Individual Report Sounds Like PLay Looks Like Play Tijmen

e k i l ks

o o L . y.. a l p

l iva t s -fe TRP

36 S 9 1 n nd io – s08 a t s c e a fac terGurp r n I u l us S yfun van a o l n e PTijme th Lumi e m e 2 m Th dent B3.m Né Large 11 Stuc Yearh Sahilips 0 2 i c P a ber dem Coents m a e c A Cli Dec

R l a du

i

v i d In

e k i l s ds

t r o ep

n u o S

y a l p

Individual Part Tijmen van Gurp Intro

Pressure cooker

In this part of my report you can read more about my

In my pressure cooker I spend my time to look at the ma-

findings in this projects. I wil emphasise a litle more on

terial provided by Ben Schouten, Bert Lonsain and Hans

the things I have done, seen and discoverd.

Leeuw in the kickoff. These where inspirational videos of

Motivation for project:

artists, interactive concepts, and new ideas. For us it was

Connection is change in color

No connection is your color

Bucket of whater, bubles, affect

shadown on the screen

the screen

the task to start acting out and create new things and to

In the beginning of this semester I still had to choose be-

explore the possibilities as wide as possible within the

tween 3 different projects within the project Sounds like

context STRP festival and the fact that we had to make

play looks like play. Although the other projects were also

visualizations on Lumalive screens.

very appealing for me I choose for the STRP project. This

I decided to go immediately to the workplace in vertigo

had several reasons, one of them was that I like to work

and make something with the materials available over

in teams and this project would be in a team. Working in

there. While making something I thought about what is

a team keeps me motivated because goals are achieved

playful and what is important for me in this project.

together, you deal with the joy and stress together and therefore you can learn a lot of each other. As I had one

The object that I created helped me further in the devel-

year of individual work ( my B2.2 and B3.1 semester) I

oping concepts. It was a start for me to start thinking in

wanted to develop my skills in teamwork and commu-

physical carriers that with manipulating the movement of

nications. I like teaching this has always been a joy for

objects would

me, and I like to do this in such a way that I am a guide

Hanging balls from the ceiling

shadows

wiping it clean

Connect your music

Inject your color

through the process without being too much of an know it all and leave room for mistakes.

One threat off this project was that it probably would focus a lot on programming, and this was something which I already did a lot the last semester.

This project is in the theme playful interactions, I chose for this theme because I see play as one of the most beautiful ways to learn new things. I think interactive play objects give us the possibility to express ourselves, and it can be a medium to meet new people. In my internship and knowledge agoras project I looked at different ways of showing complex data. In a next nature project I focused more on an interaction that had more artistic qualities than purely functional qualities. I saw the possibilities to combine these 2 directions in this project and develop them both.

Connect your music

Pic your colors , mix physical balls

weight, and jumping as input

Goals for this Project There are multiple things that I ideally want to embed into

an object towards a movement on the screen. I want an

my interaction. I want an interaction that is easy to start but

interaction that is kind of a puzzle, for example: “ do A and

where there are multiple levels of difficulty. People can start

B together C happens. Do A and C together B happens.” I

the interaction easily and there are more things to explore

think the interaction can be in such a way that you explore

once they start. I want multiple inputs that work intuitively

new things by accidently for example clapping your hands,

together. I think there is a power in a direct link of moving

standing on a certain spot etc..

My vision on playful interaction Often we achieve our goals on a nonlinear way, the world is

everyone. I think because of this new dimension there also

in open ended play and how it can stimulate interaction

factors of ideas that I had and thought of possibilities how

dynamic and surprising. In my opinion so are games. People

apply new rules to this situation, what will motivate people

between people. What can it do to us?

