Physical Computing Blog


 
 
Week 10
  Working on project 3
This week we took pushkin to a trip in the street of New York, to create our first quicktime VR movie in Cooper Union square.
Using the marionette as a controller to navigate through the movie - if you zoom-in to the right place in this VR world you will find yourself in a small strange hotel room, this room as well has a door to a third world.
We had some problems with the navigtion and strange values from the accelerometers, but we finally made it almost good and hopefully smooth navigation.
The switches on the stage will now manipulate sound and will trigger a new video layer appearing for only a few seconds until it disappears, revealing some new aspects of the story.

Final Jitter patch
Here is the web-page for the project
 
 
 
 
Week 9
Project 3 - Pushkin the Marionette - Next Generation

Pushkin to Jitter Code - re-scaling the analog input from the accelerometer in order to send MIDI values to Jitter
The Jitter patch, using quicktime VR

Marionette User Testing
After recoding and adjusting our values on max Jitter we were able to use our puppet effectively with out analog input of the accelerometer to affect the quicktime vr photo by rotating the wooden handle.
It was time to see how other users interacted with our project. We had 4 users take the helms of the marionette and found interesting results:

Lamar- First he used the puppet with two hands, his own inclination , he slightly rotated the wooden handle and instantly realized that he was affecting the image on the computer. I had him try with one hand and he seemed to really feel connected to the piece. His findings were that he knew he was seeing what the puppet saw, however, he felt that the puppet's head should move to make it more clear.

Jason Lee- He also took the wooden handle by both hands, he seemed to be very intuitive with the controller, even adding a two handed toggle, which was very interesting, like the puppet was running, he actually looked at the puppet and split his focus between the computer screen and the puppet, trying to really combine the two worlds.

Hawk- He saw the other users and he was curious about the two handed vs. one hand controller. His reaction was that the left and right yaw of the wooden handle was easier for him to understand while using both hands, he was curious about handicapped users...which is a good point. My reaction to that is that the puppet can be controlled by hands, mouth, arms, legs..it is not confined to just the use of the hands.

Rich- He quickly found the association of movement affecting the video, but, he was also trying to rotate the wooden handle latterally.
He noticed that this did not have any reaction. He was very gentle with the movements, which was very inspiring to the designers. He was trying to figure out the content associations with the puppet and the church that we were showing in the quicktime vr, we told him this was just an example to show movement.

We presented the project to the interactive design program in RCA - London, in a video conference talking about puppets. It was a strange experience...








 
 
 
 
Week 8
  Project 2 - Pushkin the Marionette
The puppet's movements and locations on the small stage in turn activate a visual wonderland for the puppeteer and audience to enjoy as we follow the puppet on a journey through an adventure, navigated by the puppeteer.
Ryan's Block Diagram
The jitter patch and its screenshot
The PIC code
More Picture

 
 
 
 
Week 7
Project 2 - Marionette
We are using an anonymous sailor marionette.
The idea is to build a little theater and have some sensors to capture the marionette movements.
An accelerometer will be hooked to the marionette's wooden handle.
We will also attach some magnets to his body and have some REED switches on the floor. That will give us a reading of the marionette location on stage and his position: standing/sitting/lying (when there is no change in the wooden handle angle but in its height).
A video projection will act as the setting.
Our aim is to match videos and sounds to the position of the marionette in the space and his current posture.

postures pictures

 
 
 
 
Week 6
Re-thinking the Robot
I am thinking of using puppets/marionette.
You may call them Robots, they might act like robot, but they will not be metal, they will be properly dressed up.
As a first step I would like to try and make a marionette movement affect some visual and audio effects.
 
 
 
 
Week 5 (Oct. 8-15, 2004)
Chelsea hotel project - presentation (ppt)
 
 
 
 
Week 4 (Oct. 1-7, 2004)
Chelsea Hotel - Group Project (with Jenny, Ryan & David)
After several visits to the Chelsea hotel, we decided to focus on the first thing that drew our attention - the mirrors in the bar.
We thought that the bar bathroom can be an interesting place to set our experiment.

