Saving Face

Venus Cosmetics, a leader in the cosmetics industry, has a new facial cream they are preparing to market. Their advertising agency, however, has not yet decided what approach they would like to take. They could persuade their audience to purchase this wonderful new product because it would be the smart and beneficial thing to do. They could manipulate their audience into thinking that not purchasing it could be detrimental to their well-being. On the other hand, they could appeal to the audience through another set of emotions by using seduction as the primary motivator. What approach would be best?
.

There is no simple answer for that as there are so many variables in play. Who is the target audience? Will there be a comprehensive campaign involved? Will the approach they choose allow for the transition to a different approach down the line? Once these, and other, questions are answered, the ad crew can decide upon the approach; but, first, they need to understand what these approaches entail. So what are the differences between persuasion, manipulation and seduction, and what are the different tools for each?

According to Dave Lakhani, author of Persuasion: The Art of Getting What You Want (2005), the American Heritage dictionary defines persuasion as, “to induce to undertake a course of action or embrace a point of view by means of argument, reasoning or entreaty”; while it defines manipulation as, “Shrewd or devious management, especially for one’s own advantage” (para. 6). In his book, The Art of Talking So That People Will Listen (1983), Dr. Paul Swets says this, “Manipulation aims at control; not cooperation. It always results in a lose-lose situation. Persuasion, on the other hand, always builds the self-esteem of the other party.”

So with each of these definitions we can generalize by saying that persuasion is more of a collaborative form of communication. The receiver is as involved in the transfer as is the sender. Manipulation, however, would appear to be a one-way monologue in which the sender directs ideas at the receiver in hopes of eliciting a desired response.

For a look at seduction, Dr. George Simon, PhD (2009) declares, “Playing to the desire of another to be valued and liked can be a powerful manipulation tool … seduction can be very deliberate, calculated, and carried out in such a manner that the other person is swept away.” It would seem, then, that the consensus is that persuasion is the most “egalitarian” approach in attempting to either modify or reinforce another’s attitude, and hence their ensuing behavior.

Persuasion could be said to be the simplest form of attitude affectation of the three. However, as “simple” as it might be, a clear-cut definition is truly difficult to come by. The authors of Perspectives on Persuasion, Social Influence, and Compliance Gaining (Gass, R.H. and Seiter, J.S., 2004, pp. 14-16), list more than twenty varying definitions from some of the most esteemed authors and researchers in the fields of persuasion and social psychology. Even these accomplished sources provide very different elements in their definitions, some citing the give-and-take nature of the process with others using a minimal use of language to form the definition. Many of these individuals do include certain common attributes such as a desire to affect another’s attitudes and beliefs, and that the receiver has a choice in acceptance or rejection of the message(s).

It is safe to say, therefore, that manipulation may merit its perception as a negative communication device. The sender is one who treats the receiver as an object to be changed, rather than an individual with whom to have a logical dialogue. The sender can use behavioral stimuli known to elicit certain responses, for instance, and achieve the desired results while circumventing the receiver’s cognitive analysis; or the sender can use messages that have proven to act upon the receiver’s encoding in the desired fashion. “Persuasion without integrity is just a fancy name for manipulation … making people do something that they obviously don’t want to do … Manipulators use the emotions of people against them, destroying trust in the process” (Sager, 2005).

The art of seduction is a subset of manipulation that has a specific style or line of attack. The sender insinuates himself into the more intimate comfort zone of the receiver, identifying himself as a source of trust and ego-satisfaction. The sender so stimulates the receiver’s need for self-fulfillment that no attempt is made by the receiver to analyze the worth of the message; the response is on a purely emotional level. Dr. George Simon, PhD, author of In Sheep’s Clothing, looks upon seduction in a very unfavorable fashion. “Perhaps one of the most insidious ways to favorably manage the impressions of others while simultaneously trying to get something you want from them is seduction” (2009, para. 1).