I could make it with a technology. I ended with accelerom-

play to have fun, to enjoy life and to learn. Ask random teen-

to engage in an interaction? What are triggers for people to

ager if it would prefer games over homework my estimated

understand an interaction? And how can we invite people

I think that what is true for play is also true for art, in modern

guess would say they would prefer games. The beauty is I

to start a game when the rules are not first explained on

art you can become an participant of the artwork. As the

The advantage of choosing the technology for me was that

think that good games stimulate all our senses and capabili-

paper? I think rules have to be found intuitively or acciden-

audience you are completing the artwork, or in other words

it narrowed down the kind of interactions that where pos-

ties and can therefore teach you a lot. And lately more and

tally before they are understood. But because of the game

the artwork is no art without you. I found this direction

sible. I was motivated for quickly deciding for a technique

more games also enter the physical world by adding sensors

industry and the gadget industry people get familiar with

Papers: lezen wat is de strekking er uit, wat heb ik er aan en

because then I would have time to experiment with the

to game consoles, think of the Wii, Kinect etc. First we knew

a set of interactions which can be used in the interaction.

hoe hebben wij het anders gedaan

interaction and get input from users that would test my

that the computer could react on the keyboard and mouse

When multitouch, speech recognition and gestures become

idea instead of validating something on paper. I chose to

I was searching for a way how to get a link with the physi-

experiment with a combination of Touch OSC a iPhone app

and therefore it was quite a non-dynamic input and even

eters as input.

if the game itself could have different levels and all kinds

second nature to the average human the physical world will

cal world towards a screen based interaction. I wanted to

that could sent the IPhone’s accelerometer data towards my

directions to explore now there is a whole new dimension

be open for a whole range of new interactive situations.

manipulate the screen by a bodily movement which would

computer.

wherein it is not just the keyboard that registries you.

What should we do with these new possibilities? That’s the

effect a physical object which was connected to the screen.

I believe that playful interactions will more and more enter

important question for me as a designer. Research is done

The difficult part was that I did not wanted a interaction that

the public space. Games will be possible everywhere with

was like pressing a button. Therefore I looked at common

Interim exhibition: For the interim exhibition I had chosen to develop a concept with physical object as a carrier for the interac-

Reactions on concept

tion. I used the application touch OSC on my IPhone in

Overall I believe the reactions where positive and helpful.

combination with processing on my computer to make an

People liked that they could engage in a working interac-

interaction wherein objects would move over the screen

tion. The main feedback that I received was that I should

accordingly to the position of my IPhone. My motivation

look at what game you could play with this. Adding another

for using an accelerometer was that it can give very direct

person would make it a more interesting interaction. What

feedback on actions taken. In my case my prototype reacted

would happen if your objects would collide towards objects

on the position of someone sitting in a chair. The content on

of another person? Can you influence the other ones ob-

screen reacted very direct on what happened on my phone

ject? Other remarks where that I should add more dimen-

I wanted to see if people would understand what happened,

sions into the movement, now it was not intuitive enough

and if they would have more ideas within this concept.

because the chair that I used was also able to turn around quite easily, and that is something which my accelerometer

Another important aspect for me was that there are surprising aspects in the interaction which can be found acciden-

didn’t sense.

tally as a sort of Easter eggs. They could happen accidentally

Conclusion

without knowing that you have influence and therefor it

All the things I learned for my concept of the midterm

would show more randomness when there is more activity,

exhibition were extremely useful for me for the exhibition at

or you can pick up that you have influence on the system

STRP. I could reuse most of my code and also implement the

and show it to other people.

things that I learned about what could work in the interaction.

I made a start in this by adding a color change towards my visuals on the screen when the sound level of my microphone would come above a certain level.

From midterm exhibition to STRP festival After the midterm exhibition there where 5 weeks left to create working interaction with the Lumalive panels from Philips. From previous projects I had the most experience in connecting different hardware and software. In the short time we had I decided that it was best to take the role as a technical programmer on me as this would be the most efficient.

http://cmapspublic3.ihmc.us/rid=1K29WCLRL-

When looking back I still this was best for the process

2P4CSK-10NR/processing%20code%20

we had, but it was not ideal for my own development.

sounds%20like%20play%20looks%20

Because of this decision I had not much space for further

like%20play.cmap?rid=1K29WCLRL-2P4CSK-

development of the ideas that I had before the midterm

10NR&partName=htmljpeg

exhibition. The advantage of this focus was that I truly have better programming skills than before.

