city sound · 2013-05-30 · city sound date due: 31st of may, 2013 12:00 pm awesome platypi...

City Sound Date Due: 31st of May, 2013 12:00 pm Awesome Platypi Members: Student Numbers: Joshua Rillera 43150621 Gary Myles 43190775 Jaydon Cassimaty 43192023 Sebastian Hands 43188660 Mitchell Stringfellow 42620435 Maggie Ting 42893556 Mark Davies 42461795 Group blog: http://awesomeplatipi.wordpress.com

http://awesomeplatipi.wordpress.com/

Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 4

Concept Portfolio .................................................................................................................................... 5

Design Installation #1 .......................................................................................................................... 6




Design Installation #5 ........................................................................................................................ 10





Design Installation #10 ...................................................................................................................... 15











Concept Maps ....................................................................................................................................... 26

Organic Map ...................................................................................................................................... 26

Dimensional Map .............................................................................................................................. 26

Organic Map and Explanation of Categories .................................................................................... 27

Explanations/Annotations of categories ....................................................................................... 28

Dimensional Map 1 and explanation of categories .......................................................................... 29

Explanations/Annotations of categories ....................................................................................... 30

Dimensional Map 2 and explanation of categories .......................................................................... 31

Explanation/Annotations of categories ........................................................................................ 32

Workshop .............................................................................................................................................. 33

Brief Summary – General Summary .................................................................................................. 33

Brief Summary – Timeline ................................................................................................................. 33

Brief Summary – Activities ................................................................................................................ 33

Brief Summary – Materials ............................................................................................................... 34

Brief Summary – Intent ..................................................................................................................... 34

Results ............................................................................................................................................... 34

Evaluation of process and outcomes ................................................................................................ 35

Improvements and suggestions for future workshops ..................................................................... 35

Statement of Design Intent ................................................................................................................... 36

Purpose of installation ...................................................................................................................... 36

Inspiration for installation................................................................................................................. 36

Main goal of installation ................................................................................................................... 37

Where to deploy the installation ...................................................................................................... 37

Success Criteria ..................................................................................................................................... 38

Table of Criteria................................................................................................................................. 38

Explanation of success criteria .......................................................................................................... 39

Our design successfully addresses the situation at hand ............................................................. 39

Easily Understandable................................................................................................................... 39

Usability ........................................................................................................................................ 39

Attraction ...................................................................................................................................... 39

Deployment................................................................................................................................... 40

Enjoyment ..................................................................................................................................... 40

User Evaluation ..................................................................................................................................... 41

Success criteria grading ..................................................................................................................... 41

Our design successfully addresses the situation at hand ............................................................. 41

Easily Understandable................................................................................................................... 41

Usability ........................................................................................................................................ 41

Attraction ...................................................................................................................................... 42

Deployment................................................................................................................................... 43

Enjoyment ..................................................................................................................................... 43

Overall Result in Success Criteria .................................................................................................. 44

Results of deployment of installation ............................................................................................... 45

The Stand of the iPad .................................................................................................................... 45

Lack of Attraction .......................................................................................................................... 45

Unsuitable Deployment Area ........................................................................................................ 45

Lack of Time .................................................................................................................................. 46

Improvements ................................................................................................................................... 46

More Planning on Design .............................................................................................................. 46

Better Time Management ............................................................................................................. 47

Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 48

Introduction

The modern city is an example of human ingenuity. Everything from the tallest

skyscrapers to small ramps, like the ones used in shopping centres, has been a

result of countless planning and incredible precision. Every piece of architecture,

such as the buildings and even the fire hydrants, has been designed for a particular

purpose. However, as time passed, focus has been placed on allowing people with a

diverse range of senses to be able to live in the modern city with little to no

hindrances. Because of this, attention has been placed on how the modern city

allows people of diverse senses to interact with it. As a result, we must investigate

the thesis: “The modern city discriminates against the diversity of our senses.”

To be able to investigate this thesis, a design installation must be developed

to investigate this thesis. This design installation must be able to cause people to

reflect on the thesis and must document how the public had engaged with it. To be

able to create a design installation, a process must be followed, which will include

creating a workshop that should allow people to understand the design installation,

brainstorming to find a design installation, concept mapping to compare the

installation concepts from the brainstorm, describing the design installation used,

judging the design installation on a set of self-defined criteria and evaluating the final

design installation with the public. The process will begin with brainstorming for a

design installation.

Concept Portfolio

To be able to collate and organize any design installation concepts, a concept

portfolio can be made, where the concepts will be made and written on a common

A5 template. The A5 template has the name of the concept, the group’s name, a

description of the concept and an image providing an idea of the concept. To

guarantee at least one feasible idea, at least 20 concepts should be made. After the

concepts have been collated, concept maps can be made to compare these

concepts.

