Profile- Male Artisan

Profile Male Day

After creating a number of profiles for a range of potential briquette users we had to brainstorm ways in which we could promote briquette burners to the appropriate people. With my group Kieron-Scott Woodhouse and Dwayne Lecky we decided to use the idea of a food festival to promote briquette use. By showing people how they would use the burners and allowing them to see the results; to taste the food cooked on them, we hope that it will convince some people to switch their coal burners for briquette burners. We used our design hacking skills to create images of the vehicles we would imagine would be used to travel around Nairobi cooking on the briquette burners.

The first vehicle was put together using parts of a bicycle and wheelbarrow, the second was using a local bus to house the cooking equipment for children, like those library buses that used to drive round to schools in the UK a few years ago. By hacking existing vehicles which are available to the community in Nairobi it made it a viable scheme. We also designed some posters which would be displayed on the vehicles to promote briquettes, get people involved and advertise the food festival at the end. 

Many of the pieces I talk about in this blog feature in the following video:

I visited the decode exhibition recently, being involved in an open source project (the Jua Kali project) as part of my course, it was intriguing to see how open source design was being used already. From the moment I walked in I loved this exhibition, everything about it encouraged you (and at some stages forced you) to interact with the designs. Entering the exhibition it was like entering a fantasy world, wading through Dean Roosegaarde’s light stick installation as though it were a field, reaching out and touching the light sticks and watching how they react to this interaction was magical.

James Frost used the visually impressive Radiohead video for ‘House of Cards’ and used 3D mapping technology to create an interactive version of the video. The face appeared to follow the movement of the person’s hand. It was a mesmerizing experience watching this form adapt and change according to your movement.

A piece I found really interesting was the exquisite clock. The numbers were complied of images photographed by the public of everyday objects which appeared to spell out a certain number. The images used by the clock were fed by a live database of images updated by visiters to the website (www.exquisiteclock.org). This level of open source made everyone feel like they could get involved with open source design, which is what it is all about.

Another creation by  Fabrica; the Venetian Mirror was a piece that amazed me.  The image created in the mirror is not immediate, for the persons image to appear they must sit completely still in front the mirror. The effect of movement creates a blurred effect. It is almost like a photograph which is in the process but never quite gets developed. The design of the mirror; the choice of colour scheme and the effects created in the image make the piece appear supernatural, all the people appear and disappear like ghosts, their image lingering after they have left.

Some other pieces in the exhibition which really caught my attention was Ross Phillips Video grid, people recorded a 1 second film which was then placed on the video grid. The grid was constantly being updated each time someone new recorded a video. Mehmet Akten’s bodypaint, converted movement and gestures into paint and explosions of colour. Finally Sennep’s piece called Yoke which allowed you to blow away a dandelions’ seeds using an infrared light concealed in a hair drier. The visual effect created made it look as though it were the wind blowing them in a film, it was a really beautiful sight.

I think the great thing about this exhibition was its mass appeal. By engaging the audience and involving them in the open source design of the pieces without overwhelming them with the technology behind it; it allowed the pieces to connect with people on so many levels. In a world where user centered and open source design and prototyping are becoming increasingly important, this exhibition sold their appeal to the masses.

For the first experience I was sent off to find the Kolam Dancers Mask, I was told it was in room 24, in the theme living and dying. As I walked around the museum my partner Ryan had observe my experience, the touch points I encountered on my way to find the mask and the difficulties I faced in finding it. We had to examine the experience for the user from the moment they entered the door, what they were able to see, what visual clues were on show.

After struggling to find the specific item using the touchpoints available at the museum; the maps, signs, information points and tables and item labels; we repeated the task again. This time we employed empathy tools (in this case a pair of sunglasses and a pair of motorcycle gloves) to put ourselves in the shoes of someone with an impairment that would restrict their ability to find the items.