Well now that the “Mad Men” for Venus Cosmetics know the distinctions among the three approaches, they can decide how to proceed. Do they feel confident that this product is, in fact, a superior one that can truly deliver prime results? It would seem apt to use a persuasive approach in this instance. By presenting a credible spokesperson like a microbiology specialist who could point out what makes this a superior product; or Nicole Kidman testifying how use of this cream has fundamentally improved her skin’s health and appearance could satisfy two forms of message processing. In one sense, the appeal would be to the audience’s central processing – deliberate, logical interpretation of the message. Additionally, both Kidman’s high status with the general public and the specialist’s use of copious supportive data could also appeal to the audience if they were to assess using peripheral processing, or mental shortcuts. Accepting the actress as a trusted spokesperson, or believing that a lot of data must be true data, the audience would accept the message as valid without further analysis.

Traditional television and magazine advertising would probably be the most appropriate media for this strategy. The audience would be intelligent, discriminating women, who do not take things at face value, but search for the underlying veracity of messages directed at them.

Say the Venus ad agency determines that they are uncomfortable with the potential numbers of women who would use strong cognition in message reception. Fearing that number to be insufficient, they could choose to go for a manipulative presentation. Here there are more options from which to cull a specific technique. They could choose to use envy as a hot button, implying that anyone who is anyone is buying this product. They could appeal to their sense of guilt for buying another brand’s product at twice the cost – “what a waste!” They could appeal to their moral sense by announcing that a percentage of each purchase would go to a well-known charity.

As well as TV and magazine exposure, radio and internet exposure could also be added. For example, there could be a banner on the charity’s website repeating the message that sales of the product would benefit this charity. These approaches would work well upon the majority of the female target audience, I believe. They satisfy many needs and responses on many levels, and provide for a minimal amount of cognitive analysis. Marketing could still focus upon a manipulative approach, while bolstering the campaign here and there with more-intelligent persuasive messages as well.

For purposes of seduction, the message would be that using this facial cream would make you desirable to all men. It could prey upon the many insecurities that women have concerning self-image, and state that this product would be the cure-all they so desperately need. Rather than a specialist telling them about the myriad revolutionary and unique properties of the cream, or a sophisticated spokesperson such as Ms. Kidman; a sexy Eva Longoria, Catherine Zeta Jones or Megan Fox would be the representative extolling the gratification one can achieve by using this cream.

There would be many TV ads showing, say, Ms. Fox, seductively attired and interacting with a very handsome male model, implying that the model finds her attractive because of the product. Internet ads might be even more blatant in suggesting that if the target audience has no romance in their life, it is their fault for not using this magical product. The target here would probably be both a younger and lower-income demographic. This appeal would certainly not be for the sophisticated and discerning woman, but for those whose self-image and self-confidence might be less than desirable.

So what is the marketing arm of Venus Cosmetics to do? It will depend upon many, many issues such as market research, demographic research and confidence in the product. They can take the moral high road and attempt to persuade their audience by presenting compelling, accurate facts concerning their superior product. On the other hand, they could choose to “play the odds” and implement the tried and true method of manipulating their audience to achieve the desired goal of towering sales/profits. If manipulation is their choice, they could choose to apply seduction as the catalyst.

These are the many choices our marketing individuals will have to make. A simple task? No, not by any means. Perhaps that is why they are called, “Mad Men.”



References

Lakhani, D. (2005). Excerpt from Persuasion: the art of getting what you want. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. Retrieved March 5, 2010, from http://www.squidoo.com/persuasion-or-manipulation.

Sager, L. M. (2005). Excerpt from A river worth riding: fourteen rules for navigating life. Retrieved March 5, 2010, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Persuasion-Versus-Manipulation---Whats-the-Difference?&id=980122.

Seiter, J. S. & Gass, R. H. (2004). Perspectives on persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining. Boston: Pearson.

Simon, G. S. (2009). Seduction as a manipulation tactic: playing on your need to be valued. Retrieved March 6, 2010, from http://counsellingresource.com/features/2009/04/13/seduction-as-manipulation-tactic/.