Design Installation #1

Concept: Dark Tunnel #1 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Dark Tunnel is a concept that plays with how people, who have permanently lost their eyesight, interact with the modern city. Basically, it is a simple tunnel with one entrance and on exit, which just has to be built with something solid. The tunnel only has two turns: one left turn and right turn, which will lead to the exit. However, the tunnel has no light inside, meaning that when people go in, they cannot see anything. The only way to get out of the tunnel is go through the way they came in or go through the tunnel. The tunnel should give some sense of despair, especially when people encounter the turn. They should be feeling a little nervous about colliding with the wall, because they do not know immediately that they have to turn left. Only after feeling the surroundings do they realise where they need to go. The main point that this installation makes is that the modern city does discriminate against the diversity of our senses, such as not taking into account how permanently blind people have to modern city feels like a collection of dark tunnels.


Concept: Casts for Legs #2

Group name: Awesome Platypi

Casts for legs is a design installation that focuses on how people, who don’t have use of their legs. This design installation involves designing a pair of leggings that disable people’s ability to move their legs. This can be a simple cast that makes a person’s legs be extended until the leggings are taken off. The person with the leggings will try to walk around the city, but without being able to flex and extend their legs. The purpose of this design installation is to make people think about how other people, who do not have feeling in their legs, cannot walk normally around the modern city. It should also make them consider the fact that the city itself is at fault for not taking into account people who have no feeling in their legs.


Concept: ACTION Button #3 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Amongst the crowded streets of Brisbane, amongst all the hustle and bustle, stands a simple red button displaying ‘ACTION’ upon it. Does anyone dare press it? In a nutshell: Just stand with a button on top. Once the button is pushed people wearing costumes or perhaps wielding water pistols could engage the unsuspecting victim to add more ‘action’ to their lives. Curiosity or even a genuine plea for more action in their lives will draw people to step forward and press the button, and hopefully the implications will be as action packed as they had hoped for.


Concept: Germ Glove #4 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Everywhere we go there are germs, mostly invisible to the naked eye, even the

human body is crawling with millions of germs. What if this could be shown to

people following their everyday ignorance of such things?

The idea of this concept is simple, a person standing in the city asks people

passing by if they can shake his hand? When they shake hands the person has

a glove on, which has ‘glowing germs’ applied to it and shines a UV light over

showing the multitudes of germs on his hand.

The purpose of this installation is to make people see the germs on and around

them.


Concept: Picture Time #5 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Everyone loves taking ‘selfies’ for themselves and throwing them up on Facebook, Twitter or whatever other social networking website they use. But how would someone feel about having a self-portrait displayed in a public place for all to see? Essentially just a frame with a camera embedded within, pictures are taken and after deleting the previous person’s picture the new one is displayed in its place for all to see: the ultimate case of vanity! It will be interesting to see just how many people stop to look at it, let along take a picture of them self and show it to the world.

Your picture

goes here…


Concept: Reflection Avenue #6 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Amongst the busy day to day lives of the people of the world, sometimes you just need a little time to sit back and reflect: enter Reflection Avenue. I tunnel-like structure covered head to toe with mirrors, allowing people who pass by to reflect on their day. A seemingly simple construct yet its alluring site should draw many people to come forth and try it out. Unlike the world around them which seems so daunting and huge, within the avenue everything reflects back to you, allowing people to feel more important and as if they’re actually going somewhere in life.


Concept: Thermal memory bench #7 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Sometimes all the action of our lives catches up with us and we just feel the need to sit down and relax. But what if the very bench you wished to partake of had a huge thermal print of someone’s butt. Would you still feel the need to sit down? The question we’ve all asked is why is this seat warm? Well, now you can see it! Each butt print can tell a tale, for instance, one user might have been to the gym mere moments before and has a particularly bright butt print. This provides passers a glimpse into something we all have in common but don’t know or wish to share with others, causing a little bit of humility and self-reflection.


Concept: Voice Transmogrification #8 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Ever wondered what Darth Vader would sound like singing “All the single ladies”? Well now you can with the amazing Voice Transmogrifier! A box will be hung on a wall in a public space with a microphone connected to it. A button enables the microphone to record anything said until the button is released. The recorded message will repeat back to the user, but with one large difference. It will be transmogrified to one of several different voices. This gives people a chance to hear themselves in a new and funny way and may even make there day.


Concept: Face Trace #9 Group name: Awesome Platypi

This design installation involves a clear plastic wall. The wall can be written on with markers. The idea behind the wall is that one person stand on 1 side of the wall, and another person stands opposite them, on the other side. The person with the marker then draws the other persons face onto the wall. The marker can be erased, but otherwise then there is a drawing of the persons face on the wall. The image shows a see through whiteboard such that could be used in the installation.


Concept: Pleasant Trash #10 Group name: Awesome Platypi

This design installation is focused on removing the smell that may come from trash cans, while also increasing the diversity of plants in the city. This installation involves putting flowers around a trash can, preferable waste that will not be harmful to these plants, and the flowers will make a more pleasant scent than that of the current situation. The image is only depiction, the real installation would have flowers on the side of a trash can that actually holds rubbish.


