Aesthetics of DynamicsBy Dounia Bourjila and Rico Minten

By Dounia Bourjila and Rico Minten | March 2011 | DG 112 Aesthetics of Dynamics | Michael Cruz

Contents

1. Process (our observation)Observation Analysis Mapping Choreography 2. Process (observation of another group)Mapping Translation into cardboard models Final prototype

3. IndividualDounia’s ReflectionRico’s Reflection

Processand analysis of our observation

Process (group)Our observation

Analysis of observationProcess (group)

Step 1: Gathering wordsWe made a selection of words according to the exercise that was given.

Composition SimpleRepeated

QualitiesExpandingSymmetrical Trough Shape OutwardCircularSpreadOngoingconstrained Light forceRelaxedStaccatoStraight (direction) Extra words:Two dimensionalRepeated Semi circularExpanding

Step 2. Finding the essence (strike-trough words that are irrelevant)The observation looked a lot like a dripping tap which consists from one point where the “waves” are coming from and the spreading of those waves which change of form (expand). SimpleDoesn’t describe the characteristics enoughExpandingSymmetricalTrough ShapeOutwardExpanding already describes that the movement is going “out” instead of “in”CircularCircular describes movements like a whirlpool which goes around. The wa-terdrop movement has the form of a circle but has a straight direction, and expands itself (trough shape)SpreadOngoingConstrainedThe movement is not constrained to one point. It starts from one point, spreads around that point and grows.Light forceThe force can’t be described as light or strong. It is a very subtle movement, which is more related to speed or timing.RelaxedIt is not related with a conscious force.StaccatoStraight (direction) Extra words:Two dimensionalDoesn’t describe a movement, but the space where it movesRepeated Semi circularExpanding

For the analysis we followed several steps to narrow the amount of words down to the most essential and descriptive words.

Process (group)Analysis of observation

Step 3. Finishing the list ExpandingSymmetricalTrough ShapeSpreadOngoingRepeated Semi circularStraight (direction)

Sometimes it was difficult to make a distinction between two words that look a lot like each other. For example: ongoing and repeated. By discussing the meaning of both we tried to agree on explanations of them to make a distinction. Another thing that helped us make things clear is the fact that we should be aware of what we see, and what we know.

Each of us interpreted the spreading of the water in a different way: it looks contrained to the point, in this case the source of water, that produces the round patterns in the water. But you could also see it as a wave which means that the movement goes trough shape (the water). We know that a source of water produces waves, and we see that circles are appearing in the water, move and spread towards the same direction. But this could also be seen as expanding of one small circle to a bigger one, instead of the movement of several circles. We assumed that many “circles” are appearing and each one of them expands.

MappingProcess (group)

Version 1:

Version 2:

MappingProcess (group)

The second version seemed to describe all the qualities the best. “Straight” and “Symmetrical” are left out.

Process (group)Choreography

Making a mapping helped us getting hold of the most impor-tant values, combined with a lay-out that expresses the feel-ing of the movement.Yet, it was difficult to translate this into movements with the body, that would be abstract enough so they won’t refer to exsisting examples.

Version 1:

Version 2:

FeedbackAccording to the feedback both choreographies didn’t contain the values. They looked too much like the original movement, instead of a new expression that has the same values.

ApproachWe tried to express the moving and expanding waves by us-ing hands and arms. The expression that was really stand-ing out according to our observations was the wave that was moving and expanding at the same time.

ResultIt was quite difficult to use this choreography in the rest of our analysis, because we didn’t check whether our chosen values were good. And for making a good choreography, we should have read/learned more about expressions with the body, which is a topic apart. * See videos of the choreography on cd

Processand analysis of the observation of another group

Process (group)Mapping of the other group

The mapping contains the next values: Fluent Continuous Irregular in time and space Complex Light Constrained

For us it also seemed like a dripping tap that has more power than the waterflow that is visible in our observation.

* See video “Observation” on cd

After we received and analyzed the mapping from the other group we started with thinking of possible models that would fit with the qualities that were in this.

1 (ball slide)In this model we tried to create a fluent and constrained move-ment. This worked quite well, apart from some bumps in the track.

2 (balls/elastic bands)In this model we tried to create a light and irregular movement. In this model the lightness we thought would be in the bouncing did not fully happen. However we missed seeing at first this was also a constrained movement. We learned that in one model there can be more qualities than you originally think of.

