Couple of comments on your description of your modeling state:
1. "I de-focus my eyes, I use my vision to track movement" I would suggest that shifting your vision in a number of ways would prove useful - for example, you are correct that de-focusing (or focusing at a focal length well in excess of the thing you are attending to will enhance your ability to track movement (like the breathing patterns of the people in context) however if part of what the model is calbrating in the client is skin-color changes, then foveal vision is required to appreciate it.
2. "I mimic the movements of my model only after I have been in their prescense and can feel a pattern of some sort repeating, most of the time I don't know what it is but I can feel it."
I suggest that you develop the ability to use micro muscle movements to copy the movements of the model while in his/her presence - the fidelity will rise dramatically as opposed to doing it off of visual memory of the model while not in his/her presence.
3, " And then I go from there. I try to identify the pattern without judgement or at least what I think it is that I am feeling."
There is an important distinction here for me that is not apparent in what you write - namely, evaluation is a certain logical type of f2 mapping - however, only one type. All interpretation, for example, is a f2 mapping. Thus any attempt to understand what is happening as you observe (and hopefully, micro muscle mirror the model) the model is to be suspended, as such attempt violate the suspend all f2 mappings with the attendant decrease in quality of the resultant model as argued in Whispering by Carmen and me.
4. "Then I do it consciously to see if i'm right and am achieving some what similiar results if i'm not than I drop what ever It was that I thought was the pattern and feel for the next one.
And I do that one by one until I complete the model. Once I have a cluster of patterns then I begin the process of subtraction, I begin doing all of the patterns and then I begin leaving one out to see if there is a difference if there is not I leave that particular pattern out if there is I leave that particular pattern in. And I continue to do that until I have the handful of patterns that make up my model.
The danger here is that there are patterns that are effective only in the context of other patterns (nested patterning) - testing them one at a time will likely yield examples where the deployment of one of the patterns (coded as X) is unsuccessful whereas if that same pattern (coded as X) were deployed in the context of some additional pattern, Y, say, it would function perfectly. This would be an example of nested patterning with X nested inside of Y.
I would recommend that you do a modeling with the suggestions offered and let us know whether you detect an increase in quality and efficiency in your modeling.
|NLP Modeling Videos
|Re:NLP Modeling Videos
|Re:Re:NLP Modeling Videos
|Re:Re:Re:NLP Modeling Videos
|Re:Re:Re:Re:NLP Modeling Videos
|Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:NLP Modeling Videos
|When, how long, which part?