Concept: Chalk Wall #11 Group name: Awesome Platypi

If there is a blank concrete wall available, we put chalk near it and add a stimulus to the community will be able to respond to said stimulus with either drawings or words with said chalk. Since the chalk rubs off with rain the installation is able to be on going-providing no one steals the chalk.


Concept: Getting back to nature #12 Group name: Awesome Platypi

This particular concept requires more equipment and building. It is simply a dark room placed in the middle of a busy city street with a single lounge in the centre of the room. There will be a projector placed in the dark room with clips of farming videos. The videos will include sounds such as cows, dogs, horses, tractors etc. This allows busy city people to stop, sit down, relax and get back to nature for a small amount of time. The idea behind this concept is to let people experience the difference between busy cities and the countryside.


Concept: Listen to me #13 Group name: Awesome Platypi

This concept is fairly simple. it requires a pair of sound free headphones. The idea of this concept is to incorporate silence into a busy city street. The headphones will be placed in a busy city street with the sign “Listen To Me” above it. The concept is to let busy city people take a break from the noise and effects of living and being in a big busy city.


Concept: Passing by thoughts #14 Group name: Awesome Platypi

This concept allows people to share their thoughts about anything they are thinking about. The concept is very basic, it is simply just placing a magna doodle board on a busy city street with the sign “Your Thoughts?” above the board. This way people are encouraged to leave notes or draw on the board to share their thoughts of the day. By doing so, it creates a sense of community within the area and shares creative ideas on how individuals are feeling at the time. By using a magna doodle, it allows people to freely draw and/or erase messages on the board, giving them the freedom to choose what message they want to share.


Concept: City Sound #15 Group name: Awesome Platypi

This design is something to test whether members of the public will stop and take interest in a sound based attraction. Think of it in the way that a water fountain is an installation designed to be solely a visual treat whereas this is an interactive audio attraction. Essentially it’s simply a touch screen on a stand with an app capable of taking user input to play different songs or stop the song. It could keep track of how many button presses. I’m hoping that there’s ample interest in the installation as this would suggest that this sort of thing is unheard of in the modern city (whereas things like very visually appealing architecture are commonplace, so much so that you wouldn’t stop to admire them)


Concept: Colour piano #16 Group name: Awesome Platypi

This design follows the same principle as my other design. It uses the fact that people are crowding around it to imply people are deprived of audio attractions in the city. Fairly simple design. Each screen plays a different note when touched then changes to a random colour. Mysterious, uses 3 senses, interactive. Cons: Requires minimum 3 ipads to be entertaining.


Concept: Muffin Button #17 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Sometimes life feels as if it’s just the same thing, day-in and day out. Sometimes everyone just needs a little change, maybe some surprise, perhaps even something sweet: Enter the Muffin Button! One hit of the aptly named apparatuses and *BOOM* one muffin! Something so strange, yet so simple can make all the difference to someone’s day. A simple button paired with a chute and some form of holding container, hitting the button dispenses a muffin, no rocket science here. People often follow a routine which never seems to end nor get any better. Taking their thoughts, sight and even taste away from this and placing it all on a tasty little muffin; your taste buds will thank you later.


Concept: Crowd Control #18 Group name: Awesome Platypi

While walking through a populated city area how often do you listen to see if someone else is talking to you? Not being able to communicate with someone could cause a life threatening situation. The concept of this device is to install a speaker into a densely populated city area which has a constant traffic of pedestrians. This speaker will have specific recordings that will randomly be played to see how people react to them. These recording include: “Hey you!”, “Stop there!”, “Look up!” and other recordings that allow us to determine whether people are listening to their surroundings.


Concept: Loud Tone #19 Group name: Awesome Platypi

Have you ever travelled through a busy city environment with loud cranes and machines operating around you? What if you had the choice to completely stop the noise? This concept is a machine that generates a constant loud annoying ring that is used to represent a loud construction site. On the front of the machine is a button that when is pressed stops the noise for 1 minute. The machine is used to determine people’s behaviour towards loud construction sites and if they are stopped around the area if they will continue to press the button.


Concept: Lucky Dip #20 Group name: Awesome Platypi

How comfortable would you feel approaching an unattended stand that asks you to reach into darkness to pull out a single item that you may keep. The main idea of the installation is to test people’s reactions towards reaching into a dark space and grabbing an item without any visual assistance. This especially would be tested in large open city environments where it can also be recorded to judge whether people would feel more comfortable after someone else has already taken something from the box. This is also to show the user how blind people going throughout their normal routine must be cautious to coordinate what they touch at all times.

Concept Maps

After the 20 design installation concepts have been made and collated,

concept maps can be made to compare these concepts. There are two different

concept maps that can be made: organic and dimensional. These concepts, along

with existing installations, will be compared on all three concept maps.

Organic Map

An organic map is a concept map where the concepts are placed on a map

depending on their relationship with other concepts. This allows concepts to be

compared with other concepts, based on how similar they are.