Swets, P. (1983). The art of talking so that people will listen: getting through to family, friends & business associates. New York: Fireside. Retrieved March 5, 2010, from http://www.hodu.com/compliments.shtml

World Peace in the Virtual World?

“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy,” Shakespeare’s Hamlet declares (Act 1, Scene 5, 159-167). The melancholy Dane was certainly on to something, he just did not go far enough; for not only are there “more things,” there are also more worlds. Though many of us are content to exist in our one real world, there are others who also reside in another world, the virtual one; specifically, on websites that allow members to participate in role-playing situations. These scenarios are frequently games of a sort, yet others simply provide an environment for interaction; and the interplay among its inhabitants can produce some very interesting points of view regarding communication there. More specifically, discovering both the advantages and disadvantages of collaborating in the virtual world with regard to intercultural communication could be an immense boon to solving current international strains. Does the anonymity that this medium brings produce positive results when people from different social environments commune, or more often negative ones?

First, we must understand what intercultural communication is. Simply put, it is the ability to put aside one’s ethnocentric proclivities and assume an objective, yet sympathetic approach when communicating with one from another culture. Understanding that other cultures do not experience the world in the same way, and thus have distinct, yet sometimes subtle communication standards is the key to successful intercultural discourse. As Fred E. Jandt elaborates, “To begin to understand a culture, you need to understand all the experiences that guide its individual members through life” (2010, p. 16).

One great advantage that immediately comes to mind for circumventing cross-cultural differences in the virtual world is that the avatar, or virtual world persona, one creates can be free of any culturally identifiable markers, thus eliminating the immediate inclination of others to stereotype. As in the real world, stereotyping can be a real social problem. In a recent Stanford University study, it was shown that both men and women perpetuated the “rape myth” when observing scantily clad avatars (Blackman, 2010, ¶ 12). This myth expresses the belief that women who dress suggestively deserve sexual attacks upon their person. This is a frightening attitude, and yet one of the many generalizations that are made based upon one’s appearance. Therefore, removing any indicators upon creation of one’s avatar could go a long way toward being accepted in the mainstream.

If there were no causes for prejudgment, then the inhabitants of the Virtual World (VW) would be more open to listening to and considering the validity of messages. There could be a more open exchange of ideas. Points of view heretofore rejected because of their association with their cultural origin might be more seriously considered.

Another advantage for erasing cultural barriers in the VW is that the environment itself is more nonthreatening and so conducive to encounters lacking in an innate defensiveness. This “safe” environment also promotes the exchange of social interplay and idea sharing. This unique location can spawn cross-cultural insights as well. A recent experiment performed at the University of Barcelona gave male subjects the avatar of a young girl, who then viewed themselves from a third-person perspective. The young girl was then slapped by another avatar, which resulted in a truly sympathetic/empathetic response by the men. “The effect was so intense that seeing the virtual girl slapped elicited heart rate responses in the men,” says Mel Slater, the cognitive scientist who created the experiment (Bower, 2010, ¶ 2). If this experiment can create such a deep-rooted response providing subjects an insight into the life and point of view of another individual, perhaps an extension of this study could provide for individuals insights into other cultures.

As with any social experiment, however, role-playing games can also have negative results as well. If one chooses an ethnically or culturally ambiguous avatar as posited earlier and is, say, an Afghani Muslim, one is essentially misrepresenting oneself, which can create an assortment of problems. If that person is later “found out” by individuals with whom that person has had ongoing interactions, those individuals could feel betrayed and severe resentment might follow. This would, in turn, further a stereotype demonstrating that “those Arabs just can’t be trusted!” In this scenario, more damage than good would have resulted from the anonymity of the VW.

Another minor failure might result when the “outsider” is insufficiently familiar with the social customs of the majority culture, and could unknowingly create offensive and objectionable behavior or speech. Since the majority members would consider this person “one of their own”, they would see this as deliberately objectionable behavior.

