Sky Grid: Project for CSIS Cafe

Sky Grid:

Project For CSIS Café

contents

Our Goals...................................................2Nature And The Garden.............................2Our Design Process....................................3Physical Context.........................................4User Survey................................................5Usage Patterns...........................................8Design Constraints...................................10Initial Prototypes......................................12Exploring Ryoanji Garden.........................20Choosing The Mapping............................22Prototype Feedback.................................23Self-Evaluation.........................................25Physical Context Revisited.......................26Reflecting (On) Nature.............................27Summary..................................................28About The Authors...................................29References...............................................30

Ye Meng [0825301][email protected]

Robin Parmar [0823945][email protected]

Shaun Wallace [0823937][email protected]

Tong Xu [0702542][email protected]

CS6052Interactive Media in Public SpacesParag Deshpande

by

for

Our Goals

Sky Grid is an ambient media installation that was derived through an iterative design process. Our mandate was to design an interactive media project for the University of Limerick CSIS Building†, specifically the ground floor public area‡. We knew that any successful result would have to integrate with existing activities, and so we set out first to gath-er detailed information on design con-straints and the physical context.

Through our work we wanted to encour-age deep perceptions of nature and its relationship to the built environment. Furthermore, the process itself was in-tended to teach our team about the design process; the project had a strong pedagogical component. However, tech-nology and implementation concerns were not part of the scope.

Nature And The Garden

Buildings were initially designed to pro-tect ourselves from the world outside, sheltering us from the rain, the wind, wild animals and other detrimental factors. With larger communities and

greater levels of perceived safety, build-ings could turn to fulfilling other func-tions. New materials and construction technologies have also expanded archi-tectural possibilities. For example, the ability to use large panes of glass has giv-en us an expansive window on the world adjacent to our homes and offices [Sti-gler 1957]. Contemporary architecture is now free to engage with nature in a vari-ety of ways, ranging from inviting natural elements inside structures, to mimicking natural forms through innovative design and construction processes, to opening up structures themselves into more per-meable configurations [Hwang et al 2006].

Ecology has become a primary concern of our urban society. The ecosystem "is defined as a discrete unit in nature that consists of living and non-living parts, to-gether with its total environment, inter-acting to form a stable system" [Yeang 2006, p. 30]. The ecodesign movement is concerned with "how to design our built environment, which includes all the arte-facts that are part of our everyday lives, so that it will be environmentally benign and neither be destructive nor cause en-vironmental problems to the natural world on whose continued well-being our own survival as one of nature's spe-cies depends" [ibid, p. 16].

How do we perceive the natural world in our society? This is a complex question we can only touch on here. The concept of "nature" is a social construct variously

representing growth, change, process, continuity, purity, freedom, mystery, transcendence and even fantasy. Urban residents seek nature as a restorative, to bring back "balance", to "refresh" them-selves after the stresses of city life, or to reduce anxiety. "Urban places subject you to many stimuli, often of great in-tensity, that change quickly and continu-ously, while in the country most change is gradual and periodic" [Gallagher 1993, p. 209-210].

The garden has long been used to imbue the urban with some of the restorative powers of the rural. The word "garden" is derived from the Latin hortus gardinus meaning a cultivated, enclosed area. In fact, "the notion of limitation and closure lies at the very heart of the concept of garden, in turn indissolubly linked to the idea of paradise, a word that comes from the Persian paridaeza meaning enclosed orchard" [Portoghesi 2000, p. 408].

Sky Grid: Project For CSIS Café / 2

† This building houses the Department of Computer Sci-

ence and Information Systems, hence CSIS.

‡ We use "public" here to mean a shared social space,

putting aside property ownership issues.

We do not have to look far to see evid-ence of this nature/paradise link. The myth of Arcadia, derived from Jacopo Sannazaro's poem of the same name, and the Garden Of Eden from the Christi-an Bible are but two examples.

These concepts of nature and the garden will inform the development of our inter-active media project.

Our Design Process

Our study uses a process that contains attributes from three different methodo-logies: human-centred design, paper prototyping and rapid prototyping. Our use of each of these was moderated by the fact that our goal was to produce an ambient†, aesthetic installation as op-posed to a functional, goal-oriented product. We will now explain each pro-cess in turn.

