NATASHA KESELJ - The Digital Image 2007

Between weeks 3 and 4

Betweenthese two weeks I decided to do some revision and some research intothe subject. I stumbled across this article about INTERACTIVE DESIGN. Coming from an interactive background, I found this article quiet confronting and challenging – not in a negative way, rather in a way that made me really think about interactive design, and how far we can push the ideas of “interactive-ness”. Below is the article, along with its location on the web. I highlighted some of the sections that I found to be of importance and or challenged my own ideas and beliefs. but of course as I EDITED THIS BLOG 1st in microsost word!!-- it WONT show us here the underlines/highlighted areas.... sooo.. ull jus have to make do! sorry! :( its still an interesting read tho!

Interaction Design
The challenge
'Interactivity' is often limited to the user moving their cursor to an appropriate place, clicking their mouse, then something happens. Choice follows a tree structure with limited branches and is limited to a series of predetermined outcomes, nothing new or unplanned for originally can develop, emerge or challenge the original script. Multimedia programming which produces an over-determined interaction creates a fundamentally passive user experience, with little more user input than a television remote control provides. Before thinking of ways to help design 'interactives', it is necessary to ask "what is interaction?".
Interaction is a recursive process
Interaction is a recursive process: a complex back-and forth, a dialectical process, an act of unfolding, a feedback loop between the user and the computer. Recursion a fundamental trope in computing and is becoming an increasingly important trope in the way we understand our world. Recursion as a trope combines ideas of self-reference, self-similarity, circularity, repetition and nesting. It reveals a path from the finite to the infinite, from the same to the different. It also reveal similarities between disparate phenomenon.
Recursion is difficult to define. A recursive definition is a definition which refers to that which is being defined in its own definition. A recursive process is a process that refers to itself - a computer program that calls itself being the paradigmatic example. This seems paradoxical but it is very common in mathematics and logic. Computers are recursion machines. Recursion seems paradoxical due to its circular self-reference. However, the interesting thing is - as long as there is at least one way out of a circular loop, recursion does not necessarily lead to infinite regress and paradox. Recursion is both the thing which makes our computers work and which makes them crash.
Recursion also holds the key to a very specific problem in multimedia production: How can we make a CD ROM that has a finite set of media components - text fragments, audio, video and images - but is capable of a potentially infinite variety of novel behaviours? We can do this by using recursion - rules which can be repetitively applied to the results of their own previous application. By recombination and reuse, a finite set of elements can be combined in a infinite variety of ways. This is how language works to produce linguistic creativity. It is also how mathematics, logic, number, divination, myth, DNA, sampling DJs, and artistic pastiche work.
Lippman's definition of interactivity
According to Alan Lippman from MIT's Media Lab, interactivity involves "mutual and simultaneous activity on the part of both participants, usually working towards some goal, but not necessarily", and offers these principals:
• Interruptibility - that an interactive system allows participants to interrupt each other, not just alternate complete turns
• Graceful Degradation - that an interactive system will always encounter something it can't respond to fully, in which case it needs to gracefully "degrade"
• Limited Look-Ahead - that an interactive system is capable of looking ahead in order to anticipate the other [artificial intelligence?]
• Impression of an Infinite Database - that an interactive system gives the impression of being able to handle an infinite variety of interactions with an infinite number of responses
• No Default - that an interactive system does not push a default trajectory for the interaction
Interaction as mutual and simultaneous activity
If we think of "interaction" as a mutual and simultaneous activity between participants (our user(s) and our software), then - adopting Lippman's ideas - the following pincipals will help designing interactive multimedia:
• Each participant is able to interrupt the other at any stage.
• The direction of the flow of information may change during the interaction.
• In order to maintain the flow of interaction it must not get stuck in dead-ends halt the interactive process. Thus the trajectory and outcomes of the interaction is contingent on the user's actions and the program's actions.
• Avoid pre-planned paths to interaction.
• The path is developed in interaction, not prior to interaction as no one party can determine the course of the interaction.
• Each participant is (to a certain extent) semi-autonomous because they must have the ability to change the course of interaction whilst staying responsive to the cues provided by the other participant.
Application of these principals
Rather than describing an interactive multimedia project through a series of screens and pathways which can be detailed in a storyboard, think of your software as a semi-autonomous agent in a 'conversation' with the user. Whilst individual scenarios and activities can be storyboarded, the way they are manifested is an outcome of interaction. Therefore, think in terms of how your software can receive user input (how it 'listens' to the conversation), how does it process these inputs (out does it 'think' about what it hears), and how is its response manifested (what it 'says' back to the user).
For example, the PAL9000 Project, an attempt to a self-referential multimedia title which plays with the conventions of human computer interaction. A key idea expressed by PAL is that we no longer give 'commands' to machines but we 'enter into dialogues' with them. PAL 9000 takes this one step further by engaging users in a (literal) conversation that are partly determined by the user's actions and partly by PAL's mood (which in turn is influenced by a range of factors such as past conversations with that user, the time of day, the availablility of certain resources on the user's computer and so on.). PAL constantly generates unique experiences for the user, so that each time the user has a different 'conversation' with PAL. Some of the elements of the conversation might be the same - like a real person PAL sometimes repeats itself when it runs out stories, gets bored or forgets. PAL's face is the primary interface. His/her visual appearance is fluid because PAL likes to wear masks, to play games and to impersonate other computers and software for dramatic effect. There is no pre-planned paths to interaction. For some users, PAL is a like a 'tamagotchi' to be pampered and cajoled in performing cute tricks with caresses and flattery. For others, PAL is an adversory to be tricked and beaten into submission or exposed as a 'pretend' artificial creature with linguistic booby traps.
A short comment on graphic user interfaces
A typical way an interactive multimedia application 'listens' to a user is via a GUI (graphic user interface). Over the years, an informal standard or orthodoxy has developed for many visual devices - such as buttons, sliders, radio buttons and checkboxes. There are some advantages to maintaining and supporting such a standardised approach since they provide an easily recognisable 'common language' for users and software to use when interacting (and it certainly makes it easier to start a conversation with a user when they immediately recognise the language your application is speaking). Making an obtuse and mysterious GUI does not necessarily help create a richer, deeper level of interaction. Whilst a well designed, seductive 'GUI' (and some 'interesting content') will help stimulate the curiosity, users interact with the 'whole' of the software over time, not just its visual interface.
http://www.lingoworkshop.com/Articles/papers/interaction_design.php#article263