What happens when the mirror responds to your actions?
The goal of our project is to critique the private space of the bathroom, and somehow enhance the experience inside it.

Potential Input -
  • weight
  • distance from the mirror
  • duration in front of the mirror


    • Output -
  • Changes of lighting
  • Projection of images
  • Mirror movemnt - up and down, forward and backward, rotating left and right


    • More Pictures

    Lab: servo/analog out
    While trying to build a small model for our project we programmed the chip to start the servo motor, by sending some pulses to it.
    Then we connceted an analog sensor (a photocell) so it will influence the movement of the servo motor.
    Here is the code
    		 
     
     
     
    Week 3 (Sep. 24-30, 2004)
    Lab Assignment - Analog in, tracking changes with variables
    After the Analog-in review, it all became pretty clear.
    Besides the fact we are running out of chips (and today I learned how to ruin a chip - remove it from the circuit without unplugging the electricity first), all the steps went smoothly.
    		 
     
     
     
    Week 2 (Sep. 17-23, 2004)
    There is not much to tell about the second assignment...
    Programming the chip was quite simple.
    I made some tests using the serial cable to transmit output back to the computer.
    The only problem I had is - most of the pictures I took are fuzzy and I can't attach them. So here is a link to my code intead
    		 
     
     
     

    As an owner of two microchips (PIC18F452-I/P and PIC18LF452-I/P), one breadboard and a switch, I am proud to open my physical computing blog.

    First Week (Sep. 10-16, 2004)
    The first week was mainly about finding the Basic Electronics for the lab assignment. What seems like an easy task - go and buy a kit in NYU computer store, turned into a trip to Canal street, where we entered almost each electronic store until finding the desired breadboard.

    Step 1 in the assignment was the trickiest one. Soldering the wires to the power supply connector with a challenging soldering-iron, which just didn't work as it should have. So when I realized that the problem is the soldering iron and not me, I stopped feeling that "this is a man's work, what the hell am I doing?"

    Of course it took a while to connect the first circuit, but it felt good to see the light. (Img 1)
    After understanding the basics, the next steps in the assignment were much easier. So in step 2 I watched the effect of a few Led's on the strength of the light of the LEDs (Img 2)
    And in the last step I examined the effect of exposing and covering a photocell on the strength of the light. (Img 3).

    Img 1 Img 2 Img 3


    Less is More (More or less) - William Buxton
    The article was very interesting, I agreed with most of it. Yet I couldn't stop thinking if there is a certain point when we should say - this is it, we invented too much, is all this technology necessary or are we just trying to satisfy a need to create and invent ?
    Do all these inventions make the world a better place? Of course it's an easier place for those of us who are not challenged by technology. But I think the majority of the world's population is actually terrified by the computer.
    Therefore I strongly agree with the writer - we have to examine the user's needs rather than inventing another wonderful technology that only few people can understand its importance and substance…

    While reading I recalled an article I read a year ago reviewing 10 technologies that deserve to die:
    Nuclear weapons
    Coal based power
    Internal combustion engine
    incandescent light bulbs
    land mines
    manned spae flight
    prisons
    cosmetic implants
    lie detectors
    DVDs


    Switch - use your head....
    I thought an interesting idea for switches would be switches you have to physically use your head in order to make them work. Here are some ideas:

    1. A pillow which has an alarm clock in it, that wakes you up with a gentle head massage, in order to stop it you just have to bang your head against the pillow.

    2. A window that opens when it feels your head approaching a certain point of it. So basically when you want to open the window you have to stare at it at a certain point. This is actually not a good idea for many reasons. But I am documenting....

    3. Head movement visualizer - just like the music player visualizers in the computer. Basically it's a switch that responds to head's movement with visual effects like changes of lights and colors. The power/strength of the movement will determine the colors and the effects it produces.