We just had a visiting speaker by the name of Luciana Haill who showed us ways of measuring brainwaves using a special device which you attached to the forehead to pick up EEG waves. The software used with this device was able to produce visualisations and sounds from the data. Your brain is controlling the images and mix of sounds so the experience is very unlike those of conscious “forced” interaction loops where you need to perform an action in order to get a response or view a change.
Here’s a video of the software and hardware in action:
The fascination with this technology goes beyond just making beautiful sounds and patterns to perhaps being a step towards gaining a deeper understanding of the human brain. She has a myspace if anyone is interested - www.myspace.com/lucianabrain.
In the previous module, I looked into brain-computer interfaces and I posted a few YouTube videos I had found on the subject. Scroll down and take a look at people playing pong using the power of their minds!
Thursday, 13 December 2007
Tuesday, 11 December 2007
Magic Eye
After looking at the Magic Eye Tetris game linked to from Sita’s blog (www.lutanho.net/play/magiceyetetris.html) I’ve been looking into Magic Eye images and thinking about creating some sort of interface using the Magic Eye images.
As mentioned in an earlier post on this project I am interested in creating a “wrong” interface which interesting and makes us think about how much we take intuitive interfaces for granted. I’ve also, as you can see in previous posts, been looking into optical illusions and Op art and researching into how and why we see and perceive things the way we do.
I have found a site which lets you create your own magic eye images too, try it for yourself here:
www.flash-gear.com/stereo
Here’s one I made earlier:
What is it?!...Answers on a postcard please (or in a comment).
As mentioned in an earlier post on this project I am interested in creating a “wrong” interface which interesting and makes us think about how much we take intuitive interfaces for granted. I’ve also, as you can see in previous posts, been looking into optical illusions and Op art and researching into how and why we see and perceive things the way we do.
I have found a site which lets you create your own magic eye images too, try it for yourself here:
www.flash-gear.com/stereo
Here’s one I made earlier:
What is it?!...Answers on a postcard please (or in a comment).
Monday, 10 December 2007
Repetitive Art
Here are some artists who use optical illusion and repetition themes in their work:
Jim Lambie
Jim Lambie Installation view, Mental Oyster, Anton Kern Gallery New York, 2004
Mark Titchner
Mark Titchner Turner Prize installation, 2006
Photo from Turner Prize 2006 exhibition at Tate Britain. Photo: Sam Drake and Mark Heathcote
Bridget Riley
Jim Lambie
Jim Lambie Installation view, Mental Oyster, Anton Kern Gallery New York, 2004
Mark Titchner
Mark Titchner Turner Prize installation, 2006
Photo from Turner Prize 2006 exhibition at Tate Britain. Photo: Sam Drake and Mark Heathcote
Bridget Riley
Repetition
After looking at optical illusions and Op Art which uses repetition to confuse the brain, I’ve been discussing with a few people reasons why we repeat things. Here is a list of reasons I’ve gathered together (if you think of anything else please comment on this post):
- To learn/practice
- To distract
- To remember
- Religiously
- Routinely
- To affirm
- A stutter/ by accident
- Humour (custard pie, catchphrases)
- Because of mental-health problems – echophilia, autism
There is safety in repeating things. This is often used in web-design where templates for pages are often the same throughout the site.
If you repeat something too much does it lose its original meaning and become something different?
When people don’t get a reaction from something the first time they tend to became frustrated and repeat the question, or command, or physical action until they do get a reaction. This often happens with computers and is described in “The Design of Everyday Things” by Donald Norman.
Response to Essay by Francis Halsall –Observing Systems – Art from a Systems- Theoretical Perspective
One of the points we spoke about when we discussed this essay this morning, was how systems theories overlap each other and how we could all define ourselves, within this course, as systems artists.
An example which was given was that of the “system of a street corner” overlapping with the “system of a gallery” to create something else. This overlapping is evident in the art of Banksy bringing art outside from the galleries and therefore combining two systems.
We also discussed the work of Simon Morse. His work is concerned with systems as a way of viewing the world and showing how they encapsulate our view of things. He has also compared systems, such as the system of a gallery to the system of a company. Comparing systems may give us a better, clearer view of the world and a way to make sense of things around us.
A piece of his work, which sprung to my mind when he was mentioned during the discussion, was his custard pie fight piece “We Do What We Do Best Best “, created in 2005. To create this piece he observed systems of interaction within an office, which he had worked at, and also considered social systems of interaction to create his impression of a mass custard pie. This fight took place within an enclosed environment which would otherwise be a calm and ordered system.