Dimensional Map

A dimensional map is a concept map with a set of axes. These axes represent

pre-defined criterion and their exact opposites. For example, one end of an axis

represents concepts that are expensive to build, while the other end of the same axis

represents concepts that are inexpensive.

After the concept maps have been completed the workshop done by the

group will be discussed.

Organic Map and Explanation of Categories

Casts for legs

Legend:

Our Concept – Concept

Existing Concept - Concept

Pleasant Trash

Meet Eater

Muffin Button

Action Button

Colour Piano

Loud Tone

Voice Transmogrification

Face Trace

Passing by thoughts

Chalk Wall Public Wish Box

Interactive Gordon Brown

City Sound

Dark Tunnel

Listen to me

Getting back to nature

Public Voice Box

Germ Glove

Crowd Control

3800 KV Bra

Erratic Radio

Picture Time

Reflection Avenue

Thermal Memory Bench MMH

Oil Standard

Removes Senses

Environmental

Focuses on hearing

Require input

Provokes Reflection on self

Explanations/Annotations of categories

- Removes Senses

o This category highlights the concepts that take away a person’s senses temporarily. For example, “Dark Tunnel”

involves users walking into a completely dark tunnel, removing their sense of sight.

- Environmental

o This category highlights the concepts that deal with nature and the environment. For example, the “Pleasant Trash”

concept involves making trash cans more environmentally friendly by incorporating flowers in them.

- Focuses on hearing

o The concepts in this category depend on whether people can hear or not. For example, the “Loud Tone” concept

emits a really loud noise, which is useless if the user can’t even hear anything.

- Require Input

o Concepts underneath this category are only feasible if there is user input. Please note that this is not the same as a

category where concepts need users to interact with it. For example, the concept, “Colour Piano”, can only be

effective depending on the users’ input. Users can interact with it, but its purpose may not be so obvious, until a user

provides input that sounds nice.

- Provokes Reflection on self

o This category deals with concepts that should cause people reflect and think about themselves and their lives. These

concepts can make someone feel either bad or good about themselves. For example, “Reflection Avenue” tries to get

people to reflect on where they are in life and divert all attention to them, while “MMH” causes people to be wary

about what they do or say, to try and prove the misfortune cookie wrong.

Dimensional Map 1 and explanation of categories

Pleasant Trash

Explanations/Annotations of categories

- Created to show the various levels of Benefit, randomness, visual interoperation and instructiveness throughout a wide

range of installations, some created and performed by others, and some created by our group as possible concepts to put

forward into actual deployment.

- Installations with a high ‘Beneficial’ level possess some means to help the individual or the world as a whole. Likewise high

levels of ‘Random’ mean just what it says on the can; it’s completely random and most of the time done just for fun.

- ‘Visual’ dictates that the user simply views the installation and gains whatever they may from it, whereas ‘Interactive’ actually

has the user perform some kind of action to use/partake with the installation.

Dimensional Map 2 and explanation of categories

Explanation/Annotations of categories

- Shows the different levels of complexity between installations, as well as the duration of use for the users. Contains a mix of

group generated content likewise it contains a wide range of gathered installations created and deployed by others around

the globe.

- ‘Simple’ and ‘Complex’ are both opposite ends to one another and represent the level of explanation the user will require to

use the installation.

- Similarly to simple and complex ‘short’ and ‘long’ sit oppositely and show the time it will take a user to actually use the

installation and take something away from it.

Workshop

Brief Summary – General Summary

The workshop that was designed was focused on trying to decide on which

design installation, among the design installation concepts, is the most feasible and

most appropriate concept. The workshop involves brainstorming and judging the

design installation on pre-defined criteria, using paper as physical materials.

Brief Summary – Timeline

Overall, the workshop lasted only for around 25 minutes, with the remaining

10 minutes left unused. Group activities lasted for the majority of the 25 minutes

(approximately, 15-20 minutes), while actual time spent talking to the participants

took only 5-10 minutes. However, during the activities, the participants were guided,

as they worked on the activities. However, despite having 10 minutes left over, the

goal of the workshop was achieved.

Brief Summary – Activities

The three activities relied on the participants brainstorming and judging

concepts based on criteria. The first activity involved explaining a few design

installations, which were considered to be feasible and relevant to the thesis, to the

participants. The group members that created the concepts explained them, using

only 1 minute for each explanation. Afterwards, the participants scored the design

installations on pre-defined criteria, using paper that was provided by the group. The

last two activities were both brainstorming sessions, where the first brainstorm dealt

with the aesthetics of the installation, such as what it looks like and how to make it,

while the second brainstorm dealt with where and how the installation should be

deployed. This brainstorm also dealt with any implications that the design installation

may have when it is deployed or implemented. For both sessions, the group asked

questions for the participants to guide them in their brainstorm and their

brainstorming results were written on feedback sheets, provided by the group.