So can this virtual world ultimately break down cultural barriers and allow individuals to relate without the baggage of stereotyping and prejudging? Overall, I believe the answer is “yes.” By presenting a persona that does not carry with it indicators of ethnicity that could cause a negative reception on the part of others, one has a better opportunity of being accepted for who one is, and a chance to open the eyes of people to different ideas and concepts. There is that risk involved of being judged a duplicitous infiltrator; but I do believe that the potential benefits outweigh the drawbacks. If people can learn to interact with one another solely as fellow human beings, the potential for great discoveries is there.

References

Blackman, C. (2010). Can avatars change the way we think and act? Stanford University News Service. Retrieved June 25, 2010, from http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/-february22/avatar-behavior-study-022510.html

Bower, B. (2010, June 5). Men swap spots with virtual girl. Science News, Vol. 177, Iss. 12;
p.10. Retrieved June 25, 2010, from Proquest Database.
Jandt, F. E. (2010). An introduction to intercultural communication: Identities in a global community (6th ed.).Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Inc.

Persuasion: It's No Joke

Ah, humor in the art of persuasion. Through the years, those attempting to persuade have frequently chosen the humorous approach to help gain better reception for their message. From the subtle tongue-in-cheek line of attack, to the more blatant pie-in-the-face method, persuaders have hoped to win over allies to their cause by making their audience laugh.

Is this advisable? Does the comic attack guarantee a higher rate of success than the more traditional one? The answer is not a simple “yes” or “no”; but rather, “it depends.” It depends upon various factors such as the type of message (or product), the medium of delivery and the strength of the message to name a few. Humor can help in creating a higher state of receptiveness from your audience if the proper conditions are in play; but used improperly, it can inhibit that state.

Why does humor often work in persuasion? One effect it has is to put the audience more at ease and open to listening to the message. The receiver feels a let up that he will not be hard pressed to “work” at interpreting it; he can let his guard down. In essence, it can put him in a good mood; and as Jim Lyttle (2001) points out, “According to persuasion theory, people who are in a good mood are less likely to disagree with a persuasive message (Freedman, Sears, & Carlsmith, 1978).”

Source credibility is increased in two primary ways, humor increases the likeability factor for the source; and the shared humor creates a type of bond between source and receiver – it adds to the perception of similarity. Per Lyttle, “the choice of humor might illustrate a shared sense of humor that hints at a similar set of underlying values (Meyer, 1997).” Self-effacing humor is particularly effective as only a source with strong ethos could risk that kind of wit.

Now according to the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) and the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) the humorous approach is one that will primarily be processed peripherally. That is, rather than dissecting and interpreting the message for its validity while enjoying the “comedy portion of the evening” as a bonus, the message will solely be evaluated on a peripheral, or superficial level for its entertainment value.

This is where preparation by the persuader comes into play. Does he have a strong, logical message that holds up to scrutiny, or does he instead have a weak one that is better presented with the aid of “smoke and mirrors”? If the latter, then of the many tools at his disposal, he may choose the comedic route to charm his receivers into accepting his message.

Unfortunately, there are many examples of persuaders, like advertisers, who have gone to the extremes of attempted humor. Domestic beer advertising is a prime example of flash (or humor) and no substance. The marketing agents appear to be targeting the most puerile, sophomoric audience by producing television ads that truly generate no information of substance, but instead present carnival-like situations of the broadest comedy – almost burlesque. There is no message here, just a hope that by providing entertainment with which the audience can strongly relate, a bonding will occur which will stimulate the purchase of their product. These agents of influence will often try to create a strong “branding” by incorporating memorable catchphrases. Who does not remember that brilliant motto, “Whassuuuuuup?!”? Luckily, Mere Exposure Theory shows that “some research indicates that there are diminishing returns to increasing exposure, with a leveling off or drop-off in effectiveness after 10 to 20 exposures” (Seiter, J. S. & Gass, R. H., 2004, p. 49). Apparently, the marketing agents for that campaign were unaware of the research as they bombarded poor, unsuspecting Americans with that phrase for months.