He mentioned, when he came to speak to us, that he took inspiration for this piece from a Laurel and Hardy film called “Battle of the Century”, in which a mass custard pie fight takes place when one person accidentally hits another with a custard pie which acts as a catalyst causing a chain reaction which culminates in chaos.
On this course it is very important to study different systems to help us to create interesting and intelligent work and acknowledge the wider world around us.
A quote in the essay we were discussing was by Jack Burnham describing systems-aesthetic as:
‘An attempt to bring together artistic, technological and social conditions under the rubric of systems and a concern in them shared by a variety of groups including artists, scientists and social theorists.’
This describes the sharing and overlapping of information, which is what I am doing at the moment with my project. I’m looking at various other systems and thinking about ways to combine them within this design for interactivity brief. Some of the systems I have been observing for this brief include scientific and philosophical systems.
We also discussed the focus on the process and idea being more important within Systems Art. This was as opposed to Renaissance art, where the final creation itself was of utmost importance. This important point about systems art is mentioned in a quote at the start of the brief for this unit:
'…Design boundaries can be thought of as very elaborate systems of control'.
'The users of new media are becoming the content of the form'.
(P. Marshall, 2004, New Media Cultures, Arnold Press: London Pp.18)
The other quote, shown above, mentions how systems can be used to control the individual with a set of rules. Control is an important point involved with interactivity. How much control does the user want or need? Do people enjoy adhering to rules? Evidence that they do is clear from the popularity of video games, which can only be played by conforming to these rules...
An example which was given was that of the “system of a street corner” overlapping with the “system of a gallery” to create something else. This overlapping is evident in the art of Banksy bringing art outside from the galleries and therefore combining two systems.
We also discussed the work of Simon Morse. His work is concerned with systems as a way of viewing the world and showing how they encapsulate our view of things. He has also compared systems, such as the system of a gallery to the system of a company. Comparing systems may give us a better, clearer view of the world and a way to make sense of things around us.
A piece of his work, which sprung to my mind when he was mentioned during the discussion, was his custard pie fight piece “We Do What We Do Best Best “, created in 2005. To create this piece he observed systems of interaction within an office, which he had worked at, and also considered social systems of interaction to create his impression of a mass custard pie. This fight took place within an enclosed environment which would otherwise be a calm and ordered system.
He mentioned, when he came to speak to us, that he took inspiration for this piece from a Laurel and Hardy film called “Battle of the Century”, in which a mass custard pie fight takes place when one person accidentally hits another with a custard pie which acts as a catalyst causing a chain reaction which culminates in chaos.
On this course it is very important to study different systems to help us to create interesting and intelligent work and acknowledge the wider world around us.
A quote in the essay we were discussing was by Jack Burnham describing systems-aesthetic as:
‘An attempt to bring together artistic, technological and social conditions under the rubric of systems and a concern in them shared by a variety of groups including artists, scientists and social theorists.’
This describes the sharing and overlapping of information, which is what I am doing at the moment with my project. I’m looking at various other systems and thinking about ways to combine them within this design for interactivity brief. Some of the systems I have been observing for this brief include scientific and philosophical systems.
We also discussed the focus on the process and idea being more important within Systems Art. This was as opposed to Renaissance art, where the final creation itself was of utmost importance. This important point about systems art is mentioned in a quote at the start of the brief for this unit:
'…Design boundaries can be thought of as very elaborate systems of control'.
'The users of new media are becoming the content of the form'.
(P. Marshall, 2004, New Media Cultures, Arnold Press: London Pp.18)
The other quote, shown above, mentions how systems can be used to control the individual with a set of rules. Control is an important point involved with interactivity. How much control does the user want or need? Do people enjoy adhering to rules? Evidence that they do is clear from the popularity of video games, which can only be played by conforming to these rules...
Sunday, 2 December 2007
The Illusion of Interactivity
I thought I would post some of the ideas I’m currently looking into and try to get some reactions to them to help me to decide in which direction I should progress with my research.
The first idea I had was to investigate Brain Training games (such as the ones created for the Nintendo DS) which are said to “help” people with Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, and concentration problems and reduce your “Brain Age”. However I have found a lot of articles which condemn this new form of gaming and dismiss any health benefits.
