Week 6 - Interfacing with Design

Once again, this week'e lecture will be discussed, before moving on to the final look at the first group project for this design unit.

Lecture 6

The lecture started off by talking about the second group design project. But I will not make any comments about this just yet. I'll leave this week to finishing off the first group project.

The rest of the lecture was all about Human-Computer interface.

No matter how good a system may potentially be, it might become worthless without a good human interface. So it's vital to consider the needs of the end user, even the needs that the end user may not be able to articulate. Many disciplines from Philosophy and Cognitive Psychology, to Design and Engineering, are all brought to bare to help devise the best kind of Human-Computer Interface.

The goals of this kind of research are to improve: Safety, Utility, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Usability, and Simplicity.

We also looked at the hype cycle, which I think everyone already knows (unless they live extremely sheltered lives).

It is also worth repeating Jakob Nielsens 5 'Quality Components':

• Learnability (for beginners)
• Efficiency (for experts)
• Memorability (for casual users)
• Errors (for everyone)
• Subjective Satisfaction (for everyone)

I think that the bottom line is that in these times, software/apps (or any piece of tech really) will live or die largely based on their interface. Even if doesn't have a rival, if another eventually comes along with a more sophisticated and well designed interface, the less 'friendly' model will gradually pay the price.

References from the lecture that I looked up:

• Marshall McLuhan - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan) A philosopher of communication theory. I agree that new media can have great implications in cognitive thought. For example, games could be seen as time wasters that prevent better cultural development. Yet I feel that as gameplay becomes more incorporated in society, it itself becomes a culture worthy of developing. However, I don't agree with entirely with his Global Village view. I don't see it as moving away from individuality towards a collective, but rather as using collective resources to enhance individuality.
• Jakob Nielsen - (http://www.nngroup.com/people/jakob-nielsen/) The guru of Web usability. I also looked at his note on the top ten mistakes in web design. I note to myself that this is someone that is pertinent to remember, and do searches on in the future.

Group Project - Flow (Week 4 of 4)

Image from http://origamiancy.com/2010/09/paper-lanterns/ . I put this picture here, since on presentation day, I realised that our group design was not unlike a paper lantern (although with a different designed purpose).

This week, all the groups presented their final designs to their class, using Prezi (http://prezi.com) to help deliver the visual component. I'll start with our design before moving onto giving my thoughts about the other groups designs.

Our Design -Lava

Our group went last on presentation day. I ended up feeling quite nervous. I think I would have rather of went first. Maybe next time the tutors can do presentations in reverse order :P

I felt the team member in charge of putting everything together in Prezi did a good job. I liked how with each iteration of the design, a smaller deeper picture was zoomed in. Likewise, for the map of the site, a photo of the location was zoomed into on the spot on the map. Prezi does allow for visual flow.

Our presentation was last, and there was not much time left before class end, so feedback was limited. The main comment was about the durability of the design. The designs of other groups were generally large and robust. As the criteria of this project stated it as needing to be temporary, this design made no attempt at permanency. I told the tutors that it was effectively a form of paper lantern, and not meant to be stronger than that. It was not until that very moment that I fully consciously made that connection (even though it was always in the back of my mind). What had been discussed in the week 5 lecture came to mind. This was an invention, which combined new ideas with an existing design (in this case, a paper lantern). But I only saw that fully on reflection, and not while in the midst of the development. Seeing that aspect of it clearly now, would only improve any further development (and deployment) of this design. The tutors said that our design had the best reasons for its surrounding environment. However, that was partly because we had to think about that, given our designs inherent fragility.

All in all, I still considered our group design to be the best representation of 'Flow'. Ours was simple and elegant, and conjured the concept of flow in a highly discernible way. Yet other groups in our tutorial had great presentations, and some showed considerable ingenuity in realising what they put forward.

Other Group Designs
I'll discuss the groups in the same order as I did in week 5, although this does not match the order they were presented in on the day. My original initial comments from last time will be in red italics.

