences for all. The students learned more about vocal arts and gained confidence, while the La MaMa contributors were introduced to new cultures and vocal forms. This exchange created a bridge between New York and three vibrant communities. The most rewarding element for all of us at La MaMa was learning about the youth who shared their stories and talents with us.” All of the participants have plans for future use. The Cowles Center states: “We do plan to continue to grow our partnership together and expand programs we offer!”

4. Telepresence technology as a new art-making platform has challenges and needs time to develop and evolve.

This program is offering a place for that process and growth, a collective creative place where we can teach and learn from each other offering our unique perspectives and sharing our vision of possibilities. By providing a framework for mutual support to play and experiment with the artistic process, the capacity of implementation, and share skills and best practices of working in a technology based platform with each other we are collectively developing this art-making platform.

When asked about the greatest challenge of the program, Pregones Theater highlights the art-making itself: “Artistically we felt the time allotted to learn about cohort partners was rushed and too short; we needed more time to get to know each other; to better understand and most of all, experience the scope of each other’s artistic work via the new technology…. Perhaps our shared eagerness and excitement about the project made us overlook the significant artistic and cultural differences between the organizations, and how to best use those differences to the project’s advantage.”

HE*'D0$4E0B)*J)'L*$*&#"-0$)'M-)-$4'*C*$"'"E#"'-$.1B%*%'.0$$*."-$4'7-"E'D#'9#5#'

""!

Other participants noted the practical implementation of new programming; The Cowles Center states, “Our greatest challenge was getting this program up and running smoothly. With any pilot program it took us much longer than anticipated to create, engage and implement the program.” And Dance Place said, “The biggest challenge so far has been the coordination of schedules.” This was also noted by Miami Light Project: “It seemed that

there were always conflicts in schedules and little ability to shift preplanned seasons. It was hard to find dates available with SDAS partners to develop an exchange… Also advance planning in general has to happen to sync seasons with collaborators.” And La MaMa notes the challenges of working with a technology-based platform, stating, “Over-all, the technical demands of this work were arduous. However, this did not take away from the value of the collaborative artistic work made possible by this technology. We are committed to repeating this programming in years to come.” Longhouse adds: “Our greatest challenge was facing unforeseen technical difficulties at every stage of the planning, testing and execution of our telepresence events…. Despite the challenges, it has been an exciting experience to be able to use the telepresence technology in such a variety of ways. Each of the events we have held has enriched the lives of our constituents and expanded our ability to meet our mission.”

9-#5-'D-4E"'3&0F*."'#&"-)")'*NA10&-$4'.#5*&#'#$41*)'

"#!

VI. TECHNICAL FINDINGS

Just as the pilot program led to a number of initial discoveries about the nature of distance collaboration through technology, so this year’s program allowed participants to locate the special challenges of and opportunities afforded by telepresence programming. These included:

1. Audio: Simultaneous low-latency video between venues is a difficult technical feat. Adding quality audio to the production multiplies the difficulty, especially because audio can be an assumed aspect of communication and can evade attention. With audio, latency is more apparent, and poor quality is more damaging to the audience experience. Now that all participants have had experience with distance collaboration, learning the importance of feedback mic placement and feedback issues, we expect audio production will improve significantly over the next phase.

2. Multi-component Customization: As described in the outline of the project, the systems purchased for the partner organizations were customized to their specific needs and capacities. Since the selection of components had to draw from affordable and readily available consumer-based technologies, this involved incorporating different equipment, installing, and training participating organizations how to use the disparate parts as a whole. This presented some successes, as well as some challenges, with Alaska Native Heritage Center, for example, stating: “The individual pieces we received were familiar because we use them on a regular basis, e.g., video cameras, cables, video switcher. The difficulty arose when we tried to use all the pieces in conjunction with the telepresence equipment and Blackmagic switcher. The system became less intuitive. Even with the help of our IT department we still found certain aspects of the set up process difficult. We are still facing some challenges but we are making forward progress learning how to fully utilize the system.”

However, the benefits of customizing a system out of multiple components greatly outweigh any drawbacks. Components, such as video cameras and microphones can be used individually for other artistic projects (versus proprietary components of many systems), and can offer flexibility, portability, and specialization to suit the needs of performing arts organizations.