There is documented proof through research that shows humor can be an effective tool for achieving compliance. Results from a study performed by Thomas W. Cline and James J. Kellaris appearing in Psychology & Marketing (1999) show that, “Results of the experimentation suggest that the joint interplay of humor and argument strength in a print ad can significantly contribute to the formation of A^sub ad^ [advertisement] and A^sub b^ [brand] for a low-risk, convenience good.” This part of the study relates to the HSM component that specifies that the audience is more inclined to use heuristic or peripheral processing regarding a message that is of low importance or “low-risk.”

There is, however, also verification that the use of humor can backfire when used in conjunction with a high-risk, or high-involvement, message that calls for central processing. Those with a strong sense of NFC (need for cognition) will choose to interpret a message they deem important with strong analysis and logic. As they have a vested interest in the message they want to focus upon its message without distractions. These are proponents of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), and do not appreciate the distraction that humor can create. If the humor is relevant to the message rather than incidental, the distraction is not so great. As Cline and Kelaris point out, “The third explanation suggests that the combination of humor and strong arguments somehow back-fired and negatively affected attitudes (A^sub ad^ and A^sub b^) … It follows that the inclusion of strong arguments along with humor may signal an inconsistency regarding the nature of the product, and as a result harm attitudes.”

Of course, there are few hard and fast rules where psychology and communication are concerned; however, a safe tenet to hold would be to keep humor to a minimum if you have a strong, solid, important message to convey, and resort to the pie in the face if your message is as weak as Don Knotts. If you have a clever angle that is relevant to your strong message, and could enhance it, then, by all means, employ it. If you have nothing really to say, then the sky’s the limit and you could create the next “Where’s the Beef?” catchphrase.

Persuader, if you have something to say and want to incorporate humor into your approach, go ahead and be creative. Just be sure of how you want your message to be remembered. Do you want your audience to remember the message, with its incidental humor just that, incidental? On the other hand, do you want your message delivery method to be what they remember, and its message overlooked and forgotten? So if you are introducing an important and effective new drug for the treatment of arthritis, do not begin the message with, “A guy walks into a doctor’s office and says, “Doctor, it hurts when I do this…’”


References

Cline, T.W., & Kellaris, J.J. (1999). The joining impact of humor and argument strength in a print advertising context: A case for weaker arguments. Psychology & Marketing, 16 (1), 69-87. Retrieved from Proquest Database, March 18, 2010.

Lyttle, J. (2001). The effectiveness of humor in persuasion: The case of business ethics training. The Journal of General Psychology, 128 (2), 206-217. Retrieved from Proquest Database, March 18, 2010.

Seiter, J. S. & Gass, R. H. (2004). Perspectives on persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining. Boston: Pearson.

Am I Right or Am I Wrong?

In the world of organizations, one is often faced with situations requiring a resolution based primarily on ethics. This can be a slippery slope that must be managed with structure, insight and a full understanding of the issues, as well as the inner working of the organization in question. I shall explore two ethical dilemmas and try to find the correct solution to each, using my current understanding of ethical propriety.

The first dilemma (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 125) places me in the hypothetical position as a newly appointed personnel director who must evaluate applicants for management positions, and present the top three candidates for review and advancement by management. In this particular case, a vacancy on the company president’s staff must be filled. The conflict arises because my president has made it known that he does not want a female on his staff; yet the top three legitimate candidates are female.

I could (1.) find flimsy and subjective reasons for eliminating one of the women, replacing her with a male candidate; (2.) rationalize dismissing the evaluation, and beginning anew, this time with “stacked” criteria that would cause all or some of the women from being removed from the short list or (3.) ignore the implied directive, and submit the three women as planned.
There is a fourth route that I believe I should follow, and that is to submit the three women after having first had a frank conversation with the president and explain that he cannot make such a gender-based request.

As part of management, I have been given a responsibility, to do my job to the best of my ability while keeping the best interests of my company in mind. In my role as personnel director, I am to assess the qualifications of employees and find those best suited for and, hopefully, deserving of promotion to management positions. The criteria I use should be rather clearly formulated for each instance, and those are the criteria I should follow. My job is to put the best people (and, yes, “best” could certainly have several different definitions) in the corresponding positions to further the success and satisfaction within my organization.

