Tag Archive: physical


Last Wednesday most of our class had our mock exam. There we had to present our progress, stance and achievements in our project, both practical and theoretical. Making a presentation takes a lot of your time, so I spend most of it working towards my mock exam. In this post I will look at my results of the mock exam, but first I’m gonna look what I have done before it (I didn’t update my blog for two weeks I think). Below my chronological progress what I have done the past weeks.

Photo collages

I gathered all my research I did from the surveys and the photo documentation from the users television environment. I ‘documented’ the results in my sketchbook and in some folders in my laptop, but didn’t apply any decent structure in it. For the presentation (but also for myself), I’ve made a collage of pictures that explain the main conclusions of my field research. The goal of it was to apply this conclusions in my next step, building a testing environment and the object design.

resting positions remotes

resting positions remotes

Persona’s

During my progress I was figuring out how important persona’s are for my project. My target group could be everyone that uses the television (except of course far extremes like disabled people). In the end I thought it was better to make persona’s, just to understand the target group better. I based these persona’s on the people I visited during my field research. I’ve made one central one and two extremes (one technical user and one technophobe).

three persona's

three persona's

Testing room

A while ago I arranged a place to build my test room. During that time I gathered some second hand stuff for decoration, thought about how to do the video documentation and alternative set-ups for testing. With alternative set-ups I want to test how the setting has influence on the user experience, according to the embodied interaction theory. Thats why I want to use different seats, like a couch, fat-boy and crappy chair. I also did my first test, but I will come back to that later.

observation and testing room

observation and testing room

Research set-up

Before I wanted to test users and objects in the test room, I decided to put my observation goals on paper. That’s why I’ve set up an observation document. In this document I’ve thought about my goals, expected results and observation structure.

Sketches and low-fidelity prototypes

My goal was to start with very simple objects, only primary shapes and simple interactions with it. With each iteration I want to define the object(s) more in detail. I’ve started with sketching simple shapes. Secondary was the feedback within the object itself. I thought about simple feedback, like a weight that moves or the characteristics of an object (like softness, form, warm or cold). I bought some stuff from a toy store and DIY shop to make these objects. In the observation document I defined what the expected results would be of each object.
In the mock examination I got some comments on this process, which I will come back on later.

Low-fidelity prototypes

Low-fidelity prototypes

observation room first test

The next step was to test these objects with users and I started with fellow students. I did this through narration (an IDEO method card; a way of testing). This comes down to giving simple commands and let the user think out loud. My main goal was to find out if my set-up worked and some first comments on the objects itself. I was really happy how the testing went, so this is a good basis for future testing.

User testing low-fidelity prototypes

Supportive Narrative

Last but not least, I also worked hard to get a nice draft for the mock examination. I started with finding useful snippets from other papers and books to get a good basis. What also took a lot of time was the outline; structuring my paper relevant to my own project. Writing the first chapter in English was harder than I thought, but I think this will be manageable for the rest of my paper.

Mock exam and feedback

The mock presentation went well, but I went over the 10 minutes, so next time I have to shorten the presentation a lot. After a stressful period of waiting I got the result: a disappointing orange (you get red-orange-green as an indicator). In short, the comments where that I was on the right trajectory, but I have to adapt my end goal a bit and focus more on the object design. Although I wasn’t really happy with the result, they teachers told me I don’t have to worry to much because it are relatively small adjustments.

At the moment my process is mainly research: I want do define my object more in detail through each iteration. It’s a research driven progress. The comments where I have to be more of a designer, so I have to go deeper in the object design. That means defining the form, feeling and interaction more in detail before each iteration. Some examples are choice of materials, form and function. What is central is the interaction with the object itself, so the ‘feeling’ and expectations is most important for the device. I have to build a clear continuum of forms, material selection and feedback. I have to focus on tangibility of designed objects and tested experiences.

With this I have to go to workshops to get some inspiration or guidance. I have to improve my artistic standard, so I have to go more crazy with ideas. I have to apply the same form of research (and use of results) I did for my field research.

My original planning was to work towards a functioning prototype. I could get some help from Aduen, who is an expert on physical computing. The comments where that instead of working to a functioning prototype, I have to make a proof of concept video. This is because of the limited time, and I could focus more on applying the research and concept ideas.