3. Time and Capacity: The very nature of not-for-profit performing arts in the United States is one of capacity challenges. Administrators, artists, and staff all juggle various duties and wear many hats. The ambitious scope of the distance collaboration project placed

I1#)8#'6#"-C*'G*&-"#4*'/*$"*&')*""-$4'BA'#$%'-$)"#11-$4'$*7'*RB-A5*$"'

13  

demands on the participants beyond the capacities of their infrastructures. Of the “Playing Rules” and “Sound/Motion/Story” Framework, Pregones wrote: “Perhaps our shared eagerness and excitement about the project made us overlook the significant artistic and cultural differences between the organizations, and how to best use those differences to the project’s advantage…. In retrospect, a less ambitious framework could have afforded time to concentrate on a different partner each month, with each partner streaming their selected events/programming and hosting exchanges with the rest of the group where we could talk about the streamed events and learn more from each other.” La MaMa wrote: “At present, La MaMa has no dedicated staff for this programming, which requires a project coordinator, teaching artists, technicians and the support staff needed for every workshop. Coordinating workshop events with the various time zones and organizing technicians to set up five hours in advance to do test calls with the other side, reserving space, and gathering necessary equipment were labor intensive, time consuming and costly elements of the Distance Learning Exchanges.” The lack of marketing and communications support affected Miami Light Project’s livestreamed programming, with the result being: “We had difficulties in finding programming with our SDAS partners that would have appropriate matches. When we promoted the live streaming of our performances, we didn’t receive any interest from our partners in developing an exchange.” And while noteworthy exchanges were made, such as those between the young people of a remote area of Alaska with contemporary spoken word artists in New York, adequate support for communicating the programming to the press and marketing outlets was not available. In the next phase of the project, plans will be implemented to support the staff and artists of these exchanges, and to further disseminate awareness of the programming, including attracting audiences for livestreamed and internet-based programming.

"%!

VII, FUTURE PLANS

Despite the challenges highlighted by the participants and in our technical findings, we have been inspired by the energy and resourcefulness that everyone showed during this program. Many of the events that were accomplished were more developed than anticipated, and all of the organizations pushed the systems to their maximum performance, spurring a call for more powerful and reliable tools. Telepresence production is a new art-making platform and like any art form, mastery does not come quickly, especially when the art form is developing.

Overall, the telepresence collaborations have been greeted with considerable enthusiasm, and the will and energy is there to continue on for another phase of the program. Of the benefit and success of the program, The

Longhouse Education and Cultural Center wrote, “Having access to, and basic proficiency with the equipment has allowed us to consider new possibilities for meaningful exchange beyond the limitations of space and distance….” Alaska Native Heritage Center called the distance workshops “…a great experience for students and employees,” while La MaMa said the exchanges “were positive experiences for all.” It is gratifying to review the successes of the program thus far, and exciting to prepare for the next stage of the journey.

It is Artspace and CultureHub’s intention to continue refining and developing this program. At present the plan is to invite past participants to apply for a one-year, in-depth exploration of distance collaboration models. In the coming iteration, a budget will be made available for personnel, marketing, and programming costs, deepening the level of support given to execute art making across distance. The goal of this next

phase will be to advance the program from learning new technology to capacity building, genuine artistic collaboration, exploration, and production.

HE*'D0$4E0B)*')*"'BA'#$%'&*#%S'"0'%0'#$'*N.E#$4*'

3&*40$*)'HE*#"*&')*""-$4'BA'#$%'-$)"#11-$4'$*7'*RB-A5*$"''

APPENDIX A

Current and Past Participants

A new and growing network of 13 arts organizations using telepresence technology in their work. We’ve grown from seven SDAS organizations to twelve SDAS with two Artspace projects.

