It’s not just that the designer is prolific, but she is that. Her resume lists almost three full pages, single-spaced, of design credits with a wide range of companies where she works — from American Conservatory Theater to Shotgun Players, from Oregon Shakespeare Festival to San Francisco Playhouse.
9 comments:
Anytime I have thought about scenic design, a name that always comes to my mind is that of Nina Ball. She has, for the last several years, credited for adding a certain edge to the concept of realistic set design, by maintaining a balance between the realism of the piece and the abstractness of the piece.
This article is one of the many that talks of this ability of her and it was such a delight to read it because it talks about a few different techniques that Nina Ball uses to achieve the edgy style to her constant concept of realism. She admits in the article that she tries to achieve a realistic set design but also trues to incorporate something that sets that realism slightly of the edge. And the best part about this is that she does not necessarily make it obvious. What she does is that she creates a senses of wariness for the audience leaving it upto them to figure out what is it with the set that is unsettling.
I really love this article. To be honest, I am kind of embarrassed to say that I did not know who Nina Ball was before this article. I probably have seen some of her work after seeing just how many credits she has on her resume, but she seems incredible. Her use of heightened realism is so unique and so iconic to her. The pictures of some of her designs in the article are just so genuinely interesting like the one that is representative of a house. It looks like she formed the structure of a house with a series of moving boxes. I love this idea of grouping a bunch of things that humans know and combining them with other things in ways that we have not really seen before and that we are not really comfortable with. She makes this look natural and beautiful in all of her designs and I really admire her ability to do that. I was also really interested by the article saying that she has a 3D printer in her studio. I would love to know more about how she uses that to help aid her designs and ideas.
I loved so many things about this article, mainly in the insights that the designer offers. The idea that scenic design is something “analytical and creative” is eloquently put together. I precisely know what it means but I never heard someone put it into words. Scenic designers, or just designers for the theater in general, do so much analytical work on both the script and their own designs. We constantly bring a critical edge to our thoughts and distill everything into its essence. In this light, designers are really like scientists, digging into their “data” for meaning. On the topic of science vs. art, I loved how this designer perfectly married the two together. I always disliked how society separates the science and the arts entirely, looking at them as polar opposites. But scientists can be artists and artists can be scientists. Science’s roots start in the arts. I’m very much intrigued by Ball’s deeper design process and how she integrates her knowledge from her science side into her designs.
I could stare at set renderings all day. The amount of precise detail that goes into each one never ceases to astound me. There is a charm to seeing a mini version of a larger vision, a feeling of a sneak peak for what’s to come. Reading about the work of Nina Ball gave me a chance to see more of the work that goes into creating a fully realized and beautiful set design. I could read this just to stare at the pictures alone and see what her ideas created. It’s clear that Ball considers the piece but also applies her own artistic style into her work. There is a clear sense of voice in there that I admire. I think this article is one important for all designers to read to learn about the importance of balancing both the vision of the piece while providing their own unique voice in the artistic work.
Nina Ball is a design inspiration. From this article alone, it’s clear how impressive her design work is, and how much thought she puts into her creations. I was particularly intrigued by her comment about heightened realism (getting to abstract an actual real, place just a little bit) playing into affecting the audience in the room. I agree with her saying that a wonderful thing is getting an audible reaction from an audience when a set transforms— it means you as a designer have successfully communicated a shift in tone or mood. It was really interesting to read that she didn’t go straight into scenic design—she started in marine science, of all things. She rediscovered a past love for art, and was able to combine the analytical research skills from science and a love for art into a career in scenic design. This is inspiring for me, initially thinking I might go into molecular biology but truly finding a place here in design. The last part of the article is really moving, that she taps into her instinctual gut response with emotions while reading a script and incorporates that into a design—it’s clever, it’s smart. Its that way that she creates a feeling in the audience the way it’s written that she does.
I love getting little glimpses into the lives & design processes of creatives, especially those in theatre. In my opinion, heightened reality is what theatre is all about. Taking the expectations we have about everyday places, events, and people, and tweaking it just a bit to bring in a new dimension of theatricality and the fantastic. Every part of the creative process should be heavily involved in the storytelling, every component present on stage should be essential to the story being told and should work together seamlessly present a complete piece of theatre to the audience. Set models are also a fantastic world in which to play, a dollhouse of a fake house to be put on stage for fake people. I agree with her about using scenic design to transform the space, often actively in the moment, to cause a reaction from the audience or to help them come to a realization.
What an incredible scenic designer! The name is familiar, but I could not quite place it. The part in the article about moments of transformation really spoke to me. Ball says she loves when a scene change makes an audience gasp or so completes a character's journey that change is inevitable. I know that feeling. It is exhilarating, it is immensely gratifying, it is enough to make one's heart swell with pride and joy. I may not have achieved this feeling from designing a wonderful set, but I have achieved it by seeing such a set, and I have achieved it by making art I was so exceptionally proud of that I felt I was a changed person. The way Ball transforms her spaces is inspirational and so clever. "We will salvage the essence" is such a calm and powerful response to concerns regarding a company's inability to produce a set. Ball really is outstanding.
I loved looking at the models and designs that were exhibited in this article about Nina Ball. Since I have not had the opportunity to see many theatrical productions, I probably have not seen one of her designs at this point in time. It is very interesting to understand a designer’s point of view when they analyze the material that they are presented with. I also found her perspective on the process to be very insightful. Her words about cutting and mourning those things that are removed for a moment is something that feels very informative to me. It is unlikely that our initial instincts will make it onto the stage, or our biggest ideas, which is why it is important to learn how to whittle away and keep the essence of what it is we as designers are trying to achieve. Like she says, it really is for the betterment of the show.
One of the biggest reasons why I always arrive at the theatre early is to spend a lot of time examining the scenic design, and the atmosphere. Even in the theatres where they don’t let the audience with balcony tickets enter the orchestra seats, I would be like “Oh, I already know my seat” and get closer to the stage. However, now that I come to think of it, I am usually only concerned with how it was constructed, and not who designed it. I do when the set is noticeably unrealistic like the one for Cats. I think this is because the environment is not something that people design in real life, whereas costumes and set props are. Based on this short analysis, I believe aside from those unrealistic sets, scenery is designed better when the audience can’t feel the presence of a designer. Correspondingly, I find the idea of “the heightened realism” very interesting.
Post a Comment