If I am to be an ethical representative of my association, I need to exhibit “courageous followership,” a term used by Michael Hackman and Craig Johnson (2004) defining those supportive, responsible and team-playing workers. “(Hackman and Johnson) suggest that assuming responsibility for themselves and taking accountable action are ethical responsibilities. Furthermore, the courage to serve refers to the ethical responsibility of supporting leaders…” (Shockley-Zalabak, p. 118). The president is making, not only a questionably ethical preference by suggesting a non-male for the position; but a clearly illegal one. As Pamela Shockley-Zalabak expresses, “Sexual harassment and discrimination behaviors are both unethical and illegal” which “harm individuals and organizations” (p. 124).

I shall be doing my company, and thus the president, a true disservice by not confronting and advising him of this potentially damaging behavior of his. Though he is surely aware that sexual discrimination is illegal, he probably does not see his “preference” as falling into that category.

As I had stated, this is what I should do. Would I follow this plan? I should hope that I would; however initiating such a confrontation can be a daunting enterprise. I would possibly compromise by submitting the three female applicants first, and then explaining the whys and wherefores after the submission.

The second dilemma places me as a new field sales rep. During the course of training, I have heard customer complaints about quality defects in two products, which my co-workers assure me, are known by the company and that the company is taking steps to rectify the problem. When out “flying solo” for the first time and with an important client, he addresses the issue of the rumored defects. What am I to tell the client?

In this instance, I would do what I should do; I would be as honest as possible with the client, telling him that the company was aware of the defects and that it was working to solve the problem. I would qualify that this information was acquired secondhand, and so could not attest to its veracity. I would, however, assure the customer that I promised to attain as much detailed, accurate information on the company’s progress to improve the products; and would forward that information to him.

I believe it important for the client to see that he is dealing with someone of character, which should be a selling point for his wanting to work with me. I would be forthcoming with the information regardless of its potentially negative result because, “Most experienced professionals know that their ability to handle these sensitive questions ethically contributes to their personal credibility” (Shockley-Zalabak, p. 121). If I am to have an honest, fair and mutually-responsible relationship with this customer, I must show that his faith will not be misplaced. My behavior will be, as it should, a reflection of my company’s, hopefully, ethical culture.

I have solved my two dilemmas based on my perception of ethical behavior. Am I correct, or have I made too simplistic an approach to the problems? I believe I’ve based my decisions on solid moral standards and ethical approaches to these problems. I believe my assessments to be correct. What does the reader think? Am I right or am I wrong?



References
Hackman, M. and Johnson, C. (2004). Leadership: a communication perspective. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.

Shockley-Zalabak, P. S. (2009). Fundamentals of organizational communication: knowledge, sensitivity, skills, values. Boston: Pearson.

The Innovation of Motion Capture

James Cameron’s Avatar broke box-office records and is now doing the same with DVD and Blu-Ray™ sales. This is quite a feat, especially when considering that more than seventy percent of what is seen on screen was generated through the Motion Capture (MoCap) technology. In other words, most of the characters we see on the screen are not real people, but rather the ultimate in lifelike animations created with this groundbreaking technology. We have all seen the behind-the-scenes, making-of-the-film footage; but how many of us truly understand the workings of this innovative film technique?

The most basic concept behind this technology is that it creates a three-dimensional (3-D) representation of the figure it “captures.” This is achieved by placing upon the subject (actor, dancer, stunt person) very small (from eight to thirteen millimeters) foam balls, called markers, covered in a thin layer of reflective mesh. The performer wears a tight-fitting black suit and cap to which the markers are attached by Velcro patches. When multiple performers are being captured, each performer’s Velcro patches are a unique color, indigenous to each performer. In addition, there is a unique configuration of marker placement to distinguish each performer.

The subject is then placed in the work area, called the Volume, which is a large rectangular region entirely surrounded by special “cameras” which do not photograph images; but rather the 3-D representation it creates from the markers’ configuration. In essence, the Volume is like a fish tank, it is a container; but instead of containing water, it contains space. The Volume is its own three-dimensional “world” in rectangular form.