2013/14 Ford SDAS Participants Alaska Native Heritage Center - Anchorage, AK La MaMa - New York, NY The Longhouse Education and Cultural Center – Olympia, WAMiami Light Project – Miami, FL Pregones Theater - South Bronx, NY

2013/14 Artspace Participants The Cowles Center for Dance & the Performing Arts – Minneapolis, MN Dance Place - Washington, DC

2011/12 Ford SDAS Participants Ashe Cultural Arts Center - New Orleans, LA CultureHub – New York, NY First Peoples Fund – Rapid City, SDNational Association of Latino Arts and Culture (NALAC) – San Antonio, TX PA’I – Honolulu, HI Pregones Theater – South Bronx, NY Youth Speaks – San Francisco, CA

These participants continue to explore and use telepresence technology in a variety of unique ways from artistic and cultural exchanges to educational programing and leadership development to viewing historically and artistically significant pieces in museum collections

3  

APPENDIX B

Best Practices for Technicians

Test Connection - The most crucial step of event preparation is the test connection. All locations need to test their connection in conditions as similar to the event as possible. That means same venue, same computer, even same time of day if possible. A test should always be done with new partners and often with return collaborators. And a pre event check an hour before show time is recommended. Permanent Install - Each time the system is dis mantled and reinstalled, all systems have to be tested. Even basic functions, like port number or video format, should be called into question. A permanently installed system is needed for regular, reliable connections, and to avoid extensive troubleshooting. Audio Feedback - The nature of inter-venue production makes feedback a serious risk. Mics should be placed as far away from room speakers as possible and a technician should monitor for feedback throughout the show. Echo cancellation settings are useful but can limit simultaneous performance. Local Networks - Universities and other institutions often have strict security standards built into their local networks. Often, decisions they make have unintended effects throughout their network, blocking any network data that seems unusual. Your IT department is your best friend. Work with them to assure a reliable path for your audio and video, and keep informed about any changes they’re making. Secondary Channel - When systems fail between venues, the technicians will need to discuss the problem with one another, but they won’t be able to use the failing system to do it. Try to establish a way to communicate when the main system is down. A secondary channel for communication works great for mid show coordination too. Unique Gear - The components in this system, from the Polycom codec to the Blackmagic mixer to the HandyCams, are all unique, specialized for certain kinds of productions and built with those assumptions. For instance, the Polycom mic assumes you are using it in a conference situation. It was built assuming it would remain the audio device for pretty much all events and would remain plugged in. So if the system is muted through the mic, and the mic is unplugged, the system will just remain muted.

APPENDIX C FAQ’s Why can’t I see my collaborator’s video? The first thing to check is the fixed port setting, found in Network under Admin Settings. The fixed port setting allows video to be received continuously through the same network port, which is almost always required for stable video reception. Why won’t my collaborator’s laptop connect to the bridge? Your collaborator’s laptop or their local network probably isn’t configured to share information with the bridge. Network configurations vary wildly from computer to computer and from network to network. If your collaborator is not familiar with their network settings there is probably an IT technician who is. Why can’t I hear my collaborator? They likely placed their microphone to far away from the person speaking. It helps to sound check with your collaborator before the show and coach them to be considerate of their distance from the mic. Why can’t I find the Polycom setting I need? Most of the more powerful controls for the Polycom reside in its GUI (Graphic User Interface), which can be accessed through any web browser on the same local network as the Polycom. Type in the Polycom’s IP address into the browser and login with your username and password. You’ll find options for monitors, cameras, connection speeds, and audio treatment there. Why do I hear my audio coming back through my speakers? If mic placement has been ruled out, you likely have your echo cancellation turned off. Echo cancellation is found in Audio under Admin Settings. This feature detects when there is audio in one room and turns off the mics in the other room. While this is useful for a conversation, musical collaboration can be difficult with echo cancellation. Consider the production before using it. Which audio input should I use, the Polycom mic or stage mics through my mixer to the line input? Town hall style events and teaching events are usually best served by the Polycom microphone, which can pick up a wider area and demands less attention. When specific sources need to be emphasized, say in music events, or large volume changes are expected, stage and handheld mics will offer needed control. Why does my livestream audio sound so different from my house audio? When mixing for your venue, acoustic audio sources will already have some presence and the overall mix will have natural blending from room reverberations. Livestream mixes require more volume to acoustic sources and added processing to assist blending. Create a separate mix for your livestream that can feed from an auxiliary output on your soundboard and record a sample of it during sound check to confirm it’s quality. Why can’t I see my HandyCam or Polycom feed in the Blackmagic ATEM Multiview? There is probably a mismatch of video formats between the Blackmagic ATEM and the video sources. The ATEM can only read one kind of video format at a time. The format can be set in the control software’s Settings tab. HandyCam video format can be set in HDMI Resolution under Setup. And the Polycom format can be set in Video Output under Admin Settings. Make sure all three devices match in resolution, scanning, and frame rate.

