The final sort of stages of pulling together my project saw a few problems encountered, mostly in the process of wiring up my prosthetic. The plaster face proved to be quite delicate, despite using up the remainder of my plaster to try reinforce it and stick in my circuit board from my key-hack. Further problems were encountered when some vital wires came out and required re-soldering.
The programming actually continued to become easier as I went and I found solutions in my previous patches which I could then integrate and manipulate with the jitter example patches. The very first patch we made to control Animata with the Apple Remote, I took the sequence me and Ryan figured out where we had two metros inputting values to control one overall value, to either increase it or decrease it. I used this to control the rate of a movie, to speed it up or slow it down depending on whether the switch was open or closed to represent the intensity of emotion.
It seems logical and was probably intended that way, but I like how with each feed in project and patch created, it became easier to adapt and build on what I'd already experimented with in Max MSP. I mentioned when I first started using it that it was unlike anything I'd used before and I felt like I was working blind but I definitely feel I have more of a grasp of what is possible with it. Like with the NXTs, again it is incredible to imagine that there is so much possible with the software and we only really know a small fraction of it. I liked how Josh mentioned that it was really amazing how everyone came up with something so completely different even though we were all essentially working with the same software, materials, on the same brief and deadlines. This was something I first noticed when we started with Animata, that everyones' each individual interests, backgrounds and talents were coming through in what they were creating and this is definitely what I feel is a driving force behind the whole Creative Technologies course and the industry we've been studying in our theory paper (Intro to CT).
The programming actually continued to become easier as I went and I found solutions in my previous patches which I could then integrate and manipulate with the jitter example patches. The very first patch we made to control Animata with the Apple Remote, I took the sequence me and Ryan figured out where we had two metros inputting values to control one overall value, to either increase it or decrease it. I used this to control the rate of a movie, to speed it up or slow it down depending on whether the switch was open or closed to represent the intensity of emotion.It seems logical and was probably intended that way, but I like how with each feed in project and patch created, it became easier to adapt and build on what I'd already experimented with in Max MSP. I mentioned when I first started using it that it was unlike anything I'd used before and I felt like I was working blind but I definitely feel I have more of a grasp of what is possible with it. Like with the NXTs, again it is incredible to imagine that there is so much possible with the software and we only really know a small fraction of it. I liked how Josh mentioned that it was really amazing how everyone came up with something so completely different even though we were all essentially working with the same software, materials, on the same brief and deadlines. This was something I first noticed when we started with Animata, that everyones' each individual interests, backgrounds and talents were coming through in what they were creating and this is definitely what I feel is a driving force behind the whole Creative Technologies course and the industry we've been studying in our theory paper (Intro to CT).
With the introduction with Jitter, I chose to use crossfades to alternate between my four videos, though for the longest time I wasn't sure whether it was possible to even cross fade four. In the end, it was achieved by crossfading two lots of two videos and then crossfading between those two. Essentially, when a key was triggered, say happiness, it would increase crossfade value between the 'happy' and 'sad' video until it reached the maximum so only the happy video was visible. It would also trigger a decrease in the crossfade value of the second video so again, only the happy video was visible.
This would then output into a movie window so at any given time, only one video and one emotion was depicted between crossfades. I chose to use crossfades as it could depict the transition between emotions which can often be unexpected and sudden but often also how we can feel 'mixed emotions over something.
Even though for my presentation everything worked as it was supposed to it (which I was immensely relieved about - no unsoldered wires, no plaster falling apart etc.) I still don't feel it was entirely successful overall. I feel that my ideas were too complex and perhaps a bit hard to grasp. I think that my concept would've been better grasped if people could see the videos closer up to get the full interaction and emotional impact of the words and images so the nature of the presentation was something I should've considered. I put time into planning and developing my concept, prosthetic and patch but next time I will allocate time to how I will actually present it all to ensure that the hard work I put into the other three is best shown off.
