Tag: Design

Posted on in Design, Programming

Concluding Programming II

Ubiquitous and pervasive computing come out as concepts that define my direct understanding of the digitalization of all sectors into one unified environment. This constant access to information and computational capabilities create in design an openness never before seen. “Now that we can do everything, what will we do?” is the question raised by the Institute without Boundaries at an exhibition in Chicago’s Museum of Contemporary Art and a perspective that I, as a designer, startedto consider during the past semester. Programming integrated into physical prototyping techniques creates depth, I believe, and it does bring about a new way of design thinking. Interactive design becomes an area where everything is possible as long as the skills at hand come into place with your artefact’s goals.

We decided to work on the context of addressable light for public spaces and more specifically how to use light interaction as a method to add a more playful and warmer feeling in unrevised urban locations. We carried out ideation and physical prototyping sessions and we integrated the programming components in order to advance our initial low-fi prototypes. Needless to say, I had major difficulties to connect all pieces of knowledge in a structured way of thinking, aspect that created for myself a slow development during the last phase of the project. We started out by experimenting with different Arduino sketches that were related to our project such as a series of colors triggered on an RGB led pin, on and off buttons, a light show on six different led pins and a proximity sensor that detects the distance between itself and a given external point. The missing components at this point were the setup of the serial bridge communication with or without Json and the manipulation of the afterwards received data. As an isolated element, working with Node and setting up the bridge communication between the browser and Arduino I found little troublesome as all tutorials in class gave me a clear understanding. However, I did have difficulties in adapting this to our context and prototypes and progress in the next phase of working with the data. At the end of the process, we created a main prototype that consisted of a GUI that communicated with our Arduino and can be manipulated from both places. As a reflection on the overall process, I believe that when I reached the point of understanding of where I could manipulate the data, I ran out of time in order to experiment more with it.

Interactive artefacts present the uppermost challenge of developing desired behaviors that arestrongly connected to the designer’s ability to code. To state that these programming techniquesare the barrier to whereas your design will bring about a new, innovative perspective feels almost common sense. I do feel that I was highly limited by my own capabilities when trying to bring an artefact to new positions, but at the same time this project offered me new knowledge on what it is possible. Controlling light or physical movement data and transforming all this information in a new layer that I, at this point, in a practice perspective, could place it mostly in the analytical area, brought about new colors. Moreover, it was highly interesting to discover this connectivity nest between all of our devices and how designers can retrieve or use these sources in order to create new types of experiences and interactions. I was aware of the projects that used our phone sensors and it was definitely captivating to work closer with the possibilities of it. Last, but not least I highly agree on the notion outlined by Weiser that ubiquitous computing should exist as a resource and not as an overwhelming aspect of our everyday life. In this context, I did reflect on what can be done, but at the same time what is necessary. Creative thinking can bring about unlimited concepts and in our ideation processes we did, at times, went over the convenience and usefulness area, all of this resulting in unneeded and unwanted interactions by the regular user, but I do outline this as a major insight I gained during this design practice.

References

  1. Weinberg, L. (2007). Massive Change: The Future of Global Design. Mit Press Journals, 23(4). Retrieved fromhttps://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/desi.2007.23.4.86?journalCode=desi.
  2. Abowd, G. D., & Mynatt, E. D. (2000). Charting past, present, and future research in ubiquitouscomputing. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) – Special Issue on Human- computer Interaction in the New Millennium, Part 1, 7(1), 29-58. doi:10.1145/344949.344988

Image Reference

1. Rossin, R. (2017). Scrubbing 1, Maquette [Digital image]. Retrieved from https://www.artsy.net/artwork/rachel-rossin-scrubbing-1-maquette

Posted on in Physical Prototyping

Concluding Physical Prototyping II


A giant banner that asked “Now that we can do anything, what will we do?” was the greeting point at the exhibition organised by the Institute without Boundaries in Chicago’s Museum of Contemporary Art. A big reflection point in every designer’s practice when the perspective moves from the world of design towards the design of the world. At first sight, it might appear as one and the same thing, but during thorough design processes, below the surface aspects start to come alive. The design thinking phases include empathise, define, ideate, prototype and test and if last semester we had the opportunity to experience the former, this course gave us the chance to immerse in the latter. As a reflection note, prior to this work I considered the prototyping stage of low difficulty and maybe the point where experimentation, creativity and freedom come to play. However, working closely with the ideation-prototyping-testing methods made me realise they are most probably the most challenging phases of taking a design out to life.