3  

APPENDIX D

Technical Tips from Program Participants

Connection Issues Do test connections before every exchange! What works one day, might not work the next. It can be just a small detail that needs to be worked out, so it is strongly advised to leave enough time to do a test connection giving time to trouble-shoot if needed.

Polycom Codec System Issue: System would turn on but calls were not going through via Polycom and our Polycom was not being consistent. Solution: Our immediate solution was to use Skype. We discovered later that our Ethernet connection was not working properly and we had to reboot the system. Issue: Dropped calls. Solution: We found that our calls were most stable and consistent when both groups were using a stable IP and when both sides had set cameras and microphones. Moving cameras and microphones often caused delays and sometimes the connection would even drop or freeze. Issue: Polycom would not read on ATEM. Solution: We adjusted ATEM to match Polycom video resolution and went into Polycom Codec Settings to make sure CAMERA 1 was selected. Issue: In putting together the portable codec, which included a laptop, USB microphone and USB camera, we did not include a projector or VGA connector for a projector. There was a miscommunication about whether the host facility had a projector and screen. Solution: We ended up using the host facility’s laptop to connect with projector and screen, until the host facility’s staff person provided a VGA connector so we could use our laptop. Once we connected our laptop, we were able to connect successfully to the Scopia bridging room.

Scopia Codec System Issue: You are unable to dial in through your videoconferencing equipment. Solution: This is most likely a firewall issue, have your network provider look into lifting it. In the meantime, invite your videoconferencing unit via computer. Log into the Scopia bridging meeting room on your computer and invite the videoconferencing unit by typing in the IP address. This will bypass the firewall issue. You can then close out from your computer.

Livestreaming and Documenting Issue: While live streaming, sometimes the sound went out and the frames would freeze. Solution: With this equipment you will need to have a PC or MAC with a minimum of 4GB of RAM. After hooking it up to a PC with more random access memory, it streams smoothly with no interruption in the video or audio.

4  

Issue: Giant recorded files would not fit on Macbook hard drive. Solution: After our Mac filled up, we bought an external hard drive; ideally, this should be done at the beginning of the process to avoid slow processing on the Macbook or stilted recording.

Camera Polycom Codec System

Issue: The other organization’s external camera were not being recognized by their Polycom. Solution: We worked through this problem via phone with the organizations. All wire connections were checked and replacement wires tried. The system was turned off and on. The camera was turned off and on. None of the typical solutions worked, so finally they plugged in the Polycom camera, which worked, though it would not stretch into the room. Ultimately, the Polycom camera was placed in the booth window, so on our side we saw ourselves on the screen and the backs of the students. This ended up being fine - while the students were learning new techniques, they faced the screen, and when they were performing what they learned, they faced the camera. Moving forward, we should find a way to extend the Polycom camera’s reach so it can be used as a more functional back-up camera. Issue: During an exchange, the far side could not see our ATEM switching cameras. Solution: We went to Polycom Codec Admin Settings and changed Camera 2 output to correspond with ATEM.

Sound Polycom Codec System

Issue: During a test connection, the microphones did not work. Solution: When we tried a different set of XLR adapters – because we thought they weren’t working – we discovered we were using VXLR adapters that weren’t compatible the cable and microphone in use. After swapping the adapters everything worked in conjunction with telepresence equipment. Issue: Audio volume. Solution: The basic Polycom setup comes with one table microphone. In our experience, for this type of work we really needed multiple moving microphones. Some of our partners only had access to the one Polycom table mic, and thus with these groups it was much more difficult to hear the participants, and during the workshop they had to pass the mic the whole time. The long-term solution to this would be providing additional hand held mics and an audio mixer with the telepresence package. Issue: During an exchange, we had echo issues from the far side. Solution: We asked far side to enable line echo cancellation. Issue: Far side could not hear our audio. Solution: We went into Polycom Codec settings enabled line input for mic line 2. Issue: We connected via the Polycom codec to the Scopia bridging room with both the codec and the laptop. Through the polycom, we could not figure out why we couldn’t hear participants in the room, despite being able to hear them on the laptop.

