1
Design Methodologies
By Mai H. Saeed
2
Reflective Duality
3
MA Architecture Report
Project Details Project Lead:
Mai H. Saeed
Tutors:
Sam McElhinney David Di Duca
Title:
Reflective Duality
Type:
Interactive architectural installation
Location:
UCA Canterbury campus - Kirk Hall
Project Dates:
September 2014- January 2015 Unit 1.2 - Exploratory Practice February 2015 - May 2015 Unit 2.1 - Project Development June 2015 - August 2015 Unit 3.1 - Final Installation
Design Period:
12 06 2015 - 30 07 2015
Budget:
ÂŁ450
Scale:
1:1
Support:
Canterbury School of Architecture - UCA
4
Reflective Duality
Design Methodologies
5
Reflective Duality
6
Research Agenda and Process Overview This installation represents a psycho-analytical study that focuses on visual perception and the role of imagination and memory in affecting our perceptual experiences. It explores a ‘Mind Dependant Reality’ in which an embodied spatial experience is introduced where the spectators would view carefully assembled bits and pieces of projected images. Depending on cognitive perception and a bit of imagination the encounter would provide enriching experiences within an empty space. Just like a good book would enrich our imagination to see the narrative of the story, or a good film relies on carefully designed scenes to evoke a realistic impact on the viewer, the effect produced by the installation depends on the individual’s perception, which is manifested through sensory input as well as unconscious recognition of the missing pieces generated from the familiarity of the scenes and the continuous mental processing that occurs when encountering ambiguous visual information.
Research Questions 1.
What is the amount of visual information needed to perceive and identify spaces?
2. How can knowledge and experience help us in constructing spatial narratives? 3. When does imagination contribute in filling the gaps when encountering ambiguous and incomplete visual information? 4. Is it possible for a specific space to adapt various spatial characteristics if given the right amount of information to the receiving party/individuals?
Research Statement
Significance and Contribution Providing an environment in which mental instigation constructs most of the spatial narrative. The image projected may be compatible or contradictory with the enveloping space but the sole purpose is to intrigue curiosity and allow the viewer to identify the suggested narrative. The goal is to implement various spatial characteristics in one empty space that could transform and adapt the suggested narratives in a way that helps individuals to interact and apply their own mental instigation to the context of the surrounding space.
Methodologies 1.
Static 2D images with defined visual information in relation to perspectival points, depth and space/objects coherence.
2. Layering visual information and creating an interactive visual display that engages with the different users occupying the space. 3. Live input of the movements that occurs within the space and merging it with the projected image creating a combination of both outcomes thus increasing interactivity. 4. Programming sketches that enable interplay between live video feed, motion detection and background images.
7
Reflective Duality
8
Design Proposal The setup consists of 2 projection units, 3 mirrors and an enveloping space. The projection units are located in opposite sides each containing a projector and a hidden webcam that picks up the movements within the space, while the mirrors are placed in the middle of the projection space. Each projector casts specifically designed visual information to the opposite end wall and the mirrors obstruct the projections to add their own reflections into the enveloping space. The puzzling pieces of the images increase our concentration in order to analyse the information that presents the visual space, this
encourages us to subconsciously interject a mental assumption that completes the missing context of the scene. The projectors are the main source of information; they project images that are specifically chosen to define the relationship that lies between objects and the spaces in between, while the mirrors are used as visual barriers that block the flow of the visual scene and sends the information to the shadowed area opposite to the projectors creating an atmosphere that can be sensually and physically acknowledged by the users who interact with the space.
Key technological outcomes of proposal 1.
Programming motion detection captured from the space and projected back into the space.
2. Layering of visual information into the space through several phases that can be separated physically or computed to occupy the surrounding space.
Fig.03 (left) Projections - Prototype #2
9
Proposal & Context
Design Research Context Field of Work
Work by others
Many psychologists and The project depends on visual perception as an essential researchers explored the field aspect with which we identify and of visual perception, the most significant is “Motion Perception” interact with our surroundings. research by the Swedish The visual keys presented act psychologist Gunner Johansson as an interconnected web of made in 1975. It reveals how little information, each connection information is needed to visually has its own characteristics identify human and animal figures and when combined together moving in a space. a comprehensible context is formed. David Hockney’s “PhotoMontage” in 1980s and “Walgate Spatial recognition can be Woods” in 2011 also depends achieved when providing, on the same concept of visual not all, but the right amount information carefully assembled of connections that act both with one another to form the independently and dependently “Bigger Picture” in which he used to one another in shaping our sets of small photographs to form perceptual experiences. complete and detailed spatial images.
