Live audiovisual performance is a much more border concept than VJs and live cinema. It includes the concept like “expanded cinema” as well. It is a popular form of art now, people can see it at every event and ceremony. Live cinema is not like the ordinary cinema which conveys the information to the audience unidirectionally, but it takes audiences’ feedback at the same time. Both the live audiovisual performance and live cinema have the characteristics of “live”, which means they are unpredictable, brings more excitement and surprise in the performing.
From the reading I feel that the author thinks Vjing is inferior and has less creativity since he talks about “We imagine that VJs would be more like commercial directors for hire, paid by the hour, dealing with second-hand material, willing to follow popular trends. Meanwhile, live cinema creators would occupy a place equivalent to that of film auteurs, whose goals “appear to be more personal and artistic.” ”
Vjing is creating the relationship between viewing and hearing, while live cinema is creating a conversation between those who play the live cinema and the audience.
As for me, I feel that VJ also involves a lot of creativity, the leading way of making the relationship between video and audio changes all the time, so VJ brings uncertainty as well.
about live cinema:
