This week was particularly used for discussions and reflecting iteratively on the current concept. For the first part of the week, I thought about interactivity and the implementation into my project. As I explained in my thesis, doing in order to think helps immensely to understand the matter not just in a shorter amount of time but also with more reliability on keeping it.

In a mentoring with Daniel Hug we talked about the possibility to implement the sound component as an interactive part. We discussed using samples of sounds that fit to the topic islands and are distorted by filters to create a soundscape. These filters can be triggered with the data set. Therefore, he introduced me to MuLab, a sound editiing tool as well as PureData's possibility to export MIDI strings. This was a first outlook on possible sound producing opportunities. 

Having a quick look on how to treat the sound in my diploma project video, he suggested the simple procedure to walk through the installation with a microphone attached and use this as the audio layer. The certain topic islands could be amplified with the original files.

I, as well as Nicole in a mentoring on 11th of April, stated that ithe project works pretty well visually till now but it somehow fails to provide the content in al clear way. Of course, it is hard to equip the visitor with an understanding of this complex topic. It would be too much if I wanted him to get the whole concept in detail just by going through it. So the consequence is to provide a very basic explanation or let's say a hint while visiting the installation. This could be done with the help of interactions such as self-assembling these tiles or through sound and video. I want to focus on giving the visitor first hints through visiting the installation, position himself and build his own opinion to later on resolve what the researchers interpreted. From this level, a discussion or an exchange can be fostered where people can express their diffferent interpretations and what that does with the data itself.

To achieve this complex mediator task more profoundly than within the current prototype, I thought about different approaches of enabling the visitor to interact with the installation. Some of these ways were winding the tiles up and down to show two different states of the data set, letting the visitor adjust the light intensity, or rearranging the tiles himself. 

While doing this, I noticed that I was too stuck with my hanging-tiles-idea. This is also what Björn somehow expressed in our mentoring on 12th of April when he asked critical questions such as «Why is your parkour arranged the way it is? Do you think that reflects the data set appropriately?» Due to that I saw the necessitiy to iteratively go through the current concept; open the dimanond again. In order to do so, I asked myself critical questions to improve or strengthen the current concept. Thus, I am trying to find the missing parts. I explored and noted my main messages which I want to achieve and things which I definitely not want. Further on, I started with how I could avoid the things I do not want, such as «people not interacting because the installation looks too fragile». The next step was to think about how I could achieve to express or communicate my desired messages such as «see the underlying pattern». For both steps I tried to open my mind again and to think of different ways. While doing so, I discovered that some answers of both sides are the same. Answering how I can avoid something can support conveying the message. While some aspects such as projection and the use of light are the same, some others are crucially influenced. This led from material considerations to rearranging the tiles and to a somehow new approach of realizing it but the crucial principles.

‍

‍

What can be seen here on the sketch is a general simplification, as also Björn suggested. The different topic islands are not fixed areas in size but are rather defined through the elements they carry. These elements should be stacked up to 5 items; and these 5 items create 1 stack. This way, I could be able to exactly represent the number of occuring statements of one topic. The size of the area is then defined through the amount of stacks inside.

The stacks itself, till now still acrylic glass tiles, which vary in height according to their frequency they occur in the data set. Thus, a landscape will be created which could make the visitor aware of the data set much faster than in the previous version. Using sound as an interactive element could enable the visitor to dive into the different topic islands. Therefore all statements could be read by a computer voice to show the schematic and algorhythmic methodology of assembling such a data set. Projecting onto these tile to create a pattern on the floor ist still the same. What I have to work on is still the interactivity. I made several sketches how the visitor could actively change the order of the tiles to create his own pattern and thus, visualize his own point of view.

What is interesting about dealing with this spatial approach is the fact that certain questions are coming up that may not be asked at all or at least not that profoundly when just working with a digital visualization. Questions that striked me personally were «What is happening through this translation? What is left?» or even crucial questions as «What is the main message?», «What should be derived from it?», and «Is the result still something that is connected with the original statement?». Others are for instance «Why is it necessary to abstract the data in order to display it? If not abstracted, how could it be displayed?» I noticed that minimal changes evoke completely different statements and thus, can lead to significantly different perspectives on the data set. Even slight material changes, such as switching from acrylic glass to aluminum can influence the depiction, the perception and the interpretation crucially.

Thanks to Maike Thies from the specification Game Design, I managed to obtain a license for MadMapper as she allowed me to borrow one from the specification. This enabled me to use the full functionality of MadMapper and use it for prototyping purposes. Since I would have needed to teach myself Arena Resolume, which is way more complicated from my point of view, using MadMapper is much more intuitive and thus, less time-consuming and the best option for my case.

I also got the chance to talk to Lisa Heierli who graduated last year in Interaction Design and is now working at MuDA, the Museum of DIgital Arts. She gave me a few very good inputs and showed some very inspiring artists such as pe lang.

Next steps are to prototype the new aspects of this week's contemplations and to see how it goes from there.