ISO standard 13407 characterises hu-man-centred design as having four at-tributes: "the active involvement of users and a clear understanding of user and task requirements; an appropriate alloca-tion of function between users and tech-nology; the iteration of design solutions; multi-disciplinary design" [ISO 13407 1999 in UPA Resources 2009].

The basic process model is as follows:

1. Plan the human-centred approach2. Specify the context of use3. Specify the user and organisational

requirements 4. Produce design solutions5. Evaluate designs against require-

ments

At this point we have finished the pro-cess if we meet the requirements. If they are not yet met, we iterate the process from step 2 [UsabilityNet 2009].

We decided to use paper prototypes as an integral part of our design process for several reasons. They are quick to pro-duce, facilitating a rapid development of ideas in a short period of time. They al-low communication between people of disparate language abilities. They pre-vent the process from stalling due to over-committment to an idea that took significant work to develop. They provide self-documentation and ease of aggrega-tion. And, finally, they are a natural fit as a component of rapid prototyping, and as a complement to human-centred design [Rettig 1994].

Rapid prototyping is the third methodo-logy we borrowed from. This system was developed from ideas in Fred Brooks' classic book on software development, The Mythical Man-Month [1995]. It is also called "throwaway prototyping" to emphasise the constant evolution of ideas. It is a key part of the Extreme Pro-gramming movement [Beck 2000]. Two of the authors have direct experience with this from the business and software worlds.

Rapid prototyping incorporates an iterat-ive process of four steps:

1. identify requirements2. develop prototype3. review with end-users4. revise and go to step 2

It should be stressed that all three meth-odologies are meant for systems in which efficiency, effectiveness and user satisfaction are primary goals. For in-stance, ISO 13407 is used first and fore-most in software development as a means of quality assurance. It may also be applied to fields where similar goals can be clearly articulated.

But, clearly, this is not the case for our project. Our goal is not greater efficiency, the accomplishment of a certain task or the formulation of the solution to some problem. This moderated our use of these methodologies. For example, we did not apply the detailed procedure from the ISO standard.

Sky Grid: Project For CSIS Café / 3† More on "ambient media" later in the paper.


However, believing that similar principles are appropriate for any design task, we took the top-level model as a general guiding principle.

Our synthesis of these approaches gave us the following process:

a. set initial goalsb. determine physical contextc. survey users of the space d. determine usage patternse. determine physical and other con-

straints from b, c, df. develop new prototype (or evolve a

previous prototype)g. review prototype for fit with con-

straints and goals (iterate back to f.)h. choose and enhance solutioni. evaluate end result and the process

itselfj. conclude

It would have been optimal to involve users at all stages of prototyping. Regret-tably this did not happen. Our main con-straint in this area was the lack of re-sources to organise and coordinate such sessions. Instead, the project team de-veloped the initial prototypes and took them to users only after they were deemed to be sufficiently robust.

The rest of the paper will follow the ten steps above, with one exception. To sim-plify the presentation, the iterative de-velopment between steps f and g has been linearised.

Physical Context

There were three steps to this process:1. contextualising the CIS Building on

campus2. mapping the ground floor public

space in a plan view3. determining physical constraints

Though the CSIS building is located in the main part of campus (see map below), it is a good distance from other structures. Roadways lie on two sides of the build-ing, although these are buffered by green space. On the east side is more grass and a pathway leading into the

centre of campus. The south side does not face any building; it is entirely green space, bisected by a walking path.

A water fountain and pool are just visible from the café. At greater distance is the Shannon River. While this is not visible from the CSIS Building, it would be cor-rect to say the influence of the riverside setting is apparent throughout campus, emphasised by the artificial water works.

From this description it can be appreci-ated that the setting partakes as much of the garden as it does of an urban milieu, remembering that the garden is a manu-factured and constrained setting.

CSIS Building location at University of Limerick (north is up) [University of Limerick 2009]


We mapped the ground floor by the simple expedient of taking measure-ments and working up a plan view (to scale) in Microsoft Visio. Classrooms and other private areas were not drawn, as we were only interested in the café, foy-er and adjacent open areas.