A medium-sized Volume, 120 feet by 40 feet, is bordered by 150-200 of these cameras, like the Vicon™ T60, one of the most popular brands of these camera types. The camera’s center holds the “image”-capturing element and is encircled by concentric bands of red, strobe-emitters. This strobe light cycles too quickly for the human eye to see, and creates the continuous reflection off the markers, thus pinpointing the markers’ locations in the Volume on a constant, updating basis. The camera could better be considered a sensor or receptor, as it receives the reflection from the marker and that determines where precisely in the Volume it exists per nanosecond.

The information regarding the markers’ location, shape and configuration is called data as it is interpreted in numerical values and language through the special computer program, which allows the “creative people” to manipulate the information. Visually, the computer operator capturing the input in real-time sees different-colored stick figures in herky-jerky motion; it is only later, in the editing and animation processes that the movements are represented naturalistically and fluidly.

A subset of MoCap is called Performance Capture (PerfCap). MoCap provides a grosser picture of the performer, that is, markers are placed at the major joint locations of the body – knees and elbows, for example, and so provide a broad sketch of the figure being captured – skeletal imprint. Performance Capture is much more precise and subtle. The difference between MoCap and PerfCap can be likened to the difference of painting style between van Gogh and Rembrandt. While van Gogh painted in broad, suggestive strokes, Rembrandt was the master of fine detail – his portraits looked almost like photographs, they were so vivid and life-like.

PerfCap captures not only the performer’s physicality, but also the subtleties of his facial performance. Small, white reflective markers about the size of a pencil eraser are placed at strategic points on the performer’s face. They are arranged to capture facial movements when muscles are contracted, for instance, in a smile or a frown. The more markers placed, the more specific the captured performance. The average is fifty facial markers. To achieve a cleaner performance from the body movements, smaller body markers are used as well. In MoCap, twelve- and thirteen-millimeter markers are used; for PerfCap, it is the eight-millimeter size that is employed. The smaller-sized markers force the program to narrow its analysis of where in space they, and consequently the performer, are. It provides a more detailed performance.

This is the nuts and bolts of the Motion Capture and Performance Capture processes; the performer(s) carry out physical actions and sometimes dialogue, and this is all captured through special cameras and interpreted by the proprietary computer program. This technology is used, not only for the making of feature films and television; but more so in the production of videogames. An exponentially expanding market, most videogames are produced using either of these technologies. The performers might be pirates carrying out an elaborate swordfight as in Pirates of the Caribbean: Armada of the Damned being released in 2011 (Propaganda Games™). The performer can be an animal as well. For Red Dead Redemption (Rockstar Games™), a real horse was “markered up” to create more realistic movements for the equines in the game as well. An interesting side note: especially when stunts are involved and there is physical contact, markers can be dislodged; this is very serious as it throws off the performer’s calibration. If this happens, you will hear someone on the set yell, “Marker down!” Someone then rushes in to replace the missing marker.

How the visual characters are created is another story. That is carried out by the animators who apply a character’s conceptual design to the data that was captured. The MoCap process is the inception of the whole process. This is where all these amazing effects begin.

Now is this technology ultimately a boon or a detriment to the Film Industry? Much can be said regarding the decline in quality storylines in the past few years in deference to greater visual effects. The ratio of action and special effects-driven films compared to simple screenplays focusing upon interesting characters and plots is depressingly overbalanced. The remaining pedestrian scripts are primarily romantic fluff and sophomoric broad comedies. As British journalist and novelist, Will Self opines, “Of course good -- even great -- movies are still being made, it would be absurd to deny it, but it's this level of cultural primacy that has gone for ever” (2010, para. 10). Let us hope that the novelty of these innovations dissipates, and good filmmaking returns to “a theater near you” soon!