3 (balls shaking on block)In this model we tried to create a complex, constrained and irregu-lar movement.

4 (feathers)In this model we tried to put the light, constrained and complex qualities. We failed to see in this model all the qualities that were given by the mapping. it turned out to be the best model we made.

Process (group)Translation into cardboard models

5 (crooked wheel)In this model we tried to put the irregular and continuous movement. What we noticed from this was that to create irregular and continuous this model wasn’t the best one. The movement in one rollover might be irregular, but if you look at multiple cycles they repeat and lose the ir-regularity (it becomes a regular pattern).

6 (train wheel)In this model we tried to focus on the continuous movement.

7 (slinger)In this model we tried to put the light and con-strained qualities. What we learned in this model was that actually the arm that moves the model becomes part of the model (it becomes the point to which it is constrained). We learned not only to focus on the object but on the whole move-ment and everything that is included in it.

8 (trapje)In this model we tried to put the fluent and con-strained quality. What we learned from this model is that something is only constrained if one side is fixed. If you move both sides it isn’t constrained anymore (it is part of learning the quality also done in the previous model). In this model there are as well other qualities that (expanding/shrinking) that we were not anticipating and in hindsight did not want.

Process (group)Translation into cardboard models

9 (zandloper)In this model we tried to put the qualities irregular and continuous. A problem we faced in this model was that the stones were too large to really cre-ate the effect we wished for when thinking of the model. The models got stuck in some occasions, and the continuous effect is dependent of the control over the stones and quantity in which you release them.

10 (balletjes, bakje)The focus in this model was to create an irregular movement. We learned from this that models don’t need to be complex to cre-ate the qualities we were looking for.

11 (Stokjes in bakje)In this model we tried to create a continuous and complex movement.

12 (slang balletje)In this model we tried to create a fluent and irregular movement. The qualities we wished for do focus on different parts in the model. When the ball is in the tube and just exiting it moves fluently. But when it hits the table it doesn’t move fluent anymore. From here it moves irregular. This model was interesting to explore to see the change from one to another quality.

Process (group)Translation into cardboard models

13 (sleuven)In this model we focussed on a constrained movement. Related to the mapping however we create a whole different kind of con-strained. This was something we did not focus on during this model (only on the quality) which meant this model did not really help us any further.

14 (boog)In this model we tried to create a fluent continuous movement. This model did not work however each time as thought of. The model needed a specific environ-ment to work in (rough surface) in order to work.

15 (bal met balletjes)In this model we tried to create a complex and irregular movement. What

Process (group)Translation into cardboard models

* See videos of all prototypes on cd

Process (group)Translation into cardboard models

Process (group)Final prototype

The final prototype is based on one of our smaller prototypes that consists from feathers that are constrained to a stick (like a flag). This prototype seemed to cover most of our values, which is the reason why we decided to build a marble-machine around it. We learned in the assignment that ‘eve-rything that is not visible, does not exist’, so we used that in prototuping: the parcours of the mar-ble, and the activation of the feathers is covered by a white box. The only thing that is visible are the feathers (even the threads are see-trough).

* See video of “Final Prototype” on cd

IndividualReflections

Dounia BourjilaResults of test

During the final assignment lesson we discussed the the interpretation of everyone of each prototype. It seemed that two prototypes were made correctly, because most people recognized the same values in it. When we had to combine movieclips with the pro-totypes is still was very confusing, especially when we had 20 options to choose from. For me personally I find it still a little bit difficult to link certain appearances to their values, just because of different ways of interpretation.

This happened also during the discussion Rico and I had when we made the analysis of the observation. The same observation could be explained in two dif-ferent ways. The only cause I can think of, is the fact that we both had a lack of knowledge of the defini-tions of each value (example: difference between continuous and repeated). After we discussed in one of the lessons some differences, some things became clearer, but that was a little bit too late in the process of working towards a prototype.I also find it a pity that we didn’t discuss the choreog-raphy.

The statistics were also interesting, especially when 20 choices and 7 were compared. I think it would be even more interesting to not compare the quantity of choices but to do the test the other way around: to give people the choice between different prototypes, but to present the movieclips per one. It’s just a dif-ferent way of doing the test, which could also bring in other results. I thing the test could be done in many different ways. Important is that people should have a good understanding of the values and their definitions when starting the test, if a good prototype is required.

