Category Archives: Final project – first prototype

Here’s our presentation!

Team: Marcelo, Jung Joon, Carrie, Rachel, Ting Ting

Check out our awesome prototype on the Highline here!

Narration Clip

Prototype Testing Video (1);

Prototype Testing Video (2);

Prototype Testing Video (3)

You can read our First Prototype Report here.

Check out some photos and audio clips here!

Check out our presentation here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8wzhzyazt4818ax/Team%20Jared%20First%20Iteration.pdf?dl=0

Concept Recap

Check out our project tin cans slides

Prototype

When we thought about prompts for our tin can phones, we wanted to test a range of prompts:

1. Playful + open ended

2. Playful + instructive

3. Serious + open ended

4. Serious + instructive

5. Game

6. Visual icons

Method

We tested different locations in the park, which varied in crowdedness and activity. We tried passively placing some on benches and actively giving some to people.

Learnings

• No one participated when cans were passively placed — only when we actively invited people:
  • indirect hinting
  • direct invitation
• People did not read the prompts — they only observed them after the interactions were over
• We had to inform people about technique of pulling string taught
• Young kids were fascinated because they hadn’t seen anything like this before
• Older people found it nostalgic, and multiple said they used to do it when they were kids
• Some people liked it, others were more disinterested
• Of the people that did try it, the majority had positive, engaged reactions
• When people were using it, the string instigated different interactions itself:
  • Some people tripped or walked into it without realizing it was there
  • Some kids were playful and tried doing limbo with the string
• Each conversation consisted of at least 5 exchanges
• People on lawns seemed more open to participating. It was also a better environment for the tin cans, since they involve people walking, standing at a distance, and pulling them taught
• Conversation topics were very basic introductions:
  • What’s your name?
  • Where are you from?
  • Where do you live?
• Confusion about who was listening and who should be talking
• Some skepticism and surprise when devices worked
• When people who used it knew each other, conversations were more engaging and deeper
• People watching other people participate garnered interest

Opportunities for next prototype 

• Creating some kind of stand/display and signage to draw more attention to the prototype
• Simpler prompt
• 2 versions:
  • Open-ended platform where any 2 people can talk
  • Booth where one of us is there, and individuals can talk to us, kind of like a live “Ask Me Anything”
• Lowering the barrier to entry: make it easier for people to just sit and talk without having to worry about walking, pulling it taught, etc.

Lingering thoughts:

• What’s the takeaway? Sometimes, people just want to have someone to talk to. (Old man story)

This week we revisited the site, came up with a new “kinetic art” concept, designed an early prototype, and experimented with a range of materials and light positions to find the best option for our concept.

When we returned to North End Way we realized that, as Luke pointed out in class, the presence of water so close to the location is really compelling. We started to think of ways to translate the dynamic qualities of the nearby water into the arcade. Initially we were thinking of pure audio or perhaps a wave pool to emulate the sound of moving water. Then Sam W. noticed that there is a diagonal grid created by the paving stones in the arcade and mimicked by the glass panels above. Jeff brought up the idea of “walking on water” and I brought up the work of Reuben Margolin, whose kinetic sculptures leverage the mathematics of water eddies and waves to great effect.

We were considering a projected light effect, but thanks to Michael’s feedback we realized that the ambient light in the space would probably be too much for that to be visually compelling. We decided to play on the idea of shadows instead. By shining a strong spotlight through our kinetic sculpture we would be able to broaden the reach and perceived size of the installation.

Once we had a general idea of the shape we started to experiment with different dowel diameters using one of the department’s high-intensity photography lighting rigs. We learned that the closer the object is to the ground the more crisp and clearly defined the shadow is, and also that as the dowels move farther away their outlines blur significantly. We also found that we could create a shadow wave even when moving all of the dowels simultaneously along the same path, a finding which should simplify our eventual installation. We had a few hiccups involving the material we used to suspend the rods from the main axis (thread had too much “give” and resulted in a jerky motion) but we know that the core concept is sound. Our next step is to integrate a motor of some kind and begin refining the whole apparatus.