Brief Summary – Materials

The only materials used in this workshop were two different pieces of paper: a

scoring sheet, used to judge the installations, and the feedback forms, used to write

down the results of the brainstorm. The scoring sheet was a table of the design

installations, with criteria applied to each one of them. The participants had to score

the installations on each criterion. The possible scores are from 0 and up to and

including 10. The feedback form was a simple piece of paper with instructions and

enough space for participants to write the results of their brainstorming. Each

participant had one feedback form so that they have enough room to write the results

of their brainstorming.

Brief Summary – Intent

The main intent of this workshop was to find out which design installation, was

the most feasible and the most relevant to the thesis. The group, that conducted the

workshop, had trouble trying to decide which design installation to build. To solve

this problem, the group needed to get opinions from people outside the group.

Fortunately, the workshop was perfect for obtaining opinions from people outside the

group.

Results

Overall, the workshop was a complete success. Despite the workshop lasting

for only 25 minutes, with 10 minutes unused, the workshop achieved its purpose.

When the workshop started, the participants were quiet and did not have much input.

However, as soon as the first activity started, the participants participated very well.

The participants, despite the activities having a lot of talking, to guide the participants

and to introduce the installation concepts, they had fun, but at the same time, they

provided a lot of input and opinions on which installation to do, its aesthetics, how to

create it, the implications of the installation and how and where to deploy the

installation. Because of the workshop’s success, it was able to achieve its intent,

meaning that its outcomes were beneficial and what was expected of the workshop.

Evaluation of process and outcomes

The process and the outcomes of the workshop had resulted in the success of

the workshop. The process ran smoothly and without any problems whatsoever,

besides the fact that the workshop did not use the full 35 minutes allotted for the

workshop. However, this was not a disadvantage because the workshop achieved its

intent in only a short amount of time, which meant that the workshop was efficiently

run. Because of the success of the workshop’s process and the participants’

willingness to provide input, the most favourable outcomes were achieved. The

workshop achieved its intent, the group now knows what design installation to do,

how to implement and deploy it and any implications or problems that the installation

may have. Most of all, the participants loved the workshop and had no problems with

it. They thought that the workshop was a great success and a lot of fun and they did

not have any suggestions for improvement. Overall, everything about the workshop

was a success.

Improvements and suggestions for future workshops

However, there is still room for improvement for any future workshops that

have the same intent and goals as this workshop. One improvement that can be

made is the use of more physical materials. In the previously ran workshop, the only

physical materials used for the activities were pieces of paper. The workshop was

still a lot of fun, but the implementation of a variety of physical materials may make

the workshop even more fun and encourage participants to provide more input as

well. Another improvement that can be made is to have a variety of activities. In the

previously ran workshop, all three activities required participants to listen and to write

down and voice their opinions. The activities were able to engage the participants’

minds, but other activities may be able to engage their minds in creative ways, such

as making them draw, which can result in more opinions and inputs from participants.

Thanks to the workshop, the group now knows what installation to develop

and deploy. The group chose to do the installation, ‘City Sound’, for which a

statement of design intent has been made.

Statement of Design Intent

Purpose of installation

The purpose behind ‘City Sound’ is to draw attention to the lack of audio

attractions set up in the city. Essentially, this construct is to the ears, what a water

fountain for example, is to the eyes. The aim of our installation is to prove that

modern city design does indeed discriminate against the diversity of our senses.

Inspiration for installation

The inspiration for ‘City Sound’ came from one of our 20 prototypes of the

same name. The basic idea behind the idea was that it would attempt to engage the

user in a way different from an ordinary design in the city would. This was through

hearing. The design consisted of 3 screens, each displaying a randomly generated

colour and playing a random note when touched. The focus group we spoke to didn’t

enjoy the random element of the design and eventually through various questions we

moulded the project into the final design. This meant ditching 2 of the screens and

giving our audio attraction a purpose. Our design became a piano of sorts, with

notes represented as different coloured squares.

Main goal of installation

The main goal was to have a large number of people using our installation out

of curiosity alone. We achieved this after seeing a few quizzical faces. It is through

these looks and interaction with our design that our thesis is implied to be true. This

was a great result but it drew attention to the flaws in this method of proof. One of

those flaws is the fact that people may have just interacted with this design because

it was an unfamiliar construct. The users may have also interacted with ‘City Sound’

even if it had nothing to do with combining sound/video and was just a visual

attraction. To further explain this point, one of our designs involved walking through a

pitch black tunnel with no assistance. The intention was to draw attention to the fact

that modern design left the blind with very little assistance from their environment.

This would be provable by observing the participants struggle to navigate their way

through the construct, whereas our ‘City Sound’ design was provable only through

what we inferred from participation alone.

Where to deploy the installation

A lot of thought went into choosing a location to deploy ‘City Sound’. Originally

our first thought was to set our design up in a busy Brisbane street like Queen Street.

