Evaluation of Ayo, Wanfang, Liang's Whisker Buddy
According to the creators, this is to be one of a series of small creatures that can interact with each other, perhaps for educational purposes. The first iteration of the creature was made from paper, had springs for legs and appeared light, playful and full of energy; even when it wasn't moving.
The second iteration was made out of orange acrylic and included lights and electronics. Its construction was high quality and the team's documentation was clean. However, by changing materials and form, the object lost its playfulness and lightness. Even though the material was transparent and physically light, it appeared heavy and static.
Adding electronics added to the object's new heaviness and complexity. Part of the first iteration's lightness could be attributed to its simple design. Maybe it doesn't need electronics at all. Maybe a requirement for electronics for this piece (light or sound) is that it doesn't detract from it's original simplicity.
Evaluation of My Whisker
This latest iteration added audio feedback by mapping audio frequency to what the whiskers were sensing. It also moved the whiskers off the base and let them float in the air, suspended by wires.
The new mounting system was meant to add lightness to the object. We realized, however, that one of the fundamental features of the earlier version was the whisker's ability to resonate and the user's ability to "play" the whisker.
The object still lacks a clear narrative (is it an instrument? is it a security device, etc.). By combining the new audio feedback with the previous 'playability' and tactile feedback, the whisker device could come closer to an instrument, or something that could be 'played'.
The technology from the first iteration didn't change much and continues to serve the purpose of tangible interaction and electronic feedback. I don't think that will change in future iteration.
According to the creators, this is to be one of a series of small creatures that can interact with each other, perhaps for educational purposes. The first iteration of the creature was made from paper, had springs for legs and appeared light, playful and full of energy; even when it wasn't moving.
The second iteration was made out of orange acrylic and included lights and electronics. Its construction was high quality and the team's documentation was clean. However, by changing materials and form, the object lost its playfulness and lightness. Even though the material was transparent and physically light, it appeared heavy and static.
Adding electronics added to the object's new heaviness and complexity. Part of the first iteration's lightness could be attributed to its simple design. Maybe it doesn't need electronics at all. Maybe a requirement for electronics for this piece (light or sound) is that it doesn't detract from it's original simplicity.
Evaluation of My Whisker
This latest iteration added audio feedback by mapping audio frequency to what the whiskers were sensing. It also moved the whiskers off the base and let them float in the air, suspended by wires.
The new mounting system was meant to add lightness to the object. We realized, however, that one of the fundamental features of the earlier version was the whisker's ability to resonate and the user's ability to "play" the whisker.
The object still lacks a clear narrative (is it an instrument? is it a security device, etc.). By combining the new audio feedback with the previous 'playability' and tactile feedback, the whisker device could come closer to an instrument, or something that could be 'played'.
The technology from the first iteration didn't change much and continues to serve the purpose of tangible interaction and electronic feedback. I don't think that will change in future iteration.
No comments:
Post a Comment