We decided to work on the context of addressable light for public spaces and more specifically how to use light interaction as a method to bring a more playful and warmer feeling in unrevised urban locations. We ideated using open discussions, mood boards and sketching. We came to the conclusion that we are to a certain extent already familiar with the aspects of the situation as we experience them in our everyday life. We set out more than five possible solutions and we carried out low-fi prototyping and first user tests. Effortless, almost as therewas no new implementation whatsoever, was one of the main insights we got at Dalaplan’sunderpass in Malmo. People were walking busy, not caring about tiles on the sidewalk or poles that light up. As they also admitted in interviews and surveys, they do not want to be in charge of extra actions or new interactions in this context. We used this as the main point in the following prototyping sessions. Nevertheless, I might say that due to the fact that we started with very low-fi prototypes, the overall process was one of slow advancement to real insightsand more polished solutions. Statements such as “it is definitely playful” and “I would never get to where I’m going, I would have too much fun” were concluded out of our last user tests, validating the fact that we did manage to bring the playful aspect alive in our prototypes.

Empirical data was the pillar of our main prototypes, assessing in an analytical way observations and statements that were made in our initial design research, in order to conceptualise our goal
for user values. In this way, I would say that the direct or indirect engagement with the users during our tests were used in order to validate or invalidate our assumptions made during ideation. Aspects such as discomfort in dark spaces and the realistic effects of light in public spaces were approved by users, whereas aspects such as active involvement and additional interaction with the space were not fully rejected, but were to some extent questioned by the majority of people.

The designer’s assumptions and decisions made during ideation and prototyping sessions maycome out with totally different output during user tests. This is one of the main aspects I can outline after these four weeks. Secondly, low-fi prototyping has an inherent lack of realism, but do bring about insights that you can build upon. And most important, prototypes are the bridge between the immaterial and the material, the point where your design will work or will fail. Lastly, it is definitely a different perspective when you design for the world as in opposite of experiencing design.

References

  1. Weinberg, L. (2007). Massive Change: The Future of Global Design. Mit Press Journals, 23(4). Retrieved fromhttps://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/desi.2007.23.4.86?journalCode=desi.
  2. Dam, R., & Siang, T. (2018). Stage 4 in the Design Thinking Process: Prototype. Retrieved from https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/stage-4-in-the-design-thinking-process-prototype
  3. Buchenau, M. & Suri, J.F. (2000). Experience Prototyping. DIS ‘00 Proceedings of the 3rdconference on Designing interactive systems: processes, methods, and techniques

Image Reference

1. Zack, M. (2011). Black and White Rule [Digital image]. Retrieved from https://www.artsy.net/artwork/maya-zack-black-and-white-rule

Posted on in Physical Prototyping

Concluding Physical Prototyping

Final essay below:

Over the last four weeks, we have been introduced to physical prototyping in connection to different tools such as computational development and digital media. If previously, we have been faced with the challenge of creating low-fidelity prototypes in our design processes, in this course we had the chance to go more in depth of what it actually means to take our idea into physicality, how to experiment with different materials and mediums and how to successfully distribute the functionalities of the object in question, in order to obtain a holistic view of the project.

What do prototypes prototype represented the main challenge in all our experiments, I believe. And if we started this with simple materials such as cardboard and copper, we did reach the level of having to design and plan a prototype using well established video content. The wonders of Arduino as a computational environment used in connection to basic crafting skills took us to a new extent and challenged us as designers to see new possibilities. Creating an external controller and connecting it to Arduino or Processing programming language represented for me a high point of interest in this course. Following, ideation sessions and video production planning over how to transmit in the best ways the user values of an interactive shape changing object represented the real challenge of these four weeks of instruction.

After the completion of these assignments, I am really able to draw a line and question what does it actually mean to transform your idea into a physical object. As I have been faced with big question marks on how to fully integrate all features into a tangible prototype, I can draw on this many lessons. First of all, simple thinking will never fail you. Initially, when trying to create a version of our shape changing interactive artwork, I would consider building up a frame from a solid material with a white canvas that bends on the edges and on which a visual expression is projected and programmed to react to your body movement. I have discovered that prototyping does not work this way. In a project where very different and complex features are to be integrated, it is a must that you first experience with each one of them individually. There is no doubt in the advantages of experimenting with one feature transposed into different physical forms and testing these to their biggest extent. Only after understanding each one of these in depth, you are able to meet the final challenge of connecting them in order to achieve a qualitative and functional prototype. Second of all, never underestimate the powers of simple materials. As experienced in our first challenge, tools such as paper and cardboard will really help you gain some valuable insights of what it actually means to interact with your object, exactly as Houde and Hill defines this experience as “the look and feel” of the object. And most of the times, this feel will hold the most valuable lessons in the design process.