Programming: In the main part of this project every important part we

I used my experience from earlier projects with setting up a

have done in programming is explained. In my individual

network which gave us control to change programs during

part I want to elaborate a little further to point out what my

the STRP festival.

role in it was.

After making everything work which was done just one day As earlier noted I had the role of technical programmer, this

before the STRP festival I spended all the time left during the

didn’t mean for me that I did not participate in visual pro-

festival to make changes to the visual program.

gramming, but my focus was on getting things work.

The process was focused and there was little room for

In the process I made the Kinect working, and tried out sev-

validation, and exploration. Looking back I would like to

eral possibilities in drivers libraries, and programming lan-

have more time for these 2 factors as I believe that for a final

guages. I shoes for processing as this was an easy langue to

bachelor project it is also important to have more weight

create visuals. I also invested a lot of time in understanding

on research and make decisions on facts instead of my own

OSC ( open sound control) to communicate between differ-

guts.

ent processing sketches on multiple pc’s. Before the festival

Design analyze: Process: Before the midterm our process was more experimental and everybody searched for their vision and ideas on the project. It was more explorative and we had more room for validation. After the midterm conversion of all the ideas and vision had to be done really fast, once we had combined our visions and had and we had decided on the technology we had a linear road to our end goal.

Ideally speaking I would have like to put more of our explorations before the STRP festival, this would have succeeded if we would have had more guidance in the programming process as this took most of the time.

Teamwork: The first 2 weeks we all started individual, we explored possibilities, looked into literature and made our own concepts. But right after the first meetings with STRP and Philips roles in the team emerged. As I was between the Master students and First years I saw the opportunity to guide the process . I spended a lot of time helping the first years in the beginning and it took a while before we all found a balance in working together.

It was good that we all putted our goals and vision on paper after the midterm exhibition, even though we worked together this helped us to divide roles in our team and it helped to understand each other’s ideas.

Because all the roles where so well divided and there was trust towards each other we could all focus on our own jobs without losing track of what everybody was doing. This leaded to a very effective teamwork where everybody’s qualities where highlighted. This lead to a good end result but speaking terms of what we all learned it was difficult to step out comfort zones as there was not enough time for experimenting. For the first years this setup of teamwork was highly effective and I honestly don’t think that there is another first years team that learned so much as this team.

Communication towards Philips and STRP: In the first meeting I decided that I wanted to be the contact

selves if you see on each screen something. While testing we

person towards Floris Provoost. During the process I gathered

figured out that the effect of the interaction had to be bigger,

questions from our team and from STRP and communicated

we could have achieved this by putting the screens closer to

this towards Floris. I think that the communication went re-

each other. The empty spaces in our setup also existed in our

ally well, we had weekly contact and we had enough testing

visualization of processing, because of this a moving visualiza-

points at the HTC with Philips. In the interview in the end with

tion would disappear between the screens. Better would have

Floris he said that he would like to have more contact with

been if all the screens would create one single image, because

also the other team members. When looking back it would

I think this is more recognizable. As it took 2 days to position

have been better if I would forward questions of my team-

them it was not possible to do this during the festival.

mates instead of asking it myself to Floris, because I think now he received the image that the rest was not participating in

There was too much other light in the environment:

the communication.

The effect of the screens would have been bigger when the brightness of other lights in the environment would have

During the process there were several miscommunications,

been lower. Now the screens where a nice decoration at the

they could have been prevented if we had more meetings

ceiling but they did not have enough impact to let people

face to face with all the involved parties. As all the parties had

look up immediately. The only way how we could get atten-

a very busy schedule this was difficult to achieve. For future

tion was when we had a big enough visualization on the

projects like this projects I would suggest to plan in at least

screen that almost all the screens would react on person.

on meeting with all the involved parties 2 weeks before the

The pitfalls with making the visualizations really big was that

deadline.

would be not so interesting to watch for the persons in the

Personal conclusion:

launch. We had to find a balance between making it understandable as interaction and nice to look at for visitors who

I am very satisfied and proud of the results of this projects.

were watching the interaction.