I’ve also looked into robotics and physical computing, following on from the lecture given by Mike Blow last Monday. I love the idea and look of this interactive robot called Petit Mal made by an artist called Simon Penny. Take a look at the video below to see the interesting way it reacts with the audience:
Another area I’m interested in is optical illusions, and the way in which we perceive, create and interact with what we see. Sarah Strickett suggested I look into semiotics and especially try to get hold of a book by John Berger called “Ways of Seeing” which I haven’t yet been able to get hold of as it’s out at every library I’ve tried. Obviously a very popular book!
I’ve been reading the book “Eye and Brain- The Psychology of Seeing” by Richard L. Gregory, which helped me with our last project. It has a chapter on illusions in which I am finding interesting. Another book I’ve managed to get is “Vision and Art-The Biology of Seeing” by Margaret Livingstone which is similar to “Eye and Brain” but may offer a different perspective.
The Stroop effect, is an interesting phenomenon when a word such as blue, green, red, etc. is printed in a colour differing from the colour expressed by the word's meaning (e.g. the word "red" printed in blue ink), a delay occurs in the processing of the word's colour, leading to slower test reaction times and an increase in mistakes. Try to say the below words as fast as you can and you will see what I mean:
Simon Morse’s (the artist and quiz- master who came to speak to my class a few months ago) interfaces have also inspired me to consider a “wrong” interface. If something we do not expect to happen happens when we press a button it may create a similar confusion in the brain to the one we experience from the Stroop effect. This could show us how much we take intuitive interfaces for granted. Here is one of Simon Morse’s interfaces:
Sarah Strickett also suggested perhaps playing with the idea that something completely unique, created for that individual could happen when a button is pressed on an interface.
Obviously, before you begin to bend the rules you need to know them, so I’ve got hold of a copy of “The design of Every Day things” by Donald A. Norman and found a few papers on guidelines for interface design.
That’s a flavour of my current research. Please feel free to comment and let me know what you think. It’s always great to hear ideas and opinions so don’t be shy!
The first idea I had was to investigate Brain Training games (such as the ones created for the Nintendo DS) which are said to “help” people with Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, and concentration problems and reduce your “Brain Age”. However I have found a lot of articles which condemn this new form of gaming and dismiss any health benefits.
I’ve also looked into robotics and physical computing, following on from the lecture given by Mike Blow last Monday. I love the idea and look of this interactive robot called Petit Mal made by an artist called Simon Penny. Take a look at the video below to see the interesting way it reacts with the audience:
Another area I’m interested in is optical illusions, and the way in which we perceive, create and interact with what we see. Sarah Strickett suggested I look into semiotics and especially try to get hold of a book by John Berger called “Ways of Seeing” which I haven’t yet been able to get hold of as it’s out at every library I’ve tried. Obviously a very popular book!
I’ve been reading the book “Eye and Brain- The Psychology of Seeing” by Richard L. Gregory, which helped me with our last project. It has a chapter on illusions in which I am finding interesting. Another book I’ve managed to get is “Vision and Art-The Biology of Seeing” by Margaret Livingstone which is similar to “Eye and Brain” but may offer a different perspective.
The Stroop effect, is an interesting phenomenon when a word such as blue, green, red, etc. is printed in a colour differing from the colour expressed by the word's meaning (e.g. the word "red" printed in blue ink), a delay occurs in the processing of the word's colour, leading to slower test reaction times and an increase in mistakes. Try to say the below words as fast as you can and you will see what I mean:
Simon Morse’s (the artist and quiz- master who came to speak to my class a few months ago) interfaces have also inspired me to consider a “wrong” interface. If something we do not expect to happen happens when we press a button it may create a similar confusion in the brain to the one we experience from the Stroop effect. This could show us how much we take intuitive interfaces for granted. Here is one of Simon Morse’s interfaces:
Sarah Strickett also suggested perhaps playing with the idea that something completely unique, created for that individual could happen when a button is pressed on an interface.
Obviously, before you begin to bend the rules you need to know them, so I’ve got hold of a copy of “The design of Every Day things” by Donald A. Norman and found a few papers on guidelines for interface design.
That’s a flavour of my current research. Please feel free to comment and let me know what you think. It’s always great to hear ideas and opinions so don’t be shy!
Idea-Generating Exercises
These are my answers to the “Idea-Generating Exercises” from Chapter 1- “Interactive Storytelling: A Brief History” by Carolyn Handler Miller
What traditional ritual have you participated in, or are aware of, that reminds you in some way of an interactive narrative? What is it about this ritual that you think is like a computerised interactive experience?
