http://arts.stanford.edu/sai.php?section=gallery&page=gallery&action=47
Check out the video!
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Overall Recap
1. Changes
Several changes were made between the first floor prototype and the final floor prototype.
1. reduced three stacked tiers to two separate one-layer pieces
2. tweaked the mirror dimensions to create a space which one visitor could claim
3. constructed a housing for the user interface turn table
4. further refined the spin shape
5. backed the mirrored acrylic with plywood to prevent scratching and allow for easier mounting
6. got the lazy susan and axle rotation to work reasonably better
7. constructed the entire piece out of more durable material (plywood, acrylic)
8. constructively incorporated color by finishing the housing in grey to contrast with the red and white reflection shape
2. Feedback
Seeing new people use this iteration of the project yielded some interesting observations. Although I had created a user interface spin plate, most people initially went to spin the shape directly. I tried to avoid this being the case, as I did not want the user’s hand to interfere with the reflected image.
Some feedback concerning this occurrence was that I would paint the area for intended user interaction a different color than the housing, thus attracting their attention to that spot.
A user commented that the levels of friction were different on the two side by side piece. This particular individual said he preferred the spin plate with less friction, thus producing a more fluid reflection shape transition. I talked with him about this issue, as I said I was trying to balance type of user gratification with the possibility of users spinning the plates as fast as possible in a non-constructive manner.
A labeling concept I realized I had completely overlooked because I was too familiar with the exhibit is that I did not clearly label which set of mirrors were at which angle. For the next display opportunity, I will certainly remedy this.
3. Further Possibilities
For the next iteration, I would clearly label which set of mirror were at which angle. I would also paint the intended point of user contact a different color. Additionally, I would make sure all the epoxy related kinks were worked out of the axle rotation mechanism.
4. Accomplishments
I gained a firsthand appreciation for the notion that often the most elegant solution is often the simplest. At first I was resistant to reduce the three layers of mirrors, and I really had to reason out a cost benefit analysis for that approach verses one layer. However, being able to visibly see the difference between the designs after I had made two prototypes made me realize I was only complicating the experience with three levels.
Additionally, I learned a new fabrication tool, the lasercamm. Not only do I now know how to use it, but I have much more of a feeling for what stages of the design process it is appropriate.
Furthermore, I gained much more familiarity in designing work for direct user interaction.
5. Insight
I saw that if an exhibit can slowly reveal itself or keep an element secret, only to be later discovered by a few visitors, this can be a tremendous catalyst for social interaction for those who do find it. My first hand experience came from the seeking out the exhibit “Icy Bodies” after hearing Shawn Lani discuss it. I found the exhibit, quiet and without any visitors, in an area of other high activity exhibits. After waiting patiently for the dry ice to slowly traverse the conveyor belt, I was rewarding with the swirling dance of the dry ice on water. After I watched a cycle by myself, I brought the exhibit to the attention of someone walking by. It was great to both watch the exhibit unfold together. We talked for the entire 3 minute dry ice cycle about the aesthetic beauty of the ice, how is mirrored weather fronts, and how it represented cosmic phenomenon. I would not have had that conversation if it weren’t for the fact we were both discovering the exhibit together.
Several changes were made between the first floor prototype and the final floor prototype.
1. reduced three stacked tiers to two separate one-layer pieces
2. tweaked the mirror dimensions to create a space which one visitor could claim
3. constructed a housing for the user interface turn table
4. further refined the spin shape
5. backed the mirrored acrylic with plywood to prevent scratching and allow for easier mounting
6. got the lazy susan and axle rotation to work reasonably better
7. constructed the entire piece out of more durable material (plywood, acrylic)
8. constructively incorporated color by finishing the housing in grey to contrast with the red and white reflection shape
2. Feedback
Seeing new people use this iteration of the project yielded some interesting observations. Although I had created a user interface spin plate, most people initially went to spin the shape directly. I tried to avoid this being the case, as I did not want the user’s hand to interfere with the reflected image.
Some feedback concerning this occurrence was that I would paint the area for intended user interaction a different color than the housing, thus attracting their attention to that spot.
A user commented that the levels of friction were different on the two side by side piece. This particular individual said he preferred the spin plate with less friction, thus producing a more fluid reflection shape transition. I talked with him about this issue, as I said I was trying to balance type of user gratification with the possibility of users spinning the plates as fast as possible in a non-constructive manner.
A labeling concept I realized I had completely overlooked because I was too familiar with the exhibit is that I did not clearly label which set of mirrors were at which angle. For the next display opportunity, I will certainly remedy this.
3. Further Possibilities
For the next iteration, I would clearly label which set of mirror were at which angle. I would also paint the intended point of user contact a different color. Additionally, I would make sure all the epoxy related kinks were worked out of the axle rotation mechanism.
4. Accomplishments
I gained a firsthand appreciation for the notion that often the most elegant solution is often the simplest. At first I was resistant to reduce the three layers of mirrors, and I really had to reason out a cost benefit analysis for that approach verses one layer. However, being able to visibly see the difference between the designs after I had made two prototypes made me realize I was only complicating the experience with three levels.
Additionally, I learned a new fabrication tool, the lasercamm. Not only do I now know how to use it, but I have much more of a feeling for what stages of the design process it is appropriate.
Furthermore, I gained much more familiarity in designing work for direct user interaction.
5. Insight
I saw that if an exhibit can slowly reveal itself or keep an element secret, only to be later discovered by a few visitors, this can be a tremendous catalyst for social interaction for those who do find it. My first hand experience came from the seeking out the exhibit “Icy Bodies” after hearing Shawn Lani discuss it. I found the exhibit, quiet and without any visitors, in an area of other high activity exhibits. After waiting patiently for the dry ice to slowly traverse the conveyor belt, I was rewarding with the swirling dance of the dry ice on water. After I watched a cycle by myself, I brought the exhibit to the attention of someone walking by. It was great to both watch the exhibit unfold together. We talked for the entire 3 minute dry ice cycle about the aesthetic beauty of the ice, how is mirrored weather fronts, and how it represented cosmic phenomenon. I would not have had that conversation if it weren’t for the fact we were both discovering the exhibit together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