During the workshop however, we learnt that most users would feel out of their

comfort zone or very unlikely to approach and interact with an installation in such a

busy area. Knowing this we changed the location to UQ, as we decided it would be

less crowded, but still an appropriate representation of a city. We stuck with this plan

until the day before deployment, when we were testing the design at uni in what was

quite a crowded area. The ipad speakers were too soft to be heard over the crowd

and unfortunately speakers did not fit with our completed case design. At this point

we decided on Garden’s point, as it is generally noticeably quieter than UQ.

Now that the statement of design intent was completed, success criteria will

now be developed to judge how successful the installation is when deployed.

Success Criteria

Table of Criteria

Criteria Bad Average Good

Our installation

successfully

addresses the

situation at hand

Little to no

connection can be

made with the

discrimination of

our senses.

Some connections

can easily be made

The installation

easily

demonstrates the

discrimination of

diversities of our

senses.

Easily

understandable

Little to no

members of the

community

understood our

design and its

purposes

Some people

understood the

installation and

how it worked,

including its

purpose.

The aim of the

installation was

easily understood,

and conveys our

message clearly

without

explanation.

Usability The installation is

hard to use, and

participants

needed

demonstrations

and explanations to

work it

Some participants

had trouble with the

installation, but

after reading and

trying it a few times

they could work it

easily.

The installation

was easy to

understand and

use and needed

little to no

explanation on its

mechanics.

Attraction The installation

was not very

successful at

attracting people to

use it.

Some people were

curious about the

installation, and

proceeded to use

it.

The installation

attracted many

people to use it

through curiosity/

Deployment The installation

was hard to deploy

and not very easy

to make

The installation

was not very hard

to make and deploy

The installation

was easy to make

and deploy into

society

Enjoyment Users found the

installation slightly

boring.

Users found the

installation

interesting and

were able to enjoy

it.

Users really

enjoyed the

installation.

Explanation of success criteria

Our criteria has a variety of different categories, with these we hoped to

achieve a diverse range of evaluation of our installation and how successful it was.

Categories such as how easy it was to understand, to how enjoyable the design was

to the users, will be able to identify where we may have gone wrong with our

installation, or how in some areas we may have improved it.

Our design successfully addresses the situation at hand

This category of the criteria describes how easily the design conveyed the

situation at hand to the users. With only a small amount of explanation on the

installation and its purpose were users able to see that it addressed this problem

successfully.

Easily Understandable

This criterion rates the design on how easy it was to understand it. This is

quite a broad criterion but can be useful. This tells us if the user understood the

installation as a whole, its aims, how it was deployed and used.

Usability

This category evaluates how easy it was to use. If the users had trouble using

the installation then it would not go very well. But if they users could use the

installation without much explanations or demonstrations then it was successful to

the wide range of targeted members of society.

Attraction

Here the design is rated on how well it attracted members of the community. If

people did not come over the design then it was not very successful, however, if

people were attracted to the overall look and design of our installation then it would

be successful.

Deployment

Simply enough, was the installation easy to deploy? If we were to use our

installation on a large scale, would it be easy to set up many of them, and to also

build them.

Enjoyment

Enjoyment of our installation is a large criterion. If users of our installation

enjoyed it, it will be more likely to leave an impression on them and get them thinking.

Our installation must be simple to understand as a key component for the enjoyment.

After judging the installation on particular criteria, a report must be written on

how the users interacted with the installation.

User Evaluation

The design installation, when deployed, was not successful. There were many

problems, including setting up the installation and waiting for people to interact with

the installation, which resulted in the installation failing in the majority of the success

criteria.

Success criteria grading

Our design successfully addresses the situation at hand

The installation does successfully address the situation at hand. It deals with

how the modern city discriminates the diversity of our senses, by not having

sufficient audio attractions for the visually-impaired. Because of this, the installation

gets “Good” in this criterion.

Score = “Good”

Easily Understandable

Because not many people interacted with the design installation, it cannot be

said that the installation was either easily understandable or not understandable at

all. None of the people, who interacted with the installation, were questioned as to

what they thought the installation’s purpose was, so it was not known whether they

understood the installation or not.

Score = Cannot be given due to inadequate sample space.

Usability

The installation scores well in usability, since the only skill the user needed to

know to interact with the installation is how to press a particular area. Although only

one person interacted with the installation, he was able to figure out how to work the

installation. Because of this, “City Sound” gets a “Good” in this criterion.

Score = “Good”

Attraction

Because of the significantly small number of people that interacted with the

installation (a total of one person), it can be said that the installation failed in this

criterion. As well as having a very small sample space, the installation was not

attractive at all. It had no colours and no signs and it was riddled with patches of

dried up wood glue. Some patches of wood glue were actually bubbles of wood glue,

which did not look very attractive at all. If this installation scored better in this

criterion, a larger sample space would have been achieved. Because of this, the

installation gets a “Bad” for this criterion.

Score = “Bad”

Deployment

This installation did not do well in this criterion because of its robust stand.