After seeing the problems we encountered in finding the items, we set about creating an experience prototype to overcome these problems and make the experience more enjoyable. All we used were some stickers, post-it notes, a pen, our voices and our imagination to create quick dirty prototypes to test out our ideas.

Feature 1
Augmented Reality
Head up visual display
Stickers used to prototype
overlay information about items as the person looked at it.
Post-it notes used to prototype
Locative tracking able to identify where you were in the museum and guide you to where you needed.
Voice prompts used to prototype
Zoom feature and image capture
Hand gestures to imitate zoom and photo taken

Feedback
Very useful
Zoom and image capture features important
Sometimes too much information displayed

Feature 2
Guided movement
The system can physically guide you around the museum.
Prototyped by touch- slight pushing or turning in right direction.

Feedback
Too intrusive
Wanted the freedom to look at other things

Feature 3
Audio Feedback
The system allowed the user to control
information by yes or no responses.
Post-it notes and voice used to prototype

Feedback
Overwhelmed by amount of information
More useful to have fully audio system
Allow system and user to interact

Feature 4
Advisory service
The system could advise the user other items of interest
offering links to websites, ordering food and drink.
Prototyped orally

Feedback
Useful at times
Overloads the user with information
Have a switch on/off key?

Modifications needed…
Less information
Greater feedback between the system and user.
Visual options- looking at an item would allow it to enlarge

Experience Prototyping allowed us to experiment with ideas that would have taken weeks a lot of technical expertise and money to actually develop, and it allowed us to refine our design concept according to direct feedback from the user.

“What I hear I forget. What I see I remember. What I do, I understand.”

By letting a person actively engage with a prototype and observing their reactions you are better equipped to design something for them. Experience prototyping should be an iterative process, you should gain knowledge and understanding from the first prototype and use this to develop another and then repeat the process until you develop a design which meets the needs of the user or client.

Throughout the paper IDEO give a number of examples of experience prototyping. The ROV (Remotely operated Vehicle) Experience, helped the designers to understand the problems operators face when trying to steer this vehicle as well as operate the camera angles and lights projected from it.

For the first task one of the designers had to roll up a piece of paper and use that as their only view-point. While their peripheral vision was obscured they had to find a post-it note in the office. To further understand the difficulties faced by the controller the two designers were given the task of imitating using the ROV. One designer (A) had to be the ROV, and navigate around a room full of obstacles, with a camera in one hand, which fed back to a tv screen. The other designer (B) had to watch the live feed and give instructions to both the designer A’s movement and the camera’s movement. After a frustrating few minutes the designers had a better idea of the challenges their design had to overcome and the importance of feedback and distinctions made between the ROV’s controls and the cameras controls.

The design team invited a retired ROV pilot to observe their experience prototyping, he confirmed that it was quite an accurate picture if the complications he faced as a ROV pilot and then was able to give further feedback from his experience about underwater conditions and the support tools there are already available and how this would have effected the prototype and how it should influence design development.

Experience prototyping is a very useful tool in the design development process of both products and services. It is important to observe how the user interacts with the prototype because despite the designers intentions, the users experience is impossible to predict. These interactions help inform the users needs and therefore the design.

The Wacomvision is a three dimensional canvas for creating and viewing art, products, and models. Three dimensional paintings can be created and shared online. Brush size, pressure sensitivity, and brush type are customizable. Snapshots and videos can be taken of your artwork. Not going to make it to the Louvre? You can use this product to download and view preserved art up close and from all angles.

In a business applications, imagine being able to walk around a concept car or viewing a model without a rapid prototyping lab, model making time, or money. Three dimensional models can be sent between clients to review work. Notes and requests can be marked and saved on certain areas of the models using the pen tool. You can also virtually render, paint, record, and capture views.

This product uses a state of the art virtual tracking system called IGPS Technology. This modular product has three transmitters that are wireless and placed around the edges of your 3D canvas. After the transmitters are automatically calibrated for each use, they use invisible infrared laser signals that create a three dimensional environment. The pen is imbedded with a sensor in the tip that streams its exact 3D position using the signals from the transmitters. The information is relayed back to the console and wirelessly transmitted for viewing through the virtual glasses.

