Author Archives: Sneha

“Park Talk” Final Project Iteration #4

The simplicity of Park Talk installation incurred a significant amount of curiosities from a wide age range of passer byes in Washington Square Park.

Environment:

Date of launch: Sunday November 16th

Time of launch: 2:47 pm

Location within WSP: North West side between Arch and Fountain

Weather: 46 degrees, Cloudy, light brisk wind with late intermittent drizzle at the last 5 minutes

Duration: 30 minutes

Set-up

Our set up included the map of WSP mounted on a 60”x40” Board with a prompt asking: “Where is your favorite spot in Washington Square Park”? We provided colored sharpies attached to the board for users to sketch or write their response directly on the map.

Observation

For our fourth iteration of the prototype we sat 20 yards distance from the set-up of our prototype and unobtrusively observe the type of users, level of user engagement/interaction in relationship to the Park Talk installation and people nearby. To our surprise we learned that our installation captured interest from both kids and adults with slightly different end result in the manner in which the engagement produces for each group of users.

User 1: Kids

Adult/Family with kids ranging from 2 to 13 years of age

Kids showed curiosity and excitement when they saw the board. Anticipating the response from; either their grandmother, parent(s) or guardian’s permission to have closer look to draw on the board. In one case it was a whole family event.  Parents took delight that the kids got excited in the participation that they even took photos of their kids.

Grandmother with her grandkids (est. 6 to 9 yrs age)

Family with kids (Father, Mother, Grandmother, 3 kids- est. 4 to 7 years of age)

Couple with toddler

Pre-teen girls (est. 9 to 13 years of age)

User 2:

Adults, M/F– Couples and Single participants (18 to 50+)

We had equal level of engagements between people who were by themselves and traveling with companions taking interest to stop and look at the prototype installation. Some couples and individuals were very quick to contribute, some would pass and/or linger before seeing other engaged users before they themselves participated in drawing/writing onto the board.

One particular finding of interest was that solo participants were engaging with one another over the Park Talk installation. While we were too far of a distance to understand what they were saying we watched their body language and interaction and can only guess that they were sharing something related to either the WSP, map/prototype installation or what they were drawing. . . this particular piece of installation brought two strangers to engage in a conversation!

Couples

Solo guy + Solo girl joins

Strangers meeting strangers

Findings

Given the dreary weather and how quiet the WSP was than our previous visits we were surprised and delighted at the high level of participation from kids and adults with the Park Talk prototype installation. This prototype iteration while slightly modified and having it left unattended resulted in higher kids engagement than the first prototype launched back in late september. Also, people had natural curiosities to stop, look/read the prototype installation incurring additional interests from passer byes to participate. With a traction of one or two user again created more interests; pulling people from a distance to stop and look at the board. While they may not directly draw or sketch we observed people either made exchange with other users or with their travel partners.

*For family with kids– the discovery of the Park Talk installation along their path offered serendipity and delight for the kids to engage free-form with the larger audience.

*For adults: WSP public space, intervened by this installation enabled a sharing which allowed a conversation/engagement by two random people. In conclusion, we felt that our Park Talk prototype installation was a success drawing curiosity, delight and enabling natural/genuine conversations.

As a group we were delighted our Park Talk prototype brought smile and playfulness to the public space in Washington Square Park in such a cold and dreary day.

Final Park Talk Board Contributed by Washington Square Park Visitors

Close-ups of some of the drawings

Original Goals:

• To create an experience that makes park-goers feel amusement and delight.
• To create a mixing of regulars, tourists, and those who are wandering through the park, with possibly a focus on those who are just crossing through
• To invite park visitors/people passing by to feel a sense of belonging

Additional Goals:

• To encourage people to express themselves freely
• To engage park visitors to feel ownership for their favorite spot
• To CrowdSource map of the park  (similar to an analog Foursquare)

Original Parameters:

• We will not cause annoyances to park goers
• We will not obstruct anyone’s general path
• In labeling and identification, we will not stereotype any region of the park
• We will not create noise that overpowers the general ambiance of the park’s various pockets

1. Take a photo or plan of the location that you are working in and highlight the spaces that you are activating.

 2nd Prototype Installation at SVA IxD floor:

Prompt, Floor plan, and Activity icons (Killing time, Restroom, Socializing, Reading, Solo work, Napping, Class, Eating, On a call)

1. First set up your second iteration at SVA IXD floor let it run for at least 24 hours, ideally 48.

We Installed on Monday, November 3rd, 2014 till Sunday, November 9th. (6 days)

2. Set it up at the actual location and document

A 64 x 48 in foamcore setup of the Washington Square Park Map (Map is draw on a separate sheet) We’ll have thumbtacks and markers (some with iconography, some blank) to accomodate various levels of engagement and participation. We will keep it unattended, with a prompt that allows the user to read and participate on their own volition. We will keep the map at 3 different locations for 15-20 minutes each.

3.Write an analysis of your findings

• 21 location markers

• 6 Solo work
• 4 Socializing (3 at SVA IXD, 1 at outside of IXD)
• 3 Killing time
• 3 Eating
• 2 Reading
• 1 Group work
• 1 Sleeping
• 1 On a call

• Women were more participatory than men
• There might be a need for a reward for more active participation – or a sense of achievement. We will explore this further when we convert our analog prototype into a digital vision.
• We may need a better way to encourage people to express themselves in a creative way. The previous iteration, when people drew directly on the paper in a “freestyle” mode, they were more graphically expressive, drawing caricatures of themselves, etc. In our current prototype, because we created iconography of various activities, people were more likely to write their name rather than draw anything in the “represent yourself” box. It also resembled a name tag (as a rectangle form).
• We have to consider what happens when a popular area gets overlapped – How will everyone be visible when we have a higher density (high traffic)? Clusters? Number counts? Data viz?
• Frequency and change over time (in a day, in a week, in an hour, in a certain season?)
• We will also incorporate this map into a wayfinding digital vision (where live data and sensors could possibly impact and change a park-goer’s direction by suggestions)
• We yet don’t know how color plays a role.