Looking back I don’t see a lot of what if we had done this dif-

We noticed that visitors who were watching for a while rec-

ferent but I see a process wherein everybody worked hard to

ognized that the visualizations on the panels where a reac-

achieve the goal. The only way how we could have achieved a

tion on the movement of people underneath it. I think that

better result would have been with more time and more guid-

because they saw the interaction they were more likely to

ance in the programming part.

participate in the interaction.

I think our interaction was too difficult and not always clear

Other reasons:

because of several reasons.

It was hard to measure if someone was just happened to be

The screens where hanging at the ceiling:

under screens or that this person was trying the interaction.

Because of this we already knew in the beginning that it

The interaction besides that it had different reactions on ges-

would be hard to get the attention because we had to let

tures it did not provide a clear game, this leaded to the ques-

people look up to see what they were generating. The reason

tion by a lot of people what the function of the screens was.

why the screens had to hang at 3 meters high was that they

Possible solutions

were too expensive and fragile.

To improve the visibility of screens at the ceiling it would have been nice to have something reflecting on the floor, in this

The screens hang to far from each other: In our preparation we wanted to light up a big enough space, we thought that the screens where big enough on them-

way you would notice earlier that you control the screens.

Exploration in Research material in the theme playful interactions In the end of the semester after the deadline there was

Tilde Bekker and our interaction is that our feedback was

some time left for me to dig a little deeper into the informa-

through movement in open space, and their feedback was

tion available around the subject playful interactions. Dur-

through movement of an object in your hands. I believe

ing the project there was little time for this as the pressure

people can understand an interaction based on pressing

was high and we had short deadlines to deliver working

a button but the fact that something can measure you

prototypes.

in open space is still quite new. The interaction therefor became quite magical, and interesting because it was not so

One of the main things I notice in the articles I have read,

direct as pressing buttons.

is that technology adds a non-linearity to our world. For example “ Thus players will adapt their game goals and rules

The fact that the interaction was not that clear directly also

and interaction with the object to the opportunities they

meant that people who were interested had to try move-

find in the environment”., (1) Compared to classical board

ments under the screen to see if they would react. In the

games this game they are talking about is created in the

paper Designing the Spectator Experience (2) they talk

moment, the game stimulates users to engage into a social

about the importance of the spectator which is a really im-

interaction to create their own rules. In our installation the

portant factor for analyzing what we have achieved. In our

rules were also not clear and people could explore the rules

observation we saw that the content created was beautiful

themselves. Because there was no physical input towards

to see for the bystanders. In a space to relax the dynamically

the screens I believe the interaction was hard to understand.

changing content raised questions, stimulated engagement,

The main point of difference between the interaction of

and created atmosphere. One thing said was that“ interac-

tion with computers is increasingly a public affair” , in my

possibilities means there are more roads towards one goal.

opinion our findings of how this installation affected the

Sir Ken Robinson in his videos from RSA animate talks about

public space can be of importance for other public spaces

how creative we start as children and the older we become

that have an interaction. We had in one level an interaction

the more we start to judge things on good or bad, possible

that always would happen but if you wanted more to hap-

or not possible. I believe that as a designer I have the op-

pen you would need to do a more extreme movement, even

portunity to bring new concepts in the world that engage

when this movement was shown not everybody would try

you into a diverse world where we can feel like a child again.

it. I believe this also has to do with how comfortable people

I have now learned to look into others work in literature as

would feel in an open space where spectators are watching

I can learn a lot from them how to perform qualitative re-

you. Our interaction was depended on a certain amount

search, and especially how to measure interaction as I think

of peoples, observers could understand the interaction by

this is difficult thing to do if you want to have qualitative and

watching someone interact unintended.

quantitative date at the same time.

These 2 papers where the most relevant for my conclusions

Bibliography

but from what I have read I want to point out the trend that

1. Stimulating physical and social play. Sturm, Tilde Bekker

I see.

and Janienke. Eindhoven : s.n.

All the papers talk about how technology is changing the

2. Designing the Spectator Experience. Stuart Reeves, Steve

world and how this effecting us an how we can measure

Benford, Claire O’Malley. Nottingham : s.n., 2005.

this. Because of technology there is more possible and more