Information Visualization and Data Art

Presentation by

Borra, Erik

Dresscher, Paulien

Kampman, Minke

Traditional InfoVis

“The use of computers to interactively amplify cognition, using visual representations.”

Based on abstract data and large datasets Computer based Produces a visualization Is readable and recognizable Interactively amplifies cognition

Card, et.al. (1999)

Pousman

Casual InfoVis as a complement to traditional InfoVis Centrality Gradience w.r.t. InfoVis

Ambient (informative, peripheral), social (ego-centric, data-centric), artistic (data driven, open to interpretation)

Def casual: user population, usage patterns, data type, insight

(analytic, awareness, social, reflective), design: utilitarian vs useful

How to evaluate them, how to use elements InfoVis ? insight based, systems components, usability, longitudinal

analysis, experience sampling

Vande Moere

Tension / Continuum between traditional and artistic InfoVis.

The main difference is the data mapping approach and choice of metaphor;

1. Data Visualization (What, How, Why)

2. Visualization Design (Highlights)

3. Ambient Display / Informative Art (Non-intrusive informing)

4. Visualization Experience (Conceptual exploration)

5. Visualization Art / Data Art (Exploring possibilities)

Kosara

Two sides of a scale: 1) pragmatic visualization 2) artistic visualization.

User friendliness The sublime is that what inspires awe and

grandeur and evokes emotional response. The third way:

to unify them through the common concepts of critical thinking and criticism, i.e. science

How does Aesthetic differ from InfoVis?Info Vis Aesthetic Vis

User Population expert user

Usage Pattern momentary contemplative

Data Type work personal

Insight analytical something else

Design utilitarian useful

Data mapping 1 to 1 ? to ?

Visual transfer relates directly imaginative

Interpretation designer viewer

Visualisation user friendly sublime

Evaluation scientific personal

How can these systems be useful in Information Visualization?

Certain characteristics / elements can be used

There should be an InfoVis critique (critical theory)

There might be a common frame of evaluation

Certain characteristics can be used

Theories of insight analytic, awareness, social, reflective.

Design Challenges utilitarian vs useful, pleasing, ambiguity, integrate in lives of users.

There should be an InfoVis critique Neutral voice

discuss the work not the researcher

Focus on facts backup statements

No self promotion don’t mention your own work.

Clear goal to provide an alternative conclusion.

Common frame of evaluation

Although less productivity focused and different usage patterns, different data, and different systems,

there can be: insight based evaluation, system's components or comparative

evaluations, experience sampling, longitudinal studies of utilization.