CONSULTATION AND FEEDBACK

During consultation with Andreas, he found the direction of my experimentation interesting. He recommended creating multiple publications showcasing the outcomes of these experiments. Additionally, he suggested experimenting with the code to make the servo motor move at different intervals. However, he emphasized the importance of establishing a clear link between these experiments and my research objectives. Since my RPO feedback mentioned the lack of clarity in terms of my graduation project and research, and Andreas provided a strategic focus to ensure coherence.

MAKING MORE BRUSHES

For my next task, I explored creating more mark-making tools. I experimented with various objects, including sponges, cotton, and wire. With the wire, I successfully crafted two tools—one in a spiral shape and the other with bundled wires resembling a broom. In addition to these found objects, I also experimented with Lino stamps.

Although the Lino stamps resulted in cute iterations, I realized they posed practical challenges for the servo motor experiment. Firstly, obtaining a varied texture from a Lino stamp when the servo motor rotates in different directions proved to be difficult. The stamp tended to produce a blob of ink rather than a distinguishable pattern. Secondly, the user would need to paint on the stamp before using it, adding an unnecessary step for users who are already engaged in specific tasks to achieve the desired outcome. I deemed this additional step impractical for users interacting with the project.

Hence, I found the sponge to be the most successful tool so far. While the net also provided interesting results, I am somewhat hesitant to use it, as I have employed this tool in previous projects. I aim to explore newer iterations to introduce a different texture to the project.

FACING ISSUES WITH THE SERVO MOTOR MOVEMENT

As seen in the video, I encountered difficulty with the servo motor's movement, mainly attributing it to the code. During my research, I discovered there are different types of servo motors, with one being rotatory and capable of a full 360-degree movement, while the other is more suitable for 90 degrees and at best, 180 degrees. The one accessible to me was the latter type, and I refrained from purchasing a rotatory servo motor at this point to avoid additional expenses. If the prototype proves successful, I may consider acquiring more motors later. In the video, the motor doesn't execute a complete 180 or 90 degrees movement; instead, it simply moves back and forth, resulting in a somewhat monotonous interaction and pattern. Hence, I needed to figure out how to adjust the code to diversify the motor's movement directions.

CONDUCTING USER TESTING

Once I resolved the movement issue for the motor, I decided to conduct a round of user testing with the assistance of my peers in the studio. For the visual representation of Macbeth, I created an archival accordion-fold booklet containing found images. I paired two people together for testing because I realised that a singular person doing this would be challenging due to the numerous components involved. While it can be done alone, doing it as a pair is undoubtedly more effective and easier to manage.

INSIGHTS AND OBSERVATIONS

Firstly, a big shoutout to Medha, Kou, Shalom, Tanvi, Soyeon, and Dawon for their assistance in the user testing phase. After the testing sessions, I sought feedback from each participant, asking them about their feelings regarding the tangible experience, what they gained from it, which part was the most enjoyable, and areas where improvements could be made.

The overall consensus among them was that the experience was genuinely enjoyable and fun. They found it fascinating to witness the motor's movement with just the touch of paper. Many highlighted the discovery of how the interaction worked; for instance, tapping rapidly resulted in different textures. Additionally, they appreciated the unpredictability of the mark-making process, as each outcome was unique, making it challenging to anticipate the pattern or texture that would be created.

Regarding improvements, participants highlighted that their focus was primarily on the interaction and mark-making process, while the visual representation of Macbeth seemed somewhat overshadowed. They suggested enhancing the connection between the visual narrative and the mark-making process by incorporating textures into the visual representation. Additionally, participants recommended introducing a more dynamic interaction by allowing different parts of the visual to activate the motor, creating a more engaging and interconnected experience. Another suggestion involved expanding the mark-making options by incorporating multiple motors attached to the visual, with different parts activating distinct tools for mark-making. This would add complexity and variety to the interaction.

This tangible interaction turned out to be a successful experience, aligning well with several research objectives. It effectively created a sense of agency through personalised outcomes, meeting one of the key goals. Surprisingly, the interaction designed for individual use worked exceptionally well when executed in pairs. The dependency between users in obtaining an outcome encouraged conversation, contributing to the idea of breaking the fourth wall between the user and the experience. This unexpected positive aspect added depth to the overall interaction.