![\"\"](\"https:\/\/to-mo.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Sleepy_Hollow_020335_Luxor_©PienDuthmann_1-2048x1365-1-1024x683.jpg\")
Multidisciplinary maker Thomas Brand also immediately saw the added value of this approach and had audience research conducted on his installation Mergel. \u201cNormally, when you talk to your audience yourself, they\u2019ll say everything was amazing, because they know or follow you. But this time, people were interviewed by Kim, which resulted in more objective and deeper insights. I received a lot of qualitative data \u2013 many quotes that I\u2019m already using to develop the next phase of the work. This process was so fruitful that I\u2019m including a similar trajectory in my next funding proposal. The term \u2018immersive\u2019 is also extremely broad. We\u2019re three very different makers within this field, and it\u2019s fascinating to ask: is there any overlap in our audiences? That was one of the main reasons I wanted to join.\u201d <\/p>\n\n
“Audience research should be automatically included in your planning and budget – but it isn’t.”<\/h2>\n\n
Immersive theatre maker Puck van Dijk created the immersive audio walk Reuzen van Noord two years ago, about and for residents of Amsterdam North. The retrospective audience research focused on the lasting impact of this production. Van Dijk believes it should be standard practice for makers to hear what effect their work has had: \u201cThis really became clear to me through the research. For us, it\u2019s a no-brainer to want to know the impact of what we\u2019ve created, but it\u2019s not automatically included in your planning, your setup, or your budget. And it really should be, especially since funders, governments, and sponsors often ask about the impact of your production.\u201d <\/p>\n\n
\u201cI spoke to another maker who was selected for an international film festival and told them about our research,\u201d she continues. \u201cShe said a programmer at the festival had asked if they\u2019d conducted audience research. She just laughed and replied: \u2018With what money?\u2019 The way we did it really was a triple win.\u201d <\/p>\n\n All three makers worked with Ask Your Audience to study their audiences individually, after a joint kickoff and concluding with a shared reflection session. \u201cWhat was great is that we discussed our definitions of \u2018audience\u2019 during that final session,\u201d says Thomas Brand. \u201cClarifying that together opens up new ways of thinking about your own artistic practice. That\u2019s a huge benefit of doing this collectively.\u201d <\/p>\n\n \u201cAmong us immersive makers, we don\u2019t really use the word \u2018audience\u2019,\u201d adds Danny van Zuijlen. \u201cWe talk about visitors, participants, or experiencers. An \u2018Audience\u2019 watches from a distance, while a participant is immersed in the work.\u201d <\/p>\n\n The process gave the makers more than just individual data. \u201cIn traditional theatre, audience research, peer contact, and collaboration are more common,\u201d says Thomas Brand. \u201cBut in the immersive world, you\u2019re often a lone wolf, doing your own thing. There\u2019s little cross-pollination. Having three very different makers at the table to talk about a shared theme is incredibly valuable and actually a lot of fun. We\u2019re not competitors. We\u2019re all just trying to invent a new wheel together.\u201d <\/p>\n\n![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/to-mo.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/202312220015-Mergel-1024x683.jpg\")
“We don’t really use the term audience. An audience watches from a distance, a participant is immersed in the work”<\/h2>\n\n
![\"Participants](\"https:\/\/to-mo.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Reuzen-van-Noord.jpg\" "\\"\\"\/")