The nature of the presentation is something I feel we all still need to adjust to. One thing in particular I realised often let the presentations down - and yes, I'm guilty too! - is the confessions of 'I ran out of time / if I had more time...' What I learnt from doing a lot of performing arts and stage shows is that so long as you look confident and keep going and present as if you yourself thought it was great, it makes a bigger impact.
Otherwise, after thinking about the feedback on my prosthetic, if I were to refine it, I would look at projecting the video so as to make the pictures and words more visible to help get my conceptual idea across. At the beginning, I though about looking at ideas around personal space and boundaries around touch and a suggestion got me to think about physically removing myself and instead having others go up to interact with my prosthetic, physically touching it to trigger the switches. This sort of interaction would also help get across the message as it forces them to confront it and then see the result of their interaction. The sensor points would probably have to be relocated as these I also feel were unclear in conveying the body language I wanted. Perhaps by introducing other elements of the body, disembodied from the actual confines of a literal body to represent the disembodiment of the emotion from the physical, as is what happens through communication in a virtual means. This could also link to meanings around the personal space barriers we place around ourselves, still relating to body language and physical communication, and the cultural differences around touch and physical interaction.
This would require a lot more plaster.
The documentation of my final result is still a work in progress. All the images I used were licensed under creative commons but I am just seeking the final okay from all owners' of the images to repost them. No one has had any problems so far but as I myself post a lot of my photography online, in their shoes I would always prefer people ask especially when dealing with images with what could perhaps be heavy with personal emotional significance.
So for now, here is my completed patch which I am actually quite proud of.
This would then output into a movie window so at any given time, only one video and one emotion was depicted between crossfades. I chose to use crossfades as it could depict the transition between emotions which can often be unexpected and sudden but often also how we can feel 'mixed emotions over something.Even though for my presentation everything worked as it was supposed to it (which I was immensely relieved about - no unsoldered wires, no plaster falling apart etc.) I still don't feel it was entirely successful overall. I feel that my ideas were too complex and perhaps a bit hard to grasp. I think that my concept would've been better grasped if people could see the videos closer up to get the full interaction and emotional impact of the words and images so the nature of the presentation was something I should've considered. I put time into planning and developing my concept, prosthetic and patch but next time I will allocate time to how I will actually present it all to ensure that the hard work I put into the other three is best shown off.
The nature of the presentation is something I feel we all still need to adjust to. One thing in particular I realised often let the presentations down - and yes, I'm guilty too! - is the confessions of 'I ran out of time / if I had more time...' What I learnt from doing a lot of performing arts and stage shows is that so long as you look confident and keep going and present as if you yourself thought it was great, it makes a bigger impact.
Otherwise, after thinking about the feedback on my prosthetic, if I were to refine it, I would look at projecting the video so as to make the pictures and words more visible to help get my conceptual idea across. At the beginning, I though about looking at ideas around personal space and boundaries around touch and a suggestion got me to think about physically removing myself and instead having others go up to interact with my prosthetic, physically touching it to trigger the switches. This sort of interaction would also help get across the message as it forces them to confront it and then see the result of their interaction. The sensor points would probably have to be relocated as these I also feel were unclear in conveying the body language I wanted. Perhaps by introducing other elements of the body, disembodied from the actual confines of a literal body to represent the disembodiment of the emotion from the physical, as is what happens through communication in a virtual means. This could also link to meanings around the personal space barriers we place around ourselves, still relating to body language and physical communication, and the cultural differences around touch and physical interaction.
This would require a lot more plaster.
The documentation of my final result is still a work in progress. All the images I used were licensed under creative commons but I am just seeking the final okay from all owners' of the images to repost them. No one has had any problems so far but as I myself post a lot of my photography online, in their shoes I would always prefer people ask especially when dealing with images with what could perhaps be heavy with personal emotional significance.
So for now, here is my completed patch which I am actually quite proud of.
No comments:
Post a Comment