and so after reading this article, I had come to realise that in the view of this writer, interactivity was more than just a means of creating a linear/non-linear narrative.an assumed collection of events, that are already designated before the final product is even in use by another via internet or cd rom etc. the ultimate form of interactive design is artifical intelligence. Robotics being more than the future of technology, but going as far as to say that the study and redefining of robotics/technology is our way of evolving our species, but with a limited pre-programmed memory! As to say that we are not going to live on forever – with the way that technology and industralization is advancing, and using robotics as a way to preserve ourselves for the centuries to come! Not to get carried away, and getting to my point, if interactive technology is already assumed, i.e. interactivity is a passive action, and not challenging the event then how can we possibly create A.I. or even getting back to reality, or a multimedia based item that interacts with us on such a level that the passive, pre-designated experience is overcome!
• Sugesting that Each participant is able to interrupt the other at any stage. In my mind is a load a hogwash! Interactive design AS FAR AS MULTIMEDIA is concerned, i.e. the internet, cd roms and any computer related programs and products in general, is interactve only EVER to an extent! With out assumed knowledge, how can we create a state of events(interactive-ness) for others to learn and eperience! To suggest that A path should be developed in interaction, not prior to interaction defeats that purpose of calling a director .mov file for example or a flash .swf file the “final product” but rather stating that the process taken to crfeate the .mov or .swf is more “interactive” than the finished product itself!

The idea of what is interactive and defining it, is far fetched and complex to contemplate as defining what it is to be human. Because interactivity is a way of life, not just amongst humans but all living and non living aspects of life.
To finish off this blog, and to conclude my thoughts, interactivity with in multimedia and design, needs consistancy- in design (colour, text,layout), appropriate animation/video/sound, and a level of articulate interactivity that is suitable to the intended audience. It is pointless having high-tech structures and pathways within a piece for a 5 y.o, or even someone older but who is computer illiterate! DESIGN not just the aesthetic value, but the demographics ans structure IS EVERYTHING. PLANNING is everything! Interactive multimedia is a port to broadening others perceptions, wether it be for educational, informative or even merely for entertainment value, we use computers its functions and products as a learning tool. A way to store and share all types of information. If it people want to have formal conversations with their computer then maybe they should step back , take a lok at themselves and what they are doing,a nd go and find some REAL friends to talk to!

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

After going throughthis article I decided to refresh my memory on lingo scripting and came across this lovely lil website fo rthe university of new south wales and tips on director I believe version mx2004 but it doesn’t say

And I came across this lovely liltle exert which I fond quite direct but definitely VERY true in allof its aspects, and thought id share it with everyone!:P

Computers are very stupid. They know nothing other than what they have been told. They will do exactly what you tell them do to but you will have to tell them in minute detail how they must do it. Programming is a way of communicating with your computer. Learning to program involves more than learning the 'words' and 'grammar' of the programming language. It involves learning a way of thinking, which is very different to traditional natural thinking. This can only be achieved with lots of practice and experience.
 http://www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/learning/director/Lingo/programming.asp

*******I believe this ONE blog sums up ALL of the words im meant to have written over the whole of the course! Lol Ohh well! ☺

NATASHA KESELJ - The Digital Image 2007

Monday, 19 March 2007

between weeks 3 and 4, and some intersting info!

WEEK 3

WEEK 3

WEEK 2

Monday, 26 February 2007

Links

About Me

Blog Archive