Final Week
Assignment Dec 4th, 2013.
This assignment was a bit sad for my partner Eozin Che and I. After working tirelessly on our biofeedback suit, we realized that we needed to go back to the drawing board. At user testing, we were told that the suit lacked the magical quality that our midterm inflatable piece had. Users wanted to be surrounded by the inflated space, including their visual field. Also, the suit was not one size fits all as hoped and quite delicate.
The solution that we devised was to create an entirely external bio-sensing art piece. The effect is of a heart and LED lights change with the body temperature of a user wearing a heat and humidity sensor bracelet.
The biofeedback orb....
 |
| LEDs at Baseline |
 |
| bracelet with temperature and humidity sensor |
Week 10
Assignment November 20th, 2013.
Week 9
Assignment November 12th, 2013.
H Bridge Lab ...that destroyed my Arduino!!!! :(
Final PJ countdown!!!
Mood Shield
The
mood shield affords wearers a personal climate that is responsive to their
moods. A color-codified system of expression allows the wearer to communicate
their moods to the outside world and experience
the benefits of biofeedback!
Timeline
WEEK 1
Order materials
Build code structure
Week 2
Materials study/testing
Week 3
Code sensor and test
Week 4
Final testing
BOM
|
.JPG)
Week 7
Assignment Oct 9th, 2013.
This inflatable dome fits up to 4 in a comfortable climate with continual airflow. Inflation and deflation of it is controlled by a motion sensor!
Week 6
Assignment Oct 9th, 2013.
Week 5
Assignment Oct 9th, 2013.
Photosensor Prototype for Midterm...
Mobile for Swatting:
Week 4
Assignment Oct 2nd, 2013.
Serial Communication
Week 3
Assignment Sept. 25th, 2013
Interactive technology: 4TH ST. station Metro Card vending machines at the north east corner of 6TH AVE and 4TH ST.
Assumptions about how it's used: People use touch-screen technology to purchase cards and update their card balances in order to access the MTA.
The context in which it's being used: People use these machines in close proximity to the turn stalls, or entrances to the trains. Often (at least in my case) there is a time pressure to use the machines and make a train, as well as, not piss off everyone waiting behind you.
Observations: There are often line-ups to use these machines and throngs of people moving around them. During my observation, people used the machines to update their balances but also occasionally purchased a new one once they dug around for theirs only to realize it was not on their person. People use these machines in several ways. I will outline the 3 most common that I observed. There are the eagle-eyed pointer/trigger finger users that have done this a million times and know how to get what they want with maximum efficiency. These people although goal directed and savvy, can have trouble with the touch screen on occasion, and may have to press a button more than once (transaction time appx. 45sec-1.5 minutes). Then, there are the "Slow and Steady Wins the Race" users who are very deliberate, but behave with a certain reverence and patience for the machines . They tend to piss people off that are waiting behind them. Again, the touch screen is not always responsive to them, no matter how carefully they operate(transaction time appx. 1.5 sec-2.5 minutes). Finally I observed a few people that seemed bewildered by the choices offered to them as well as the machines themselves. these tended to be older adults and tourist types. They struggled with the wording not knowing what each option would provide them with in terms of actual use of the train system. And as usual, the touch screen was not always responsive(transaction time appx. 2-5 minutes). It should go without saying, these people are the most disruptive users and make good people late everywhere.
Thoughts in relation to this experience and "Design for Disability": I think it is important to try and balance simplicity, universality and accessibility in design. The Metro Card vending machines could stand to update their touch screens, but they are doing a "good enough" job for now. I believe that universal design is more of a challengeable and forever changing ideal. Use and users are pluralistic and amongst populations that have specific challenges, there exists vast amounts of diversity. The goal then, is to design things with the above mentioned balance in mind , but never try to design the ONLY thing. That is, (to use a ballet metaphor) users, like dancers, must try on a number of slippers before they find the one that works for them. Also, in the spirit of scientific discovery, there is no one answer to design problems and people should be open to new developments and challenges to old ways. As the world changes, so should design.