5  

Solution: We realized we had not set up the speakers! So we set them up and all was well. Issue: During an exchange, it was difficult to hear the other side – due to the location of our event where there was a lot of background noise. Solution: Since we were using the videoconferencing equipment belonging to the college, we could not attach or alter the equipment in any way. If we had been using our own equipment, we could have set up speakers with volume control that would have allowed us to better hear what was being said on the other side.

Scopia Codec System Issue: There is no sound coming through the speaker Solution: Make sure “A” is hit on the mixer. It does not set on when you turn of equipment Issue: You can see and hear the far site but they can’t see or hear you Solution: This means there is a firewall issue that is blocking either sound or picture to come through the port. Contact your network provider to get all ports open. Issue: Scopia- you are getting feedback Solution: All sites should be muted. Only whoever is speaking should be off mute. Issue: Microphones are not working Solution 1: Make sure the proper receiver is turned “on”, the number on the mic should match the number on the receiver. If that doesn’t work make sure the volume on the mixer is at the appropriate level. Don’t be afraid to take time to do sound checks right away at the beginning of a session. Solution 2: If any of the wireless mics do not work, it may be due to the fact the puck mic (the circular area mic) has been muted before it was unplugged. If the puck mic has the mute button on it depressed, it will mute all of the other mics and will continue to do so even if it is unplugged. To unmute the other mics the puck mic must be plugged back in, unmuted, and then (if not in use) unplugged.

Firewall Issues Polycom Codec System

Issue: We connected via our Polycom codec to the Scopia room, but could not see the participants on the other side. Solution: We had to change the fixed port setting on the GUI.

Polycom and Scopia Codec System Note: Using Scopia software through easymeeting.net, a desktop application, allows a connection with schools in a virtual conference room that bypasses any firewalls or port issues that have usually caused issues when having to directly enter the school network.

Blackmagic Switcher Issue: When we originally set up the equipment we were using a MacMini. Because the MacMini didn’t have enough RAM we switched to a more powerful Dell PC. At first the Blackmagic switcher software wouldn’t register on the computer. Solution: A new IP address on the Blackmagic software needs to be assigned if you’re going to use different computers, i.e. 192.168.10.240 assigned to the first computer used, then 192.168.10.241 for the next computer and so on. While accessing the ATEM Software

6  

Control on your computer select “preferences” on the menu bar. While in preferences you will see a box open up entitled “Network Settings.” This is where you need to type in the IP address. Everything came up on the PC after changing the IP address. Issue: We forgot our passwords for the Blackmagic and there is no “forgot password” button. Solution: Reset entire system and re-download patches. ***Or just write down all passwords from the beginning! Issue: We had a problem detecting additional cameras when using the Blackmagic. Solution: After talking with CultureHub, we learned we had to select the appropriate resolution in order for the switcher to detect the camera. We also learned the cameras also had to have the correct resolution setting. On the Sony HandyCam select the main menu. From this menu select Setup. Then select the connection setting. From this menu you can choose the resolution that works best with the ATEM Software control.

EasyMeeting Note: Artspace currently provides access to this bridging technology. Issue: Unable to connect with easymeeting.net to use the Scopia bridging technology for multi point or multi device exchanges or any issues related to the use of easymeeting.net Solution: Contact Easymeeting Support at support@easymeeting.net or 855-299-3279 ext 1. In addition, dialing conference ID 800 from any device will call thier live video support. For instructions on how to join from any device – video system, PC/Macs, tablets/smartphones and an audio only option go to: http://www.easymeeting.net/media/filer_public/2013/05/16/easyconference_howtojoin.pdf For technical difficulties, general questions or to contact a participating organization, please contact Naomi Chu at naomi.chu@artspace.org or call her cell at 612-282-1915.