The resulting map can be seen below. At the bottom of the drawing (north) the worktops along the foyer wall have been indicated. Following this to the right, there is a washroom entrance, elevator door and stairs. In the bottom-right the first of the two main exits is indicated.

Following around to the right-hand side of the diagram (west) we have a curved wall which provides an entrance to the main lecture / performance hall. In the

top-right is an isolated area that leads to studios and a lab room. The external door here is for emergencies only. Fol-lowing along the south side of the foyer we have a service desk, generally staffed by security personnel. Then there are two lengths of benches, in between which is the entrance to the Aroma Café.

The café has a service area to the left and vending machines to the right. The rest is filled with a combination of tables and chairs. There are four sets of fire doors off this room. One set is used as an exit to the covered patio.

The second "official" exit from the build-ing is located to the left of the diagram, off the foyer.

User Survey

There were three steps to the process of surveying users of this space: developing the survey, carrying out the survey and analysing the results.

The single-page survey was designed to be simple and direct. We wanted to gath-er responses without imposing on users' time unduly, and without risking too many refusals. This follows the principle of rapid iteration that we have adopted.

The surveys were conducted person-to-person and at different times of the day, throughout the working week. Notably, all surveys were conducted in the space itself. We had considered sending out surveys electronically, so as to get more responses, but discarded this idea as not being in line with our goals and method-ology. People need to be in the space to consider the space; it is best for them to answer questions while directly engaged with their environment.

The results of the last two questions (see next page) give us some fundamental in-formation about our potential users.

Most of the respondents were students, with about a quarter being staff or fac-ulty. Visitors are few; generally they are on location to meet members of the two other groups.

plan view of the CSIS ground floor, north at bottom


Q5 user survey results



Users are almost evenly divided between the genders, a result that might surprise some aware of the gender divide in com-puter science†. The fact that the building is also used by students of Psychology and Interactive Media helps to explain this. It might also be true that women are more likely to complete the survey, especially as the members of our team performing this task were women.

The results of question two reveal that the café is the most used part of the ground floor area, with the rest of the time equally split between the outside patio and the foyer. This result is initially unexpected, given the number of people who move through the foyer in transit from one classroom to another, or on their way in and out of the building. But this disparity can be explained by the fact that it would have been unlikely for

these individuals to answer a survey. This data is from those who had a significant stay on the ground floor.

From question one we see that the ma-jority of users are in the building for four or five days a week. This corresponds with the fact that few are visitors. In fact, we have an exact match between the 6% of respondents who were visitors and the 6% who are in the location only a day or two a week.

Question three gives us some useful in-formation about the types of activities people engage in here. We will categor-ise these according to Goffman's terms. In his analysis of the exchange of inform-ation between people in social situ-ations, he defined a primary involve-ment as one that "absorb[s] the major part of an individual's attention or in-terest". In contrast, a peripheral involve-ment provides "an activity that an indi-vidual can carry on in an abstracted fash-

ion" without interfering with their primary task [1963, p. 43].

We can be confident in categorising "working" and "meeting" as primary activities and "chilling", "smoking", "drinking coffee" and "waiting" as those needing only peripheral involvement. We can further estimate that half of those who are "eating", "surfing" and "chat-ting" are doing so intently, and the other half are not. Following this analysis, about two-thirds of our potential users are engaged in activities that require their focused attention.

What we learn from this survey is that our design must appeal to an audience who are on site frequently, for long stays, and with directed purpose.

To this end we will aim for an ambient media installation, this being defined after the work of the MIT Media Lab as being one which appeals to peripheral involvement [Ishii et al 1998].

Q2 user survey results Q1 user survey results

† Only one in five CS graduates in the USA is a woman

[Klawe et al 2009]. A similar disparity exists in Europe,

and is a problem of growing magnitude.



Usage Patterns

In order to gain further understanding of our potential users, we mapped their po-sitions over time. From this we were able to gain knowledge of their usage pat-terns and develop a map that zoned the ground floor of CSIS by use activity.