The stand could not fit in any of the group members’ vehicles, and as a result, it had

to be brought in pieces to the place of deployment and built there, using glue, which

required a minimum time of 30 minutes to dry. Since group members had other

assignments and commitments, time was of the essence. Building the installation

wasted a lot of time and if the installation was easier to deploy, probably by

developing a more compact and flexible stand for the iPad, it could be deployed in

more than one location, increasing the number of interactions and decreasing the

amount of time taken to set them up. However, as a result, the installation gets a

“Bad” in this criterion.

Score = “Bad”

Enjoyment

Because there was only one interaction made with the installation, a proper

score cannot be given to this criterion. Although the installation was easy to

understand, there were not enough public interactions to judge this criterion fairly. As

a result, no score was given to this criterion.

Score = Cannot be given due to inadequate sample space

Overall Result in Success Criteria

Overall, the installation failed against the success criteria. Despite the

installation getting an equal “Good” and “Bad” scores, two scores are unaccounted

for because of the installation failing in two criteria. If the installation scored better in

these two criteria, there is no doubt that the installation would have passed the

success criteria. Nevertheless, the installation fails against the success criteria

Overall score = “Bad”

The installation also needs to be analysed when it was deployed, although it

had been judged by the success criteria.

Results of deployment of installation

Unfortunately, the installation did not perform as expected. The application on

the iPad, which was the installation itself, was working perfectly, but because of

many other factors, the application did not have the intended public reaction. This

was due to a few reasons.

The Stand of the iPad

One reason for the installation not performing as expected was the stand for

the iPad. On paper, the stand seemed to be feasible and perfect, but after building it,

there was much doubt as to whether it could hold the weight of the iPad and its

wooden case at a 45 degree angle without toppling over. Instead, the stand was

completely ignored and the wooden case, with the iPad inside, was just propped on

top of a stable, flat surface.

Lack of Attraction

Another reason for why the installation did not perform as expected was

because the installation was not very attractive. The entire installation was just wood

that had patches of wood glue and glue bubbles, which did not help with the

attractiveness of the installation. Frankly, only the iPad looked attractive, while the

entire wooden stand and case did not look attractive whatsoever. There is no doubt

that because of this, the public’s curiosity was not sparked as was originally intended.

Unsuitable Deployment Area

One other reason that negatively impacted the installation’s performance was

the chosen area for deploying the installation. In hindsight, the installation would

have been more successful if it was deployed in places, such as Garden’s Point,

because in these places, the public would have been able to take the time to interact

with the installation. Most of the public in UQ would not have had any time to stop

and interact with an installation, especially during the second last day of the

semester, where most students are rushing to get to classes and to get assignments

done by the next day. Because of this, the number of interactions with the installation

was quite low, which meant that the installation was not as successful as it was

originally intended to be.

Lack of Time

Finally, one final reason for why the installation may not have performed as

expected was because the group did not have enough time to stay for more than 3

hours to deploy the installation. Building the case took at least 45 minutes to deploy,

which would have been plenty of time to get more people to interact with the

installation. Besides the problem with the case, group members had other

commitments with another group assignment, which meant that the installation had

to be discontinued. If the installation was not discontinued, the group could have had

more deployment time, which would have resulted in more public interactions with

the installation.

Due to all these factors, the installation was not as successful as expected.

However, there is room for improvement.

Improvements

There are many improvements that can be made to improve the installation

against the success criteria and to improve its overall performance.

More Planning on Design

One improvement that can be made is on the design for the installation. The

application worked flawlessly, but it was because of the stand for the iPad, which

held the application, that severely reduced the amount of time to deploy the

installation and caused difficulty in finding a suitable place to deploy the installation.

If more time and thought was given to the planning for the installation’s stand, no

doubt that setup time would be reduced to mere minutes and at the same time, the

installation could be deployed in a wide variety of areas.

Not only an improvement can be made on the stand, but an implementation of

a sign could have been beneficial in letting the public know that they can interact with

the installation. There was no sign implemented for the deployment of this

installation, which could have increased the public’s curiosity of the installation,

increasing the chances of people interacting with the installation.

Better Time Management

Another improvement that can be made is on how well the individual

members of the team managed their time. Unfortunately, the entire group did not set

aside much time for the deployment of the installation, due to other commitments,

such as other group assignments or work. If the entire group was able to spare more

time for the deployment of this installation, more public interactions may have been

collected. However, this improvement may not be able to be implemented always,

due to the varying amount of work that each group member does for each semester.

Nevertheless, if there was an opportunity to be able to get more work done on other

assessment and to set aside more time to deploy this installation, the sample space

of public interactions would have been increased.

If these improvements were implemented, it is highly likely that the

installation’s overall performance would be improved and it may fare better against

the success criteria.