The biggest milestones in prototyping experiences are represented by first understanding the person you are designing for, the existing situation of the industry your design is about to be placed into, the need of design exploration of your idea and how to successfully communicate these to your audience, guidelines formulated by Buchenau and Suri. When faced with limited resources and only two weeks of time span, I was faced with the challenge of having to find the balance between all of these aspects. Which detail needed most attention, was one of my main questions. As an end assessment, I can conclude that we spent too much time in ideation sessions, trying to come up with the perfect working system for our object and getting ourselves lost in below the surface questions that will not serve the final goal of the task. Even though, we were at all times aware that this is a complex object, we did chose to take the challenge and make the most out of it. In this way, I did enjoy the process and it was pretty awarding to see a final product at the end of our hard work.

With little prior knowledge of video as a communication medium, I did discover some new and interesting softwares that sustain your work in the same means static digital design does. It is really fascinating how the combination of wording, audio and imagery can transmit your idea through triggering different types of feeling in the viewer. Our video prototype mostly triggered confusion in the majority of its viewers, something that I was mostly concerned about when carrying out the video editing tasks. In our video prototyping sessions, we chose to separate everything and showcase the main qualities of the object: shape, motion and interactivity and film as such representational video of our experimentation with the object itself.

This course offered me the opportunity of experimenting with the innovative ability of an object to change its form and transform itself into an immersive experience. Even though we are talking of an art object or simply of a drinking cup, it represents in an abstract way the new thinking designers should relate to. We are no longer constrained to technical limitations that will make us see objects as static and singled use and it is our duty to continue this process and discover new ways of creating. I keep this project in the archive of things I would like to gain more knowledge on and I do hope that through constant research I will be able to successfully transcend our idea in a fully functional prototype.

Posted on in Design, Design Philosophy

Lecture III: Experiencing Prototyping

The last lecture on prototyping was in the area of what does it mean to experience your object and how can you use different methods in order to gain the needed insights for your final design. 

My group was given the task to discuss and experience the prototyping of a newly innovative interface that is used mainly for media purposes and that it is tangible and foldable. We chose paper in order to carry out this task and experience the different sizes. We regarded its size attribute as a valuable insight as this will carry out important design decisions. We folded an A4 paper in different sizes and we each try to use it for accessing different digital mediums: newspaper, social media, email or planning your schedule. We discovered that half of the A4 size would best fit a smooth interaction. In our testing this gave us the best experience while also being able to carry out other tasks such as carrying a cup of coffee or turning on the light. The foldable feature of our prototype was, however, the main focus in our group. We argued that such an in-built interaction must be assigned to an important step in the flow of actions such as turning on or turning off the device. Assigning this to a trivial action such as switching pages or switching accounts would transform the object itself into a high-end, difficult to use gadget that will limit the target group. The weight and thickness aspects were also tied up to valuable insights. Using our folded A4 paper outside in the wind, we discovered that a thickness of four papers glued together will offer the safe experience of not having it be affected by external elements such as the weather. Last, but not least we discussed the possible interactions that will integrate well in our object. 

It is most surely a valuable exercise and we got some hands on experience on how to work with paper as a prototype. It surely did minimise my underestimation of working with basic materials for the design of complex objects. 

Posted on in Design, Design Philosophy, Physical Prototyping

Lecture I: What do prototypes prototype?

The lecture on design philosophy regarding the working means with prototyping as a way of transforming your idea into a physical object was the first of the third lectures to follow. We discussed in depth of what it actually means to build, use materials and get valuable insights from each test. As one of the fundamental activities of a designer, it is highly needed to understand the principles behind what does a prototype implies. 

Discussing with my classmate over Valentine’s definition of a prototype, we did agree that it behaves as a teacher or a guide in your design process, it is the most valuable tool in order to concretise ideas and test them in real time. It is indeed a iterative process where failing and succeeding hold valuable lessons in order to achieve your final goal. Last, but not least we did agree that certainty is the aspect that will always miss. It is impossible to be fully confident of the first version of your prototype as this process requires that the “individual’s imaginations is tenaciously explored, tested, broken and rebuilt”. It is the moment where your confidence will be challenged and your wisdom will be your most valuable tool. 

The main knowledge behind this lessons is that we as designers must understand the situation we are designing for, the concept and the materials. As such we will be able to face the issues with lesser difficulty. 

I value book knowledge highly and I give its spot in my design practice, but throughout the talk I kept thinking that this is such a complex situation where issues that we can not yet imagine will come across and in those moments we need real life wisdom and actual prototyping practice in order to be successful. I told myself that I should not underestimate the insights from people that have worked with these methods before, but I should nevertheless exercise this as much as possible in order to create my own working method and to develop the thinking that will adjust my mind patterns in the best of ways.