Week 2
Sept. 11th, 2013
CLASS
In this class, we were told to make a zoetrope using materials from our Arduino Starter kit. Unfortunately, My kit lacked the proper wooden parts, but we managed to get the motor running at variable speeds. Here's the video:
Readings Response
1)"The Design of Everyday Things"
Chapter 1
This reading assignment was a nice introduction to the concept of usability. The author outlines Visibility (the mapping between intended actions and and actual operations), Affordances (perceived and actual properties of a thing) and Mapping (establishing a relationship between things. eg. control and function). These ideas have changed the way I look at objects around me since reading about them. Previously, I had not considered the depth of attention given to the design of everyday objects.
One thing that struck me as odd was a lack of discussion about incredibly new but important objects. What if something new thats use is not yet intuitive, could be incredibly life changing and easy to use with some basic understanding? Was the doorknob intuitive? Was the concept of "Lefty Loosey, Righty Tighty" a product of bad design?
How much of the onus is on the designer and how much responsibility should users have? What is the result of having them completely unchallenged (unskilled)?
I DO like the idea that design can address the issue of rapidly developing technologies and updates. Perhaps having more intuitive design applied to broadly used technologies can reduce the digital divide between the tech literate elite and those facing access barriers. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE FORMER AND LATTER PARAGRAPHS SEEM IN OPPOSITION.
2) Emotion and Design
I quite liked this piece and would really like to apply the ideas outlined to my own work (one day). Not only am I interested in design to suit needs, but also to provide acknowledgement (through design) of cognitive states and abilities(be it by anxiety, stress or happiness). I would like for us to read into and discuss as a class, the notion of empathic design. Is it possible?
Labs
1)First Arduino Program!!
photos:
2)Analog In
photos:
Week 1
Sept. 4th, 2013
CLASS
In our first class, we were instructed to create a fantasy device considering the user's experience. My partner and I decided that a useful invention would be a bike light vest: something that would be easy to operate, easy to wear while riding, create high visibility and be powered by a bicycle's motion. We decided that the vest would have 4 main components: left/right signal switches on the handle bars, power generator on the cranks/back wheel, sensor on the break (to trigger breaking light) and of course the LED covered vest that displays light when in motion, turning and breaking/slowing down. We gave a lot of thought to use and decided that it would be best if the controller had a limited function, was intuitive and easily reached. We also agreed that the entire set up should be as wireless as possible.
Bike Light Vest Plan:
Below are photos of the Bike Light Vest Prototype:
READINGS RESPONSE
1.)"Art of Interactive Design"
Based on this reading and my own life experiences, I suggest the highest quality interactions (although quality varies, of course)allow both actors' input and output, are non-linear relative to the content of the interaction, and require empathy on the part of involved parties. The latter idea makes me question whether or not there can be true high quality interactions between humans and computers? I suppose human-human interaction is ideal, but if software and hardware is designed empathically, interaction can be of a higher quality.
I found the author's opinion of the interactivity of performance art lacking in subtle examination. Although I am not a performer myself, I feel the author underestimates the transformation of more than one person into an "audience entity" that performers engage with through laughter, gasp, applause, restless sound, etc., or lack thereof. What about group interaction? Does this exist? I am curious to hear what the class thinks.
Examples of digital work of varying degrees of interactivity:
LOW
Major news corporation feeds
MEDIUM
Twitter
Facebook
HIGH(er)
Skype -although restrictive in tactility/communication mode
2.)"A Brief Rant..."
Although the video presented at the onset of this article was beautiful, I also found it unsettling. Funny enough, I started worrying about apple and their influence on every aspect of our lives, repetitive stress on our hands and wrists as well as the loss of face to face interactions between people (for example, the man at the hotel and the woman arriving). What a relief to read the article that followed. I especially like the sentiment that the future is a choice. Here is hoping.
LAB
Tears of joy