Bibliography

All images used in the concept portfolio are from the following sites:

Anon, 2009, ‘Tattoo Gloves’, Safecare Gloves, viewed 26th of May, 2013,

<http://www.safecare-gloves.com/tattoo-gloves.html>

Anon, 2010, ‘Top Subjects X to communicate with strangers’, Aquela Ein!, viewed

29th of May, 2013, <http://aquelaein.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/top-x-assuntos-para-

comunicacao-com.html>

Becker, F, 2002, ‘Julia’s JDMS Diary’, Julia’s JDMS Diary, viewed 18th of May, 2013,

<http://www.ralphb.net/JDMS/june2002.html>

Choiron, M, 2012, ‘Funny for Kids’ Animal Games’, World’s Children, viewed 26th of

May, 2013, <http://worlds-children.blogspot.com.au/2012_03_01_archive.html>

Depositphotos Inc., 2013, ‘Professional development | Stock Photo’, depositphotos,

viewed 26th of May, 2013, <http://depositphotos.com/2983460/stock-photo-Professional-

development.html>

Freeland, L, 2012, ‘The Problem with Simultaneity”, L.A. Freeland, viewed 18th of

May, 2013, <http://www.lafreeland.com/tag/writing/>

Halyburton, D & McVay, J, 2010, ‘Take Action For Your Digital Future’, McVay New

Media, viewed 26th of May, 2013, <http://www.mcvaynewmedia.com/services/action-

button/>

Inter IKEA Systems, 2013, ‘Ribba’, Ikea, viewed 26th of May, 2013,

<http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/60132521/#>

Jelsoft Enterprises, 2013, ‘Anyone just remove the factory resonator and weld in a

aftermarket muffler?’, Chevy HHR, viewed 27th of May, 2013,

<http://www.chevyhhr.net/forums/showthread.php?t=26810>

Last Night’s Garbage, 2009, ‘Trash Can Flowers’, Last Night’s Garbage, viewed 26th

of May, 2013, <http://www.lastnightsgarbage.com/?p=1167>

http://www.safecare-gloves.com/tattoo-gloves.html

http://aquelaein.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/top-x-assuntos-para-comunicacao-com.html

http://aquelaein.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/top-x-assuntos-para-comunicacao-com.html

http://www.ralphb.net/JDMS/june2002.html

http://worlds-children.blogspot.com.au/2012_03_01_archive.html

http://depositphotos.com/2983460/stock-photo-Professional-development.html

http://depositphotos.com/2983460/stock-photo-Professional-development.html

http://www.lafreeland.com/tag/writing/

http://www.mcvaynewmedia.com/services/action-button/

http://www.mcvaynewmedia.com/services/action-button/

http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/60132521/

http://www.chevyhhr.net/forums/showthread.php?t=26810

http://www.lastnightsgarbage.com/?p=1167

Lions Youth Haven, 2013, ‘Westwood Farm’, Lions Youth Haven, viewed 27th of May,

2013, <http://www.lyh.org.au/lyh/?page_id=181>

LisiSoft.com, 2013, ‘Tape-a-Talk Voice Recorder 0.9.7.6.1’, lisiSoft Android Apps,

viewed 26th of May, 2013, <http://androidapp.lisisoft.com/apps-android-phone/103210-

name.markus.droesser.tapeatalk.html>

Missouri Vocational Enterprises, 2012, ‘Park Benches’, Missouri Vocational

Enterprises Correctional Industries, viewed 26th of May, 2013,

<http://doc.mo.gov/mve/html/metal/benches.html>

Polyvore, 2013, ‘How Magna Doodle Works’, Polyvore, viewed 27th of May, 2013,

<http://www.polyvore.com/how_magna_doodle_works/thing?id=66055719>

Spurgeon, C, 2008, ‘Emergency Party Button’, Spurgeonblog, viewed 29th of May,

2013, <http://www.spurgeonworld.com/blog/archives/2008/05/emergency_party.html>

Walsh, L, 2011, ‘Lucky dip #2’, Now and Then, viewed 29th of May, 2013,

<http://lynnwalsh.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/lucky-dip-2/>

Wikimedia Commons, 2008, ‘Muffin NIH.jpg’, Wikimedia Commons, viewed 29th of

May, 2013, <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Muffin_NIH.jpg>

Wikimedia Foundation, 2013, ‘House of Mirrors’, Wikipedia the Free Encycolpedia,

viewed 26th of May, 2013, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_mirrors>

http://www.lyh.org.au/lyh/?page_id=181

http://androidapp.lisisoft.com/apps-android-phone/103210-name.markus.droesser.tapeatalk.html

http://androidapp.lisisoft.com/apps-android-phone/103210-name.markus.droesser.tapeatalk.html

http://doc.mo.gov/mve/html/metal/benches.html

http://www.polyvore.com/how_magna_doodle_works/thing?id=66055719

http://www.spurgeonworld.com/blog/archives/2008/05/emergency_party.html

http://lynnwalsh.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/lucky-dip-2/

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Muffin_NIH.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_mirrors

city sound · 2013-05-30 · city sound date due: 31st of may, 2013 12:00 pm awesome platypi...

Documents