To do so, we conducted an observation exercise. Every two minutes a member of our team noted the positions of all people within the space. This was done by placing a dot on a plan view. These observations were continued for an hour. The result was 30 sheets of paper that could be overlaid to produce an indica-tion of dwell time.

This entire activity was done twice, at different times of the day. The results are shown in the illustrations to the right. The darker the blue dot, the longer someone stayed in that position.

Two observers were engaged for each usage survey, one each for the café and foyer. This was necessary due to line of sight barriers and also because of the sheer number of observations that we needed to make. Observer positions are marked with eye and camera icons, in the top middle and bottom left of the il-lustrations, respectively .

Photographs were taken in the same manner, so that an isometric impression of the space could be considered along-

dwell time observation results 1

dwell time observation results 2


side the plan view. A still from this video is shown on the next page. The field of view covers about 95% of the high traffic foyer area.

For the time lapse animation we com-pressed each interval to 2 seconds. In this way the full hour became a single minute of viewing time.

This method has certain advantages over shooting motion video. First, the most important data is recorded in situ, as op-posed to having to glean it from video playback after the fact. This reduces er-ror through problems of reduced band-width. For example, it can be difficult to know if a figure in the near distance is one or two people when viewed from a video shot from a fixed angle. When the observer is present in the place, they can change their observation position slightly to quickly clear up such ambiguities.

The results from these animations were used to divide the area into activity zones. Here is a brief description of the activities in each zone and typical dwell times. Refer to the map above.

1. Patio Social Zone: smoking, eating, talking (6-16 minutes)

2. Café Commerce Zone: queuing, or-dering and buying food (<6 minutes)

3. Café Work Zone: working, eating, chatting (up to, or more than an hour)

4. Foyer Social Zone: chatting (brief)

5. Foyer Work Zone: chatting and pho-tocopying (2-16 minutes)

6. Transit Zones: flow in and out of classrooms, in and out of building, to patio, etc. (brief)

We can make some further qualitative observations.

Traffic varies greatly over the course of a day and throughout the week. The busiest periods are just prior to the hour, since this is when class changes occur.

The work surfaces are underutilised. If not for the photocopier, that part of the foyer would almost never see activity.

The benches are never used to capacity. This could be because they are uncom-

fortable, or at least appear to be uncom-fortable following a visual inspection. Also, they force someone sitting on them to face away from the hub of activity in the café. It is difficult to set up sight lines for conversation while sitting on a bench. Thus they are mostly used for solitary activities, specifically laptop use.

Certain spots on the bench are more popular than others. When asked, occu-pants note that these are more conveni-ently located and quieter than other loc-ations.

To conclude our study, we conducted a self-evaluation of the working methods. Here follow potential criticisms and our responses.

activity zones


Traffic at other times of the day, week or season might not be the same as that observed here. The data is too sparse to draw any conclusions.Our own familiarity with the space for the past seven months leads us to be-lieve that this data is typical of the site usage. However, we do not claim it to be authoritative and welcome a more ex-haustive study.

No first-person video is provided to sup-port a user-centred study.Again, we ourselves have day-to-day fa-miliarity with the space. We were initially planning on shooting video, but determ-ined that we could learn little from that activity, given the other data we had already gathered.

The two minute interval means that the data points are too far apart.

This interval was chosen based on the observers ability to scan the area accur-ately within a given period of time. Closer intervals would mean accuracy was sacrificed.

There could be errors in data interpreta-tion. For example, a dot at the same place in subsequent pages might be two people who just happened to occupy the same spot.This is indeed the case. We would have to track individual movements to avoid this problem. However, that would tax the ability of an observer to gather enough information to make the study worthwhile. Video surveillance would be an alternative approach, but we decided this would also reduce data accuracy (as already discussed).

The presence of the observers might

change the results gathered, especially if people know they are being watched.In order to minimise interference with the subjects, the camera was triggered automatically, using an intervalometer. The observer in the café wore head-phones and appeared to be working on a laptop. While the observer problem can-not be eliminated, we believe our efforts minimised it.

Design Constraints

We can now synthesise the information we have gathered into a list of con-straints that will shape our design pro-cess. Here we also incorporate informa-tion from question four of our survey, as well as ad hoc interviews conducted throughout our discovery period.

