Another question (or two)

Are the overall rise and the foot rise in proportion to one another

and

Does the answer you gave earlier withy regard overall rise apply also to foot rise

"Are the overall rise and the foot rise in proportion to one another(?)"

Not necessarily. You can have body rise without foot rise (as in backward steps). However, if you have foot rise then you will have overall rise as well. The only exception to this generalization might be a weave in the Fox Trot.

"Does the answer you gave earlier withy (sic) regard overall rise apply also to foot rise(?)"

All of my responses prior to this particular one have been about foot rise.

jj

Waltz and foxtrot have different character of movement (and so to a degree do the closing vs. passing steps within waltz).

What the character does is predict how much rise and fall would balance other aspects of the dance, such as the size of the horizontal movement.

So in the end it's proportional - a champion's foxtrot will have more rise and fall than a beginner's waltz, because even though foxtrot's rise and fall is less in proportion to the horizontal movement, the horizontal movement is drastically larger for a champion than for a beginner.

I wish you guys would look before you comment. Compare if you Google Luca and Lorain Demo Foxtrot and Luca and Lorain Demo Waltz and compare. Take a look how high Lorain's heel is off the floor before it lowers. Write what you see and not what you think you see or have been told. I doubt if Luca would be able to get any higher in his Foxtrot if he tried. Look then come back and write. I think in both cases Waltz and Foxtrot you will find the feet rise to an angle of 45 degrees in both dances.

I have viewed those videos. Nowhere does either partner come close to 45 degrees in a foot rise, especially in the Fox Trot.

I've also watched Howson and Bolton, Gozzoli and Betti, and the Hiltons.

When one is stepping backward, of course, the foot will appear to have a high degree of pitch when the toe contacts the floor but that is not foot rise.

jj

Polished.

I agree it is a good idea to look at video evidence. The camera never lies !

I do not have access to many videos. But one I do have is Hearn's advanced ballroom figures DVD. I was wondering if you had that, and if so, could you perhaps pick out some examples from that to illustrate your point.

To follow up on my last post.

I had a look at the Hearn video with Gozzoli and Betti, and compared some ups in FT vs W. I think it is very hard (for me at least) to make an accurate comparison. But I do agree the difference between W and FT is not compelling. I did however think that his FT ups looked higher on a compact figure like a telemark step 2 or curved three step 2 than on a more progressive figure like feather finish step 2.

You refer to an angle of 45 degrees. What angles would be expected according to technique. I have image analysis software here somewhere so I could probably measure these things from video. The Hearn video is certainly clear enough to do that meaningfully.

Interested.On rise and fall. This was given to me to prove that what we do is following a natural law of movement. You get a Shopper docket or a piece of paper about 6 inches long and 2 inches wide .1 inch at the bottom fold it with the crease going to the right. 2 inches above that fold it to the left. And 2 inches above that fold it to the right.Turn it side on with the first crease to the right and pump it up and down. The bottom fold represents your feet above that the shin and above the thigh. The rest is your body. You will need to lightly touch what would be the toes to keep it in place . Do you see the constant angle between the three segments on the raising and the lowering. This is a natural turn of events.. Don't forget where you saw it.The person who passed this on just happens to be one of the top forty world wide. They should know shouldn't they. What angle are the feet if the thigh and shin are 45 degrees. If your feet are only ten degrees then is the thigh and the shin the same angle as Luca's are..I haven't got Gozzoli's . I am using stuff from youtube mainly because with the right location anybody can go and look . It is possible to slow the movement down to almost zero if you know how. Also it is possible to get the clip onto your computer in your picture section. Or to get it onto one of those USB's that's one of those little carry around thing that you can collect data on and plug in anywhere.

I agree with your estimate - just by eyeballing the Gozzoli video, the angle (between the long axis of the foot and the floor) can be clearly seen to be of the order of 45 degrees both in waltz and FT. Any difference between FT and comparable figures in waltz is hard to discern, and although I wouldn't rule it out, the difference is obviously no more than 10 degrees.

I would be interested to hear others' views re what angles are stipulated or implied by the standardised technique, if indeed there are are any hard and fast requirements (for W and then for FT).

"I would be interested to hear others' views re what angles are stipulated or implied by the standardised technique, if indeed there are are any hard and fast requirements (for W and then for FT)."

There are of course NO ABSOLUTES, as the proper amounts and angles are all RELATIVE to the size of motion desired, in the context of the character of the dance in question.