• Group 24. Flow of Time. Represented by a cube, with each of four walls having nine rotatable cubes representing the seasons (via changing/evolving pictures). Clear design, meets criteria, only needs refinement. This was a large person height construct. This design really didn't change. They refined it's construction as expected, stating its materials. Visual aids in Prezi complimented the presentation, yet the concept was clear even without it.

  

  Graphical representation by group 24.

• Group A. Flow in Perception. Represented by a series of arches with points of intersection that gradually shift as you walk along a path. Kind of like a distortion effect of a Fun House. Good idea, still a little vague in execution. This group belonged to another tutorial.
• Group 25 - Flow of Time. Represented by an hour glass. Idea defined, but execution needs to change due to using glass, which is not a material that can be used in this project. This was a large person height wooden hourglass. Given that they couldn't use glass, I thought this was a bad design that should be discarded. Yet the group persisted with it. As a display of Flow, I thought it remained a bad idea. The glowing algae used as a light source would only really be visible as a static pool. Also the design still had the problem of water loss when turning the hourglass over, since there was nothing between the two receptacles. However, this group showed plenty of inventiveness in making this design seem actually feasible. The ingenuity applied to its structure, the deep thought given to its materials, and the quality of the presentation, all made this a thought provoking design. If a patron just had to have a certain design that seems unworkable, then this is the team to put on the job. They deserved to be graded well.

  

  Just my own graphical representation of the wooden Hour Glass concept.

• Group 26 - Flow of Time/Space. Represented by circular maze with images of a tree going from sapling to maturity and back again as you go along path. A sundial is in the centre. Sound idea, vague on construction. A wormhole was their inspiration. This was presented as a simple circular maze at least 4 metres in diameter. The flow of time was partially presented by having a modern compass at the start, then a sundial (already existing in the botanical gardens), and then an ancient icelandic spar. I didn't think this was effective, as not many people would know much about icelandic spar and it's relation to time. The connection between the objects is perhaps too loose. The idea of a growing sapling was replaced by bamboo that increased in height going into the maze, and decreased going out. This does create a flowing design to the maze. The 3D animation that they created of the maze was very well done. This would be an impressive and interesting structure. As the tutors pointed out, other embellishments could be made to improve it's concept of flowing time. I could easily see it as a permanent garden feature rather than temporary.
• Group 29 - MY GROUP. Abstract Physical Flow. Already discussed above.
• Group 27 - Fibonacci Flow. Lots of ideas and potential, but no real design yet. This was presented as a large clay shell, light shining out from within. This group focused on both fibonacci design (shell structure), and flow of thought (contemplation). Unfortunately, the design came across as being more of a shelter than a design on flow. Also, I thought that they would have been better served focusing on the fibonacci element. As it was, the design seemed a bit lost in it's focus on 'tranquility'. Yet given that they had no real design beforehand, and that their concept was a very abstract idea to start with, the presentation was still interesting, if not convincing.
• Group 28. Abstract Physical Flow. Represented by the 'effect' that flowing water has on other objects. Kind of like the 'reminisce' of flow. Not yet set on a method of execution. This design was realised by a waist height, probably 1.5 metre diameter round maze in a bowl like structure. Titling the bowl to move a ball around the maze. This presentation also had a very good 3D animated presentation. I'm kind of disappointed they didn't stick to their 'reminisce of flow' idea, which would have been potentially a lot more artistic. Yet their final design would be a fun thing to play with. I'm really not sure I would get a sense of flow from this design, but it was well thought out in it's construction and design.

  

  3D design of group 28.

• Group B. Flow of Time. Represented by plants growing up a statue. Aided growth by flowing tears from the statue. A few powerful messages behind the design: Life-Death, Reclamation. Design is still evolving and not ready for refinement. This group belonged to another tutorial.
• Group C. Flow of Energy. Mentioned yin/yang and double helix. Still exploring ideas with no concrete design yet. This group belonged to another tutorial.

I obtained this image from http://activedirdeletedobjects.blogspot.com.au . The person on that blog site does not indicate where he/she got the image from. This first group project has now met it's end :)