Constraint 1: DurationA piece must cater to users who are on-site four or five days a week and for ex-tended dwell times.

Constraint 2: Peripheral InvolvementSince most users are involved in their own primary activities, a media installa-tion, to be successful, should not de-mand more than peripheral involvement.

Constraint 3: Available SpaceThe ground floor of the CSIS Building is a busy place. There is little in the way of available free space for activities or in-stallations.

still from time lapse photo animation


Constraint 4: Transit ZonesZones in front of classroom doors, elev-ator, stairs, washrooms and entrances are heavily trafficked. The third usable exit is from the cafeteria, though this is officially a fire exit. It is also a busy thor-oughfare; people constantly move out-side to smoke.

Constraint 5: RegulationsHealth and safety rules restrict some doors from being opened, some paths from being blocked, etc.

Constraint 6: LightThe natural light changes often depend-ing on cloud cover. However, it is gener-ally diffuse and pleasant. The artificial light changes according to the time of

day, but does not seem to be on a regu-lar timer; rather it depends on when staff change the settings.

Constraint 7: Atmosphere And MoodThe consensus of those surveyed is that the café is a "chilled place" to relax and conduct their activities. An installation should respect this.

Constraint 8: NatureThere are no plants, running water or other natural elements present in the space. Even the patio is surrounded by well-controlled elements: sculpted hedges, grass monoculture, pathways constrained by low-lying hedgerows. This is a constraint we are particularly inter-ested in exploring.

Constraint 9: FurnitureIn the café chairs and tables dictate where people will sit. There are usually four chairs to a table, though people move these around to suit their activities and the size of their group. There is one comfortable settee that seats two. In the foyer the benches are sometimes used, but people generally prefer to stand if chatting.

Constraint 10: Faculty And StudentsA specific demographic inhabits and uses the CSIS Building. Should we cater to their interests and personalities? Or should we challenge their conceptions?

Constraint 11: Café And Security StaffWe cannot hinder or obstruct normal job tasks, nor can an installation cause cus-tomers to be lost. This rules out highly confrontational pieces.

Constraint 12: Sound LevelTeaching is ongoing in adjacent classrooms. Students use the café to meet and study. Sound levels should be kept low.

Constraint 13: SoundproofingThe foyer is lined with Helmholtz reson-ator absorption tiles. These dampen re-verberation, allowing for easy conversa-tions at a reasonable volume level. This could be an opportunity for a sound work, since it could output lower amp-litudes than normally possible in such a hall, while still maintaining clarity.

at work in the café


Initial Prototypes

Now that we had gained a more com-plete knowledge of the design domain, we began to iteratively devise paper pro-totypes of possible interactive installa-tions. As we did so, certain themes be-came apparent.

Theme One: Functional vs. Fun!Functional solutions are those that are needs-based, task-oriented, and demand primary involvement from the user. Fun solutions involve gaming or play, familiar objects and perhaps a unique form of in-teraction. But, as a rule, these also re-quire primary involvement.

Theme Two: Overt vs. Ambient Overt interactive systems might include a touch-screen, keyboard, floor panel, levers, buttons, dials, or other apparent input device, along with an obvious out-put device such as a computer screen, LED or large panel display. Designing such systems involves well-established practice, for example those principles discussed by Donald Norman in The Design of Everyday Things [1998].

We brainstormed several overt designs but eventually realised that an ambient form of interaction might better fit our design constraints by fulfilling peripheral instead of primary interaction functions.

However, ambient systems pose chal-lenges to user interaction as traditionally defined. This is evident by examining Norman's list of design questions.

"How easily can one:1. Determine the function of the

device?2. Tell what actions are possible?3. Determine mapping from intention

to physical movement?4. Perform the action?5. Tell if system is in desired state?6. Determine mapping from system

state to interpretation?7. Tell what state the system is in?"

[ibid, p. 53]

Ambient systems involve subtle interac-tion that make it more difficult, or even impossible, to answer these questions. The root reason for this is that they provide an experience, setting or ambi-ence rather than a task or a problem to be solved. Thus traditional industrial design processes are of limited applicab-ility.