A USB connection to the console allows for viewing of outside virtual models to be used as underlays. You can choose to view your artwork with or without the actual physical background. Multiple people can be linked to the same projection so you can work as part of a team. In order to bring up the interface, the button on the pen is pushed. The interface menu can be dragged and docked all around your environment. The button on the top right hand edge of the glasses can be pushed to allow for picture and videos to be taken.

Designer: Lauren Argo

Both product design exhibitions; Design-Real a collection of recognisable mass produced consumer products presented in an art gallery in a minimalistic fashion as if they were pieces of modern art. In contrast Telling Tales, a collection of pieces heavily influenced by art, with an importance placed on form over function were presented in the V&A museum, a space usually dedicated to contemporary design.

Both exhibitions had a very narrative quality behind the products they displayed. In the telling tales exhibition it was more obvious. You could recognise the stories or fairytales they were making reference to and were encouraged to take a closer look to read further into the meaning or story. The Design-Real exhibition the story behind the product was hidden. The layout of the exhibition allowed the person to look at the product and analyse it without outside influence.  Then the central information hub provided the back story of the product, where it came from, its intentions, its influences and its development.

In essence I guess this is the main difference between the two exhibitions; Design Real is a collection of mass produced products that place a greater importance on function over form. It tells you the story of the product and how it came into being.  The Telling Tales exhibition is a collection of one off products that place a greater importance on form over function makes. They make reference to stories and fantasy rather than telling the reality of the products life cycle.

Considering the exhibitions from the stance of product and unproduct; while the Design-Real exhibition from the surface is a collection of 43 mass produced products, the practical  functionality of these products, the longevity and durability of their design mean that some of these products could be considered to be ‘unproduct’. On the other hand the collection of pieces created for the Telling Tales exhibition, while they are one off pieces not intended for mass production like the Design-Real products, they are indulgent pieces created to feed our need to consume new products.

The other day I visited an exhibition at the Serpintine gallery called Design Real, it is the first design-focused show to be presented at the Serpentine which usually showcases modern art. After wandering around in the cold for a few hours thanks to google maps having the wrong address for the gallery I was just happy to be in the warm. However the feeling I got once inside the galley was quite cold. From the outside this beautiful historical building set in the middle of Hyde Park was very inviting, on the inside the building stripped bare of any original features, ended up being three quite cold stark rooms with a series of objects placed around.

The exhibition was advertised in the metro as being an interactive exhibition full of real practical and functional designs, out on show, not behind ropes or glass cabinates which the visitor could interactive with, and see why they are considered good designs. However when I got there this was not the case at all, the objects were out on display but there were plenty of people ready to pounce if you touched, attempted to take a photograph (even though I managed to sneak a couple ) or even stood too close to the objects. 

The only part of the exhibition that encouraged interaction was the central room which contained a series of tvs which displayed facts about the products, in a circle around these were a series of saddle bags to sit on (although they werent the most inviting or comfortable of places) and read from the small interactive computers about each of the products. All of the information from these computers can be found here.

Anyway enough of my little rant lets get back to the exhibition…

Grcic the curator of the exhibition explains: ‘good design admits to the deeper insight that beyond performing a purpose in a good way, the purpose itself has to be good. All 43 items in the exhibition fulfil this idea in their own way. The relevance a product has to our life lies not only in its use, but also in how far we identify with it. A good product becomes part of our culture.’

The products that have been  selected are ‘real’, mass produced items that have a practical function in everyday life. All of the objects are labeled with broad generic terms. This is intentional, the curator hopes that this will allow the visitor to engage with the products in their own way without being told what to think about them by the labels and descriptions they are given by others.

While I can see the thinking behind this layout, the real interest in this exhibition lies in discovering the journey that product has taken to get to that state. The design narrative.  This is the information that is provided in the information hub in the central room and can also be read at http://www.design-real.com/.