I’ve attended the Summer Solstice at Stonehenge where every year a number of Druids
gather to perform ancient rituals. These rituals are rules based and involve the wearing of ceremonial robes and costumes. People often join in with the parades and dance to the drum beats. Everyone is playing a part and feel as though they are sharing an experience together similar to Massively Multiplayer Online Games. Many religious rituals and ceremonies could be compared to this type of interactive experience.
What game or sport have you played that you think could be adapted to a work of interactive entertainment? What would remain the same and what would have to be changed, and in what way?
The human joystick example in my previous blog below shows how the game of tennis has been adapted into an interactive entertainment with the whole crowd participating. In this example the rules have been simplified from the original game and the images shown on the screen are easy and quick to interpret. This allows people to learn the rules quickly with little work being done by the player. A lot of games and sports have been adapted into computer games including chess, football, cricket, golf etc.
The Wii console allows users to feel even more as though they are actually playing these games, with players being required to make real physical movements, which are detected using a special remote. It makes me wonder why people don’t want to go out and actually play these sports in “real life”. It may perhaps be the convenience of having many sports within easy reach available to be played at any time with no need to buy special equipment, travel or find someone to play these sports/games with.
What work of traditional storytelling (a novel, a play, a movie, or even a comic book) have you read or seen that contains a narrative technique that could be applied to a work of digital entertainment? What is this technique, and how could it be used?
The films Irreversible and Memento are both shown in reverse order with clues leading to a twist being revealed at the end which is actually the “beginning”. This technique could be used in a computer game. Playing the game in reverse and gaining more clues to the answer revealed at the end which would actually be the “beginning”.
Can you think of any work of traditional entertainment (poem, short story, novel, play, movie, TV show, etc.) that breaks the “fourth wall”? Describe how the fourth wall is broken in this work. Could the fourth wall be broken in a similar way in an interactive work? Why or why not?
In the film “Ferris Beulers Day Off”, Ferris, the main character, often addresses the audience directly informing them of extra background information on characters in the film, giving us greater insight into the story.
This way of breaking the fourth wall is already very common in computer games due to the fact that the players play an active role within the games.
What traditional ritual have you participated in, or are aware of, that reminds you in some way of an interactive narrative? What is it about this ritual that you think is like a computerised interactive experience?
I’ve attended the Summer Solstice at Stonehenge where every year a number of Druids
gather to perform ancient rituals. These rituals are rules based and involve the wearing of ceremonial robes and costumes. People often join in with the parades and dance to the drum beats. Everyone is playing a part and feel as though they are sharing an experience together similar to Massively Multiplayer Online Games. Many religious rituals and ceremonies could be compared to this type of interactive experience.
What game or sport have you played that you think could be adapted to a work of interactive entertainment? What would remain the same and what would have to be changed, and in what way?
The human joystick example in my previous blog below shows how the game of tennis has been adapted into an interactive entertainment with the whole crowd participating. In this example the rules have been simplified from the original game and the images shown on the screen are easy and quick to interpret. This allows people to learn the rules quickly with little work being done by the player. A lot of games and sports have been adapted into computer games including chess, football, cricket, golf etc.
The Wii console allows users to feel even more as though they are actually playing these games, with players being required to make real physical movements, which are detected using a special remote. It makes me wonder why people don’t want to go out and actually play these sports in “real life”. It may perhaps be the convenience of having many sports within easy reach available to be played at any time with no need to buy special equipment, travel or find someone to play these sports/games with.
What work of traditional storytelling (a novel, a play, a movie, or even a comic book) have you read or seen that contains a narrative technique that could be applied to a work of digital entertainment? What is this technique, and how could it be used?
The films Irreversible and Memento are both shown in reverse order with clues leading to a twist being revealed at the end which is actually the “beginning”. This technique could be used in a computer game. Playing the game in reverse and gaining more clues to the answer revealed at the end which would actually be the “beginning”.
Can you think of any work of traditional entertainment (poem, short story, novel, play, movie, TV show, etc.) that breaks the “fourth wall”? Describe how the fourth wall is broken in this work. Could the fourth wall be broken in a similar way in an interactive work? Why or why not?
In the film “Ferris Beulers Day Off”, Ferris, the main character, often addresses the audience directly informing them of extra background information on characters in the film, giving us greater insight into the story.
This way of breaking the fourth wall is already very common in computer games due to the fact that the players play an active role within the games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