So the first thing I have to do is adjust my end goal (through my planning) and beginning with detailed sketching of the remote object. I can get some help from people in my environment, who are more specialized on this area than me.

Work work!

Feedback from Irene

Last week Irene van Peer gave the assignment to look at what I have, and figure out which medium I can focus on. I did gave a lot of feedback on my blog on the material I had, but I didn’t have an ‘eureka’ moment. I also made a list of subjects I could apply my theories in, but didn’t make a final choice yet.

This week I had a very useful meeting with Irene. She gave me some additional feedback on my process and tried to push me in the right direction. We went through the materials I gathered, and it became more clear to me indeed.

The conclusion was that I’m interested in making control over a system more physical, intuitive and natural by using haptic and gestural interaction. I decided that the system where I can apply this in would be the control over a multimedia system. I want to use the remote as a starting point, because it is a good example of a bad controller. It has been tried may times to improve this device, but old fashioned remotes are still common and the same problems subsist. I think this point of view will be ideal to experiment with. If I really can improve the remote on a practical level is still the question, but the goal is to broaden myself in gestural interaction with objects. I want to see what is possible and applicable in this area.

I will start with observing the environment, and look how I (and hopefully other people too) handle everyday things. Which actions are we used to? I also want to look at extremes. For example, situations that are not common; what people do when there is no better alternative available. I want to compare this with complex everyday systems, like computers and phones, that use Graphical User Interfaces (GUI).

I’ve read a lot about different user interfaces that define physical interfaces. Examples are Natural User Interfaces (NUI), Tangible User Interfaces (TUI) and a less common one, Sensor Network User Interface (SNUI) used in the siftables. These definitions have a lot in common, but are all interesting to look at. However, I have to make a selection in materials, so I won’t go to broad. I also have to apply this in the literature I’ve got. I also have to look back at the theory of embodied cognition (what was my starting point) and select which subjects are useful for this project.

Also, Irene had some personal feedback, which is good to keep in mind.

  • I have try not to have an early judgment. This is because sometimes I see the negative of something before analyzing it thoroughly.
  • I have to walk around with antenna’s during this period. Observe, write down, evaluate.
  • visit locations and observe people, instead of desktop research.
  • Keep the 5 main senses in mind. The user experience overall. What do people feel / associate with actions?

For a start, I will define my research questions for the coming time.

  • How can the functions in this system be easily represented through real life interactions?
  • How are multimedia systems used by common people at the moment?
  • How can be this interface be more natural, graspable and real?
  • How do we make decisions through tangible feedback?
  • Remote control of multimedia system; television stations, sound and movies. how can you control this easily, intuitive?
  • I want to look at everyday household devices;
  • What are we used to in the real world?
  • Look at recognizable needs in this area;
  • What could be an addition to the usual visual feedback, to relieve visual overload?

I have to refer my findings continually to the control of a multimedia device.

My next step in the process will be to write down keywords that define my area.  After that gather some additional information. I have to analyze the data thoroughly.

Some additional literature would be:

Dan Saffer - Gestural Interfaces
Dan Saffer - Silent Language Edward T.Hall - The Silent Language
Bill Gaver

What drives me?

Last Tuesday our class had the first meeting with our tutor. Irene van Peer is now going to guide me to the end of my project. We all had to do a small presentation what our status was of each project. It was very interesting to see what everyone is doing. Unfortunately I was the last person who had to do the presentation and I had to rush a bit because we were out of time.

The main comment was that I have to figure out what area interests me the most. Embodied interaction within the living environment is a broad subject, of course. The goal I had set for myself was that I want to look at the possibilities of the embodied interaction and to pick a specific subject through prototyping and research. The plan was to do this the next few weeks. The problem with this is that I can get lost in the process, and don’t come up with a clear subject in the end. It is better to define myself as soon as possible.

During my presentation I gave some examples of projects that use physical interaction as input. With every video, I had some (mostly negative) comments about the interaction. Irene gave me the task to look at every video, and figure out which underlying subject drives me. So here it goes.

Canesta TV Gesture User Interface Demo


the video in short:
A television remote is an annoying necessarily to control your television, the video explains. Especially the on-screen interface is badly designed. Control through gestures is more intuitive. Simple movements with your hands makes you happy, jay! You can even use it while cooking! No need to put your dirty hands on the remote to change the channel.