The following seven pages contain a se-lection of our prototypes, along with brief critiques. The prototypes are presented roughly grouping by theme, as opposed to the chronological order in which they were developed. The order would be difficult to ascertain in any case, as the designs were created within a recursive and interactive process. The prototyping stage overlapped constraint determination and other activities.


Prototype: Discovery Function

Description: Users select artwork they would like to view from the university collec-tion. As they move about the space, the art follows them on screen panels.

Critique: The educational function is purely functional. This design does not create a new social interaction or speak to the location it is installed in, except in the non-spe-cific sense of including images from the local area (campus).

Prototype: Exploring University of Limerick

Description: Information on the university is displayed on a large screen, which is con-trolled using a foot-activated four-way controller.

Critique: Again, this is a purely functional design. The coupling between the input con-trol and the displayed result seems awkward.


Prototype: Mushroom Chairs

Description: To improve the seating problem in the foyer, "mushroom" chairs of com-fortable fabric could be installed. These would have power and network outlets to facil-itate laptop use.

Critique: This seating would encourage isolationist activities. Space constraints would not allow chairs to be positioned to optimise sight lines or conversation. The solution is functional.

Prototype: Pod Chair

Description: This pod chair would hang in the patio area, providing a relaxing habitat that includes a music player and built-in speakers. Pockets are available to house be-longings. In addition, the side of the chair would have strings that could be played like a guitar.

Critique: This prototype suffers from the same limitations as the previous. It may be difficult to protect from the elements. The sound levels might be distracting to others.


Prototype: Lightspace Play

Description: A game played by four people with a virtual ball encourages teamwork and play.

Critique: Same as previous.

Prototype: Interactive Games

Description: Tables provide surfaces for games, in order to encourage social interaction between café users.

Critique: The game requires active involvement, space that is hard to come by, and is unlikely to hold attention over the long term. This fills a perceived lack in social game-play, but maybe people don't play games because they don't want to play games. Is there a need here?


Prototype: Colour Wall

Description: The half-height dividing wall in the café will display colours that depend on the volume level inside the cafeteria.

Critique: Calibration might be difficult, line of sight would limit the audience, but more importantly it could discourage people from entering the café: "Oh the café is red... it's too loud in there; let's go somewhere else."

Prototype: Colour Floor

Description: The foyer floor is divided into a grid of responsive tiles. When someone walks on one, a primary colour travels in all directions across the floor, getting weaker in intensity as it moves further from the origin. The intersection of different colour vec-tors will produce a dynamic and pleasing display.

Critique: Given the high-traffic nature of the foyer, this design might be ill-placed in this location. Most of the people walking these routes will want only to get to their destina-tion.


Prototype: Ripple Wall

Description: People walking along the first floor corridor, which is open to the centre of the building, will transmit their footsteps as ripple images to the wall opposite. This makes use of an expanse of wall that is otherwise unused. And it is a peripheral inter-action that does not get in the way of any other function or activity.

Critique: Our mandate is for a ground floor project. In any case this idea seems to have been used several times in the past.

Prototype: Trampolines Are Fun!

Description: A trampoline in the foyer allows passers-by to burn off some steam and have some fun by bouncing.

Critique: How likely is it that people would utilise this device? And how many safety regulations is it breaking? Also, this does not meet the requirements of "interactive media".


Prototype: Orange

Description: A giant orange that feels like an orange and smells like an orange sits in the middle of the foyer. What recollections will it call to mind among those who pass it by?

Critique: While cute, fun and engaging, this design does not meet the requirements of "interactive media".

Prototype: In The Woods

Description: A tree stump is installed in the foyer. From it comes the sound of the woods: trees swaying in the wind, rustling branches, chirping insects, bird calls. The pattern of the wood surface is projected in magnified view on the floor.

Critique: Again, there is no interactive component here. Though this design addresses the issue of nature in relation to built environments, it seems to do so in a rather crude way.


Prototype: Sky Grid

Description: The window of the café will be overlaid with a pixellated display showing representations of nature. Birds and clouds will move relative to the current temperat-ure or wind. Beyond any aesthetic interest this might have, the display will act as a cri-tique on the representation of nature beyond the window. The display will also be vis-ible to passers-by outside, providing a shifting display that attracts attention (and per-haps visitors) to the building.