If the purpose of the test is to let us get to know the values and their meaning by discussing it etcetera, than I think this is achieved in this assignment. At least, I think I have!

* On the cd is a movie of our presentation

Rico and I presenting our collection of prototypes

Dounia BourjilaAssignment overall

I find the subject aesthetics of dynamics and its scientific approach interesting yet quite difficult. It required a certain way of abstract thinking for me, but also in concrete terms. It certainly has made a contribution to my vision: I have always been looking in my designs for a good balance between human, nature and technology, in terms of keeping a good balance with the three. We can describe our world today like the continents are now: big islands that are sepa-rated by the ocean, in which the ocean stands for technology, and the continents human and nature. So I’m looking for a certain harmony and I know I’m not the only designer doing this.One aspect that I really find interesting, and which made me thinking when I heard about it in the assignment, is how we perceive our daily lifes and our ways of interacting with products. A long time ago, “products” we simple, had one or two functions, which made it very understandable for everybody. Nowadays we live in a very complex world, which has an effect on our psychological wellbeing, our mental state, and happiness. It lies in the fact that we don’t see the direct results anymore of our actions, because of the complexity and speed of our ways of liv-ing. We need to plan everything far ahead in time, and we seem to lead a very insecure life, so we try to make it secure by planning everything. We don’t live in the now, but in what was, and what will be. What I find interesting is to bring direct results in my designs, so the user lives the moment of action to the fullest, and may reduce stress and other negative mental and physical effects.

I hope I can develop this vision into a deeper and higher level, so I will be able to implement in in my project for example.

Rico MintenResults of test

Testing the qualities

Translating the qualities we received in the form of the mapping into (cardboard) models seemed quite difficult when we started with the task. When coming up with the prototypes I tried to put in too much of the qualities at once. It resulted in very complex prototypes in terms of design and qualities (added unwanted qualities might enter). This blocked me even of coming up with enough models to show. During the stress of creating enough models I actually reduced this com-plexity and came more to the core essence of the qualities we had. Discussing and brainstorming with Dounia we got better at it model by model. Even though the models were simpler of shape, the movement in them often seemed to better fit these qualities. In the presentation this became even more apparent when on of the latest models seemed to fit each of the qualities and mapping we received.

The final evaluation went rather well for me. With all the experience from my own process and with the examples in the other presentations I learned to look at the essence of each movement. I managed to look beyond the shape of the proto-types displayed and looked at the qualities they were displaying (in some cases remembering the earlier models). I did the same for the videos, not look at what the movement is and try to link this to a prototype. But look at what each video shows in terms of qualities. I managed to get in the first session with 20 videos 4 right out of the 7 (or 5, of 1 I was not sure if I changed it in the end). In the second session with only 7 videos I got 7 right out of the 7.

Listening to the statistics I was rather surprised by the low amount of right an-swers. I struggled at first translating the movement of our video into the qualities and mapping, but with each example and presentation during the assignment I learned more and applied it better and better.

Overall assignment Rico Minten

The Process

This assignment started with somewhat of a struggle for me. I didn’t quite grasp the essence of the assignment and the purpose we strived for. I understood vision which is key with this method. I even think it is spot on with what is happening nowadays in terms of interaction. In only a few cases creating an optimal interac-tion experience has been the key of a product, but this should be in each product since it is all made to be used by someone.But I think I lacked the knowledge to really make the assignment work for me from the start. I lacked the knowledge to make proper translations between the different elements in the assignment. The many qualities there were, were not all clear to me. Some of them only being slightly different in explanation, but huge in terms of movement and effect.Only through discussing the assignment and values, both with Dounia and during the lessons, it became step by step clearer what was necessary to achieve the assignment goal and vision.

In the end I think I learned a lot from this assignment. Especially in the process and doing something which at first stood quite far away from me. But I think it would be better if the qualities would get more attention in explaining with example videos (preferable not of models, but of the observations). For me this would have helped to make these translations more easily and also better. I think this will help the groups who have to work with this to create a better fitting prototype because less of the observation gets lost in translation.

What relates this assignment to my project is that in both the experience is very important to work with at first. Interacting with a product is more than pushing a button. Interaction is an experience and in order to let your product do what it should do you need to design this experience first. From that create the shape and specific interaction to create the product. I really believe this is the future for successful products and aim to contribute to this.