One product with an interesting story; the Water Container. Its title tells you simply its function, it does not tell you much about its origins and how it came to be the product that sits here.

The function of this design is driven by our need as humans for drinking water and the need (especially in developing countries where there is a shortage of water pipes) to transport this water.

This design is called the Q Drum, it originated in response to the needs of rural people in developing countries who have a problem carrying adequate quantities of water from a reliable source. The task of collecting this water was often down to the women and children in the community so in order to allow them to transport larger volumes it made more sense to roll it in the cylindrical shape than to attempt to carry it. But what encouraged this initial thought to roll?

Well there was the invention of the wheel. It is still a mystery as to who invented the wheel and when the wheel was invented. According to archaeologists, it was probably invented in around 8,000 B.C. in Asia. The wheel; a cylindrical shape used to transport. This probably provides the start of this water cylinder’s design inspiration and story.

The use of the barrel to store, roll and transport liquids originated from the Romans in the 3rd century AD. The cylindrical shape meant the liquids could be stood up, stacked and transported in large quantities by rail road or sea. But it also meant once placed on its side it could be rolled to help transport heavy liquids.

A similar product to the Q Drum was developed in the late 1990s called the Hippo Water Roller, the main differences between the two designs being the Hippo has a central clip on pole which allows the cylinder to be pushed or pulled. The Q Drum on the other hand has a hole cut through the central section through which a simple piece of rope is fed. While this means there is a slightly less capacity in the product it is also means there are no removable handles or other metal attachments that could detract from its intended purpose if lost or broken.

The rope can be repaired on the spot or easily replaced by a leather thong, woven plant substance or any other appropriate material. In many rural areas around the world, even a hammer and nail are scarce commodities. This ability to fix the product at the source of the problem without the need of outside assistance makes this a more appropriate product, using  appropriate technology for the user.

This development of the design to make it more appropriate for its intended user demonstrates the importance of society communicating with the design process. Often designers work independently from the culture and societies they are designing products for. The Q Drum is a good example of a collaborative project working to improve design for the people who use it!

This collaborative project, helped to develop a product that is of great use to the communities it is used in, but also the consideration of appropriate technology has meant that this product can be used within the community without the need of outside aid in terms of its use or maintenance.

This reminds me of the collaborative project we are involved with through Middlesex University and Made Good to the Jua Kali community. Made Good is the interactive hub which we are attempting to use to encourage a wider range of opinions and design concepts to help design sustainable products for the Kenyan community. In this project they are designing ways to make fuel briquettes, using the processes of grinding, pulping, compressing and drying waste, but it needs to be done using appropriate technology. It needs to be a certain density and not release toxic fumes. Also design considerations need to be made towards the burners needed to burn the briquettes, which at the moment are quite a bit more expensive than the standard Coal burners.

Check out the Made Good blog for further information, and keep watching my blog for updates on my involvement with the project!

Here is a link to my website

It remains a prototype as not all the links a galleries work in the way they are intended to. The work page does not display the galleries as I had hoped, but as a prototype it displays my intentions for the website.

I designed the site using dreamweaver and imported flash galleries in to display my portfolios. However the flash files could not be fully edited so while they would work when you previewed them in the browser, when they were uploaded onto the network, the galleries were all called the same thing in the (un-editable) script so it was confused where it needed to gather the images from.

It was important that we tried to create a design which represented our creativity as well as being a simple website to understand and navigate. I have tried to make my site very visual, in that the links and navigation are based on visual clues. For example the colour of the links changes when you roll over the link, and the hyperlinks chang colour when selected.  I wanted to have a gallery displaying images of my work on the home page as well as on the separate work page to further show off my work.

Bellow are two of the static images taken from the browser preview  of my work portfolios and the Image of the open page; which was a flash animation in which the piece of paper once clicked would open up into my webpage:

Have a look at the site, and let me know what you think!