04a
05a
04b
05b
Reflective Duality
10
Design Methodologies The installation is designed with reflected projections and the 3 main elements that depend uninterrupted projections. correspondingly on one another to form the final visual outcome. The third and final element is the Projection units located at the The first element is the enveloping opposite end walls of the space, space which is designed to have each projection unit contains a : specific properties that prevent it from having a physical perceptual - Projector identity, thus enabling the casted - Webcam images to become the focus - Source (Computer) of the visual perception, these properties resemble the colour The hidden webcams attached of the walls to be either black or to the projection units run on white, the edges shall remain free a motion detection program of sharp corners and any other designed to: physical prominence that could affect the perceptual subjectivity 1- Pick up the motion occurring when the viewers wander of the virtual space. between the mirror panels. The space also contains specifically designed elements 2- Blend the real-time video that obstruct the flow of the captured with a background projections and add their own image that suggests a spatial reflection to the receiving end context for the enveloping space to adopt. walls. The obstructing elements are 3 free standing mirror panels which resemble the second main component of the installation. The mirrors are located in a central location to the projection units providing a balanced combination between the
The motion detection blend increases interactivity and transforms the design into an engaging array of images that constantly change with the movements occurring in the space.
Critical Design Elements 1.
Projection units and night-vision webcams
2. Mirrors 3. Motion detection Programming 4. Receiving end walls
Design Methodologies
11
Fig.06 Assembling an array of images to create the final outcome
06a
06b
Reflective Duality
12
Prototyping and testing • The Power of images
• Prototype #1:
Screens and mirrors was the first approached in applying the project’s main concept; it consisted of a medium scaled These slight changes have model designed to obstruct different effects on the viewer projections and an enveloping either by emphasising specific space. details such as Depth and The model was a set of 3 modules Perspectival vanishing points or positioned in the centre, each by highlighting the relationships module consists of 1 mirror that lies between the objects that reflects projections and 2 and the spaces they occupy thus transparent screens that reflect revealing defining properties of and refract the projections into the space that the human mind partial pieces of images casted subconsciously identifies as on the surrounding space. The well as assessing the physical projections shift accordingly interaction that may occur when each module rotates in accordance to the other two accordingly. Finally trying to transform these modules. The first step was to test a set of images and slightly altering some of the visual informations they contain.
images from a static 2d image The modules were fixed on cogs into a spatial form by projecting that rotates simultaneously creating a 3 dimensional array them into a designated space. of reflected and refracted projections.
Fig.07 (left) Screens and Mirrors Medium scale module for projection testing
13
Process & Methods
07b
07c
07d
07e
Reflective Duality
14
Prototyping and testing • Prototype #2:
a. Element testing
The second prototype involved 1:1 scale experiments in which a set of 3 mirror panels where positioned in a central location between 2 projectors and a series of images where projected.
The mirrors were made of shrink mirror film. The edges of the film had small creases which has an interesting effect when reflecting the projections from its surface.
The images had specific characteristics such as perspectival points that emphasised depth and motion in order to explore the transformations that occurs when blending images with slightly different visual informations and observing the final contextual outcome of the projections.
The mirror films were fixed on a braced timber frame and hung on the ceiling from the upper section of the frame with a rotating C-section.
b. Fixings and bracing
c. Technical details The two opposite projectors and the mirrors in between them enabled the end walls to have partial projections from both ends. Each end wall was a mirrored replication of the opposite end. The unusual reflected projections provide a small gap that separates it from the uninterrupted projection, thus enabling the viewer to incorporate the differences between both projections.
Fig.08 (left) Isometric diagram of the rotating mirror panel and its attachment to the ceiling detail.
15
Process & Methods
Fig.08 Mirror installation and fixing details
08e 07b
08b
08f
07c
08c
08g
07d 08d
08h
16
Reflective Duality
Fig.09 Projection analysis diagram
09a
09b
17
Process & Methods
Fig.09 Projection analysis diagram and photographs
09c
09d
09e
09f
Reflective Duality
18 Fig.10 Individuals effect in projection space - Photographs
10a
10b
10f
10c
10g
10d
10h
10e
10i
19
Process & Methods
Fig.11 Image projections and effects - Photographs
11a
11b
11e
11c
11f
11d
11g
20
Reflective Duality
21
Fabrication Techniques
Fabrication Techniques The installation consisted of two main components that were carefully designed to maintain a clearly defined projection outcome.
a. Element Fabrication
The mirror panels are made of Shrink mirror film fixed and heated to take its final reflective form while the projection units The first component was the were made of wood panels cut mirror panels with sharp defined in accordance to match the edges and a supporting system dimension of the end walls. that holds them in an upright b. Fixings and bracing position yet has no prominent The mirror frames are braced effect on the projections casted from both ends, fixed on metal through the space. stands and attached to concrete The second component was bases to prevent them from the projection units designed to tipping over. contain the projection elements The projection units have a and provide a neat surface that 50x50mm wooden beam drilled blends with the space. to the end walls and attached to the units with Velcro to prevent it from sliding or falling while enabling an easy access to the projection elements hidden inside. c. Technical details The mirror panels have wire strings attached at the bottom of the steel stands and the concrete base to provide a more accurate positioning for the mirrors. The projection units are designed with openings and hidden shelves that can slide sideways providing a more flexible area for adjustments regarding the position of projectors and cameras.