References

Self, W. (2010, August 28). Cut! That’s all, folks; Film is dead. The Times (London). P. 38. Retrieved September 1, 2010, from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=4&-did=2123303081&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1283631163&clientId=74379

Persuasive E-mail

To: All Management Personnel

From: Roger Johnson,
CEO DARPRO Industries

Subject: Improving Meeting Effectiveness


As many of you know, we recently contracted with Universal Consultants to evaluate DARPRO Industries and advise on improvements that could be made to increase its productivity, efficiency and profitability. Some of you assisted in this research by providing invaluable input that helped Universal’s representatives gain important insights into what makes DARPRO the organization that it is. In turn, Universal Consultants provided us with a strong, comprehensive overview of our organization’s strengths and weaknesses, and made clear recommendations for improvement. They have provided a clear plan of action, one upon which we plan to act upon wholeheartedly.

One important evaluation that Universal Consultants made was that the current process for carrying out meetings of all kinds, and at all levels, is clearly failing in effectiveness. Therefore, I have decided to act upon their recommendation that a more in-depth study be made of how meetings are carried out here at DARPRO; and to discover the best ways in which we can get optimum results from time and energies invested in them.

Additionally, I have chosen to decline Universal’s offer to conduct this research, and decided instead that it will be performed internally. To this end, I have assigned Daniel O’Leary, our Vice President in charge of Administrative Management, to spearhead this research and submit a comprehensive report.

I am sure that you are all aware of the drop in sales and profits this company has suffered within the last three fiscal quarters. This prompted the necessity of enforcing a hiring freeze to partially offset these losses. I wish to reiterate that I am still of a mind that decreasing the present workforce will be an action of last resort. Focusing on this issue, meeting effectiveness, can help stave off that last resort.

It is my hope that by executing the plan for improvements recommended by Universal, including improving the effectiveness of the output created by meetings by all management personnel, we can rise above our current financial challenges and become the strong, thriving organization we know we can be again.

I know that you will all wish to help Mr. O’Leary in the preparation of this report, and I ask that you begin now by considering possible issues you could bring to his attention – issues that you believe hamper meeting effectiveness, as well as those tangible concepts, which might provide improvement. The more detail, the better.

I thank you as always for your hard work and dedication to DARPRO Industries. I am confident that with your help and focus, we can continue on our upward journey!

News Release

VICON™


News Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FOR MORE INFORMATION:
October 11, 2010 M. Braeden Marcott
Public Relations Director
(555) 662-8944
bmarcott@vicon.com




VICON™ markets first-ever 16-megapixel Motion Capture camera

Los Angeles, CA. -- VICON™ Motion Systems has produced the world’s first 16-megapixel motion capture (MoCap) camera, allowing for a resolution four times that of any previously made camera for the motion capture industry! The new T-160, will allow for even more precise performance values than those created in James Cameron’s 2009 Avatar.

Building upon VICON’s proprietary Vegas sensor design, the new T-160 features the advanced Avalon sensor, which can capture much smaller “markers” (the reflective balls
-- more –

16-megapixel MoCap camera pg. 2


attached to the special suits worn by actors in the motion capture environment), thus permitting a more refined performance by the actors.

Motion Capture cameras do not, in essence, capture images, but rather document the precise location in three-dimensional space of each of the markers placed upon the actor by collecting the reflected “image”; and so could more accurately be described as sensors. As such, the more sophisticated the sensor, the more sophisticated the image that can be created on the big (or little) screen.

“Motion capture needs both high speed and high resolution. Regular sensors can only offer one or the other but not both. VICON Avalon enables data to be captured at a higher resolution than ever before with full frame speeds up to 120fps and resolutions up to 16 megapixels,” explains Cameron Spelling, Executive Director for VICON’s North America division. “With the use of the new T-160, film directors will be able to produce incredibly subtle facial performances, far superior to anything seen thus far.”

VICON was established in Oxford, England in 1984 and acquired Peak Performance Technologies of Colorado in 1994 with a goal of producing a computer- and video-based biomechanical analysis tool to help athletes improve their performance in preparation for Olympic and world competition. It is has gone on to establish itself as a world leader in its core business of motion capture and analysis.
###