Thesis Committee Meeting 1

Written by on 7th November 2011 in Thoughts with Leave a comment

Here’s the slide deck I showed at my first Thesis Committee meeting today with Tim, Elise, and Mike. It generally covers what I’ve learned from the experiments I’ve been working on so far, what type of feedback I got from Science Fair, how I’m reframing my project, and what I’m currently working on and what I plan to be working on going forward. I think the helpful part was the end where I sort of lay out the things I’d like to focus on making going forward:

  1. A way to “spawn” things in the physical realm from an online realm.
  2. A way to enable collaborative creation that affects the real world.
  3.  A tangible interface for interacting with our intangible representation of the real world.

Thesis Progress (so far)

Some general comments & feedback from my notes:

  • I seem to be operating within a space between the constraints of a game and a totally open world like Second Life. How can I be more clear about how game like or not game like my project is.
  • What makes it different from Second Life is the potential flow between the real and virtual space. This potential cycle is what makes it more interesting.
  • It may be good to do a sort of survey/catalogue of existing mixed reality type things (ie. Foursquare) and diagram out what the difference is between them as a way to situate my work.
  • I mentioned my instinct to want to include animation, which is good, but what is it about animation that makes it fascinating in this context?
  • How does animation – which lives in a very frame based virtual world – relate to the real world?
  • What type of things do we do better in the virtual world?
  • A traditional virtual world like second life is like a dead end. This new real virtual world is different because it’s not a complete escape from reality.
  • What does the virtual world offer? What does the physical world offer?
  • Maintaining the qualities of the real or virtual world when they pass that barrier makes sense. How can I be more explicit about the qualities or characteristics. What is an example of mis-fidelity or glitches
  • How does the kitty example, through the animation, poke at the existing structure?
  • The studies are interesting, maybe it’s good to dive deeper and ask what makes them interesting.
  • There are elements of subversiveness + play + interaction beyond function.
  • How can it be more meaningful (not ness. practical) into the real world?
  • How can I complete the loop?
  • Maybe I could catalogue presidents on artifacts from the virtual world in the real world. (pixels, polygons, etc)
  • Maybe it doesn’t need to be a thing. Could it be information? Or opportunities?
  • How could I explore iterations & variations on things like the kitty in real life. A spectrum from noting, to printouts, to projections?
  • Can I catalogue this range of experiments?
  • Does it have to be within a context of a static image? What if the view was a live video feed?
  • Part of it seems to be about the tension between a static and animated thing.
  • We have this world of interfaces we live in that have a spectrum from utilitarian to pure fantasy, this is somewhere between that.
  • Dig deeper and play out these variations.

Leave a Reply

You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>