Fig.12 (left) Mirror panel frame and steel stand.
Reflective Duality
22 Fig.12 Mirror Fabrication details - Photographs
12a
12b 12e
12c
12d
12f
12g
23
Fabrication Techniques
12h
12j
12k
12i
12l
Reflective Duality
24 Fig.13 Concrete base form work and casting details - Photographs
13a
13b
13e
13c
13f
13d
13g
25
Fabrication Techniques
13h
13i
13l
13j
13m
13k
13n
26
Reflective Duality
27
Process & Methods
Control Systems The real-time video picked up by the hidden cameras is programmed to detect motion by defining the total number of pixels in every frame and dividing it into two categories:
a. Element testing The cameras used are night vision webcams that can operate with very low lighting.
a- The still Pixels, i.e. the pixels d. Overall in the frame where no change or This process provides a well motion occurs controlled environment in terms b- and the changing Pixels, i.e. of defining the surrounding the pixels in the frame where space and the images projected elements are in motion. transforming the setting into an engaging and interactive The RGB values of the pixels experience for the viewers. are extracted and changed to be black in case of stillness and Please refer to appendix for more white when motion occurs i.e. information. tracing the pixels in the frame that are changing, thus creating a contrast between the two colours. The program also layers a transparent image that contains visual information representing the main context of the projection.
Fig.14 (far left) Snapshots from hidden camera 1 Fig.15 (left) Snapshots from hidden camera 1
Reflective Duality
28
Fig.16 Snapshots (every 10 seconds) from camera 1 (with no background images) - Photographs
16a
16b
16e
16c
16f
16d
16g
29
Process & Methods
Fig.17 Snapshots (every 10 seconds) from camera 1 (with background image) - Photographs
17a
17b
17d
17c
17e
Reflective Duality
30 Fig.18 Snapshots (every 10 seconds) from camera 1 (with background image) - Photographs
18a
18b
18e
18c
18f
18d
18g
31
Process & Methods
18h
18i
18l
18j
18m
18k
18n
32
Reflective Duality
Process & Methods
33
34
Review of Outcomes
Reflective Duality
Occupation and Interaction The installation is designed to implement ‘A Mind Dependant Reality’ with which our mind is in full control to express our imagination and memory and to highlight, to the participants, the importance of this marvellous ability that we all have yet we rarely notice its great impact on our perceptual experiences. The projectors are the main source of information in the space, they project images that are specifically chosen to define the relationship that lies between objects and the spaces they occupy, while the mirrors are used as windows in the centre of the space, they are windows that delete visual information, existing beyond the mirror’s physical parameters, and replaces them with reflections of the hidden
reality that lies on the other side of the mirrors. In other words; the mirrors are visual barriers that block the flow of the visual scene and sends the information to the shadowed area beneath the projectors creating an atmosphere the can be sensually and physically acknowledged by the users who interact with the space. The setting encourages the viewers to participate in identifying the information presented rather than forcing a specific context. The constant motion that occurs withing the space and the different affects that occurs to the projections provides an ever changing effects and interactivity between the space and the viewers.
Fig.19 (left) Projections casted on the mirrors and on the end wall. Fig.20 (right) Snapshot from camera 1 - no background image
35
Review of Outcomes
Conclusion This project establishes the role of imagination and memory in shaping perception, hence reality is relative to what we can recognise and understand. This observation was explored through the installation as it focuses on emphasising the reality that is subconsciously identified, a reality that is only perceived because it is recognised by the mind. The installation is designed to test this ‘Mind Dependant Reality’, its effect depends on our ability to comprehend and connect with the projected information, the entire setup aim to create simple triggers that activates our imagination and mental processing to recognise ambiguous and incomplete information. Time sequence and motion, of individuals, mirrors and projections, keep the projected environment in constant change which opens the door for chance in perception, it allows our imagination to run free and participate in creating its own effect to our perceptual experiences within the virtual space.