Critique: None of our constraints would limit us from developing this design. However, it needs to be extended to involve a greater degree of interactivity and engagement with its audience.


Exploring Ryoanji Garden

"When people are in a place for any length of time they need to be able to refresh themselves by looking at a world different from the one they are in, and with enough of its own variety and life."― Alexander et al [1977, p. 890]

Following our development of numerous paper prototypes (some not shown), we selected Sky Grid as the best option to pursue. It engages with nature in a way that is both playful and critical. It provides the "different world" about which Alexander writes, while at the same time making obvious the artificial nature of that world. This dialectic makes it the most fitting of our designs.

In order to determine how to extend this design, we turned our attention again to gardens, as both real and figurative con-structs. As we saw earlier in this paper, the garden is a contained and con-strained version of paradise, a miniatur-ised take on the "untamed nature" bey-ond its bounds. In those cases where gar-dens have been developed to their lim-its, they become fully interiorised, a fo-cus of contemplation.

Take, for example, the Japanese dry garden or karesansui. This "involves a landscape with rivers and lakes, islands

and land (with or without vegetation), hills and mountains of all shapes and sizes. All these elements are portrayed without the use of water, while gravel is used to imitate the surface of the waves. Sometimes in this landscape there is a karetaki, a waterfall created by mixing areas of gravel and stones. Normally sur-rounded by high walls, the dry garden is viewed from above, sitting on benches or steps. Only the people charged with its exacting maintenance are allowed to step on it" [Portoghesi 2000, p.423].

This garden is designed to be walked with the mind, not the feet.

The most famous example of the kares-ansui is Ryoanji Garden (Peaceful Dragon) in Kyoto. This is generally attrib-uted to the artist Soami (1480?-1525), though temple records are unclear on this point. "The garden consists of raked gravel and fifteen moss-covered stones, placed so that from any angle only four-teen can be seen at once. It is said that only when one attains spiritual enlight-enment as a result of deep Zen medita-tion is it possible to see the last, invisible stone with the mind's eye" [Jodidio 2006, p. 9].

garden at Ryoanji Temple, Kyoto [Wikipedia 2004]


Despite any mystical connotations, there is something of the virtual about this garden, something which links it to our Sky Grid. Maybe this is due to the fact that it has been designed to be seen from a single viewpoint, to be experi-enced from beyond and not from within. Maybe it is due to the garden's qualities of simulation, the rocks standing for mountains, the raked gravel for waves on an ocean. Perhaps by looking deeper into its structure we can get a clue as to what is missing from our own prototype?

Let us turn to the results of a computer analysis of Ryoanji, as published in Nature.

"To examine the spatial structure of the Ryoanji garden, we computed local axes of symmetry using medial-axis trans-formation, a shape-representation scheme that is used widely in image pro-cessing as well as in studies of biological vision... The overall structure is a simple, dichotomously branched tree that con-verges on the principle garden-viewing area on the balcony. The connectivity pattern of the tree is self-similar, with the mean branch length decreasing monotonically from the trunk to the ter-tiary level. Both features are reminiscent of actual trees" [Tonder et al 2002].

Ryoanji is a representation of a tree. And not just any tree, but a self-similar con-struct. With this discovery we decided to implement a tree as a component of Sky Grid. Specifically, a tree would grow in

response to user interaction, but in a mysterious way, requiring contemplation and the correct point of view for viewers to understand their relationship to it.

We decided it was appropriate to create such a tree using mathematical repres-entations of self-similar shapes. We used a Lindenmayer system for this task, since these iterative equations are known to map well to the natural shapes of plants.

The software package L-Systems Explorer (by James Matthews) was recruited to map the equation using parameters de-rived through experimentation. The res-ult is shown in the illustration below, which shows several stages in the devel-opment of a tree, taken from an anima-tion prototype.