My comments
Is moving your hands really better in this situation? Do you want to wave, swipe, push your hand when you are sitting on your lazy couch after you come home from work? It are simple physical movements for sure, but doesn’t it become tiring after an extensive period of time? I think buttons on a remote are better then doing physical movements, because it’s more responsive. Even if the remote is unintuitive. The problem lays in the design of the remote, not the interaction. Reminds me of an example of Nicolas Zurcher, whereby he looked at the buttons of the remote we really use:

Nicolas Zurcher's remotes

Which parts of the remote do we actually use?

And how do you go through a large quantity of television stations with only gestures? How do you control other functions, like volume, source selection, the television guide and use of other complex things? How to achieve this without learning complex gestures or using another type of input?

Gestures are not the best way to interact with the system in this situation, I believe.

Embodied Playlist Access


The video in short
The concept is about using personal objects to control your music. Every object stands for a different type of music playlist. The point is to get access through different selections of data by moving personal objects.

My comments:
What interests me is quite simple; by using physical objects you get access to personalized data. It avoids fiddling with computers (i.e. keyboard and mice). It makes selecting you music preference personal and physical. The technical barrier (where tech savvy people are so used to) is gone. The question remains if personal objects are a good representation to get access to different types of music. I see some possibilities in other forms of data, however.

MusicShapes


The video
from the youtube description: “The objective of this project was to produce a concept and a prototype of a physical computing system that would leverage the principles of embodied interaction. We developed a system that combined a webcam and a series of geometric shapes, which would play a sound or music clip depending on which of the faces is facing up. The sounds played by an object were influenced by the surrounding objects and their positions.”

My comments
Not only the movements of the shapes are input, but also the distance between objects matter. The objects can ‘communicate’ with each other, manipulating the output by moving them. It is an very early prototype, but imagine the possibilities implementing this in everyday objects.

Scratch Mat

An very simple example in real life. What makes it awesome that it changes behavior. How many times do you wipe your feet when you enter a building? This mat makes wiping your feet a playful interaction. The output of the system is very simple, but still is effective in this situation.

Siftables

Irene gave this project as a suggestion to look at. Siftables are small interactive computers with a display, wireless communication and motion sensing. What is relevant for my project is that it uses real life gestures as input. For example, pouring paint from one siftable to another, and thus changing it’s color. I would murder someone to get some of these.

I will put my conclusions in the next post.

About

I am Nikki Veldhuis, born on the 9th of march 1986. I have grown up in the little village of Grevenbicht, which is located in the most southern part of the Netherlands (near to Maastricht). Since my early youth I am interested in electronic devices, I always wanted to know how things work and how it’s made. My parents mostly found me behind the old Commodore 64, playing games or poking my fingers in the video recorder. My interest for computers and devices always stayed with me.

After graduating from my high school at Trevianum Sittard, I chose to study Multimedia Design at the Graphic Lyceum of Eindhoven (“de Eindhovense School” in Dutch). In this period I learned to gain a professional work ethic and specialized myself in all aspects of design. After successfully finishing this education in three years, I went to the Utrecht School of Arts, to participate at the study Interaction Design. Developing systems which are user centered is the most important aspect in design, but I think this part is way to much undervalued in today’s design process. My personal interest goes to developing physical interactive applications. This area has always fascinated me and I’m hoping to find a good job in this direction.

In my spare time I keep in touch of the latest gadgets and technical innovations. Next to that I play some games, I like to travel and love to be in the open air. Of course I also enjoy a beer and a good conversion in the pub once in a while.

Why this blog?

This blog started as a way to keep track of my experiences in Sweden. To goal was to document my process and that I could use it as a reference point in the future. Of course, I also started this blog to keep my friends and family up to date how I was doing in Sweden.

After my time in Sweden, the graduation year at the HKU began. The final stage of the study is an individual graduation project. With this blog I document my process of this project. My goal in the project is to specialize myself in embodied interaction, whereby I want to apply natural and gestural interaction within the television experience. In this blog you can find my thoughts, inspiration and milestones during the process.

Powered by WordPress. Theme: Motion by 85ideas. Adapted by N1kname.