36
Reflective Duality
Fig.21 (left) Snapshot from camera 1 (every 10 seconds) - no background image
37
Appendix
Appendix Motion detection program: import processing.video.*; PImage img; int numPixels; int[] previousFrame; Capture video; void setup () { size(1280,800); // Define video source from external camera String[] cameras = Capture.list(); if (cameras.length == 0) { println(“There are no cameras available for capture.”); exit(); } else { println(“Available cameras:”); for (int m = 0; m < cameras.length; m++) { println(cameras[m]); } } // Define video pixels video = new Capture(this, cameras[30]); video.start(); numPixels = width * height; previousFrame = new int[numPixels]; loadPixels (); smooth (); // insert overlay image reference img = loadImage (“forests.jpg”); img.loadPixels(); } void draw () { // Get the R,G,B values from image if (video.available()) { video.read (); video.loadPixels (); int movementSum = 0; // Amount of movement in the frame for (int i = 0; i < numPixels; i++) { //
For each pixel in the video frame... color currColor = video.pixels[i]; color prevColor = previousFrame[i]; // Extract the red, green, and blue components from current pixel int currR = (currColor >> 16) & 0xFF; int currG = (currColor >> 16) & 0xFF; int currB = (currColor >> 16) & 0xFF; // Extract red, green, and blue components from previous pixel int prevR = (prevColor >> 16) & 0xFF; int prevG = (prevColor >> 16) & 0xFF; int prevB = (prevColor >> 16)& 0xFF; // Compute the difference of the red, green, and blue values int diffR = abs(currR - prevR); int diffG = abs(currG - prevG); int diffB = abs(currB - prevB); movementSum += diffR + diffG + diffB;
}
pixels[i] = color(diffR, diffG, diffB); previousFrame[i] = currColor;
if (movementSum > 0) { updatePixels(); println(movementSum); // Print the total amount of movement to the console } } // Define image transparency in sketch tint (255,100); image (img,0,0); // Save snapshots from sketch every 30 Seconds int sec = second (); if (sec ==1 || sec == 30) { saveFrame (“data/####.jpg”); } }
Reflective Duality
38
Materials and Suppliers List Provide a list of all critical items and suppliers as exampled: Mirror shrink Film (from Rosco, London, 020 8659 2300) Night vision webcams ( from Speedy Goal Ltd, London) Timber (from Timberite, Canterbury, 012 2776 5011) 6no x 1000 x 500 x 25 Plywood for projection units 6no x 1000 x 350 x 25 Plywood for projection units 4no x 300 / 2no x 700 / 2no x 1400 MDF for projection units 6no x 1750 x 45 x 25 / 15no x 400 x 45 x 25 mirror frame 2no x A1 size Plywood sheets for frame bracing
Metal Stands (from B&Q, Canterbury, 033 3014 3357) 180x8mm Steel rods Concrete materials (from B&Q, Canterbury, 033 3014 3357) 1 bag Cement, 1 bag Sand, 1 bag Aggregate
Other sundries: Wood screws 5 x 70mm, Screwfix UK PVC Pipes 9mm, B&Q, Canterbury Metal brackets, Wilko, Canterbury Matt metal spray paint, Wilko, Canterbury
39
Appendix
Bibliography 1- Glanville, Ranulph (2008) The edge of stillness UK: The Bartlet school of Architecture, UCL 2- Glanville, Ranulph (2012) Radical Constructivism and Second order Cybernetics Imprint Academic 3- R. L. Gregory (1998) Eye and Brain: the Psychology of seeing Oxford University Press 4- Sartre, Jean-Paul, (1995) The psychology of imagination London: Rutledge
Image Credits All figures are copyright the author unless noted as follows: Figure 04: David Hockney - Walgate Woods (2011) Figure 05: David Hockney - Walgate Woods (2011) Figure 06: Gunner Johansson - Motion Perception (1975) Figure 07: Gunner Johansson - Motion Perception (1975)
Reflective Duality
40
Credits MA Architecture Course Leader: Sam McElhinney MA Architecture Design Tutor: David Di Duca Visiting Critics 2014/15: Will Alsop, All Design Hanif Kara, AKT II Jonty Craig - BAT Studio Gem Barton - University of Brighton Jon Hodges - Bare Conductive Guy Woodhouse - Piercy & Co. Charlotte Bocci - Ian Chalk Architects David Lomax - Waugh Thistleton Architects Fiona Zisch - University of Westminster Clemens Plank - University of Innsbruck James Whitaker - Whitaker Studio Kevin Kelly - Pringle Richards Sharrat Tetsuro Nagata - Nissen Richards Studio Elizabeth Upham - MUD Architecture Ruth Lang - Studio ARG Shumi Bose - Blueprint Verity Jane Keefe - The Mobile Museum
Design Methodologies
41
42
Reflective Duality
Design Methodologies
43
44
Reflective Duality