Shadow Awareness: Enhancing Theater Space Through the Mutual Projection of Images on a Connective Slit Screen






  • This study discusses media technology that enables the continuous creation of performers’ physical improvisation as inspired by the reflection of imagery evoked from the audience. To realize this, the authors have focused on “shadow media,” which promote the continuous creation of imagery through “bodily awareness.” The authors have developed a system that can project shadows of the performers in various ways, which are then transformed into various shapes and colors. The shadows are connected to the performers’ feet and projected on a “passable” slit screen set up between the stage and the audience. As a result, the interactive and mutual creation of imagery by performers and audience can form an “empathetic” stage. To demonstrate its validity, the authors applied the system to a dance performance at Festival della Scienza in Genoa, Italy.


  • 1. E. Huhtamo, “Elements of Screenology: Toward an Archaeology of the Screen,” International Studies
    of the Modern Image, Vol. 7, 31–82 (2004).
    2. B. James, On Thrones of Gold: Three Javanese Shadow Plays (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
    3. L. Danforth, “Humour and Status Reversal in Greek Shadow Theatre,” Byzantine and Modern Greek
    Studies, Vol. 2, 99–111 (1976).
    4. Y. Miwa, et al., “Shadow Awareness: Bodily Expression Supporting System with Use of Artificial
    Shadow,” Human-Computer Interaction, HCII 2009, Part II, LNCS 5611, 226–235 (2009).
    5. K. Iida, et al., “Supporting for Creation of Bodily Expression in a Group Activity with Shadow
    Media,” Proceedings of HIS 2010 (2010) 91–94.
    6. S. Fels and K. Mase, “Iamascope: A Musical Application for Image Processing,” Proceedings of FG1998
    (1998) 610–615.
    7. C. Nicolai and M. Peljhan, “Polarm,” YCAM (2010)
    8. W. Muench and K. Furukawa, “Bubbles,” ZKM (2000)
    9. J. Lewis, et al., “Night Lights” (2010)
    10. MSNBC, “NewsBreaker” (2007)
    11. L. Candy and E. Edmonds, “Interaction in Art and Technology,” Crossings: Electronic Journal of Art
    and Technology, Vol. 2, Issue 1 (2002)
    12. M. Krueger, Artificial Reality 2 (Boston: Addison-Wesley Professional, 1991).
    13. K. Vincs and J. McCormick, “Touching Space: Using Motion Capture and Stereo Projection to
    Create a ‘Virtual Haptics’ of Dance,” Leonardo, Vol. 43, No. 4, 359–366 (2010).
    14. D. Manabe, “True,” YCAM (2007)
    15. J. Watanabe, et al., “Test-patches” (2001)
    16. A. Camurri, et al., “Mappe per Affetti Erranti: A Multimodal System for Social Active Listening and
    Expressive Performance,” Proceedings of New Interfaces for Musical Expression (2008).
    17. Y. Miwa and C. Ishibiki, “Shadow Communication: System for Embodied Interaction with Remote
    Partners,” Proceedings of CSCW 2004 (2004) 467–476.
    18. J. Bitton, “Flirting Across a Distance: How a Screen Creates Intimacy with the Shadow,”
    Ambidextrous, Fall 2008, 32–33 (2008).
    19. R. Wechsler, F. Weiß, and P. Dowling, “EyeCon – A Motion Sensing Tool for Creating Interactive
    Dance, Music and Video Projections,” Proceedings of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence
    and the Simulation of Behavior and Cognition (Leeds: University of Leeds, 2004).
    20. M. Fernández, “Illuminating Embodiment: Rafael Lozano-Hemmer’s Relational Architectures,”
    4dsocial: Interactive Design Environments, ed. L. Bullivant, AD Architectural Design, 78–87 (2007).