As an aside, it should be mentioned that the birds in our prototype were modeled after photographs of crows in flight, taken on location. The clouds are by ne-cessity more fanciful, but hopefully are still based on shapes present in the Lim-erick area. This geographic specificity is important to a sense of engagement.

prototype animation: stages in the growth of a tree

equation F -> |[5+F][5-F]-|[4+F][6-F]-|[3+F][5-F]-|F

initial angle 278°

angle 8°

segment 100

step size 0.5

Lindenmayer system parameters used


Choosing The Mapping

The next major decision involved the choice of mappings for our project. As the adjacent table shows, certain input parameters from the weather outside the café or the participants inside the café were mapped onto display output. (Those mappings marked with "X" were considered but not implemented.)

Given this choice, it is possible for someone observing the display to pre-dict the weather. This provides a func-tional component to the piece, and al-lows for direct (primary) involvement of users with the system. However, in most cases people will simply enjoy the pas-sage of birds and clouds with no know-ledge of their significance. The piece provides no overt indication that these have any meteorological meaning.

Our enhanced prototype implemented these features and presented them in an animation sequence. The illustration to the right shows several stages in the flight of a bird. In the actual implementa-tion, movement would be slow and smooth, though the pixellation would be retained. This is an important feature as it visually reinforces the fact that the viewer is looking at a computer-gener-ated display. Pixels signal to the viewer that this is a digital representation, a fact we do not want to disguise.

prototype animation: several cells of bird flight

input output

outside temperature - lower speed of bird - faster

outside temperature - higher speed of bird - slower

barometric pressure - dropping number of birds - less

barometric pressure - rising number of birds – more

wind speed speed of clouds

wind direction direction of clouds

positions of users placement of tree

duration of users duration of tree

volume of users X

inside temperature X

X growth rate of tree

X size of cloud

X size of bird

X direction of bird flight

mapping of inputs to outputs


Prototype Feedback

At this stage it was important to gather feedback from the prospective audience for this piece. We constructed an addi-tional prototype in order to highlight the experience from the participant's point of view†. This consisted of a video con-taining a walk-through performed by pa-per cut-out people, again following our paper prototyping paradigm.

This prototype did not represent the dis-play interface "accurately", but rather was designed to convey to the viewer the mappings and various possible inter-actions. Specifically:

• the activity of the birds and clouds indicates weather

• a tree slowly grows if someone sits in a particular seat, providing a “re-ward” for staying in the café

• the installation can provide a talking point, creating new social interac-tions between people in the café

• it might encourage curiosity and create a sense of inquiry

A survey was created as before, in a sim-ilar one-page format, delivered in a simple and direct style (see next page). The purpose of this was two-fold: to de-termine the efficacy of the video proto-type in conveying key information and to find out what participants thought of the

proposal itself.

Ten people took the survey: five men and five women. As we can see from the res-ults of question one and two, most people understood the weather mapping and most of those liked the idea. Strangely, though 30% did not under-stand the relationship between, say, wind and cloud movement, no-one rated the mapping less than 3 on a 5 point

scale. There appears to be a disparity here that indicates the prototype should be improved.

Questions three and four likewise ad-dress the viewer's understanding of the tree growing in response to someone sit-ting for a time. Here the response was more encouraging. Fully 90% of parti-cipants understood the relationship and 70% gave it their top rating.

understanding of weather mapping reaction to weather mapping (higher score better)

understanding of tree growing reaction to tree (higher score better)

† Given the ambient nature of the piece, the term "user"

seems inappropriate. Henceforth we will use "audience",

"participant" or some synonym.


still from prototype demonstration video

prototype survey


Various qualitative feedback was also gathered. Positive comments included the comment that Sky Grid enables one to feel that "technology changes life". Another said that the display "will make me curious about seeing new changes" and "I am happy to see the clouds and birds". One respondent commented that it makes the space "more interesting than before ― I will come here more of-ten". Another was specifically "interested in the movement of the birds and cloud" and relating this to the weather. A sense of identification was attested to by the comment "If I can make the tree grow, I will have sense of achievement."

We also gathered several suggestions. One respondent desired the addition of natural sounds to accompany the wind and birds. Another wondered what would happen if a tree could recognise a specific person and grow taller on seeing them. (Though it is difficult to imagine how this might be implemented without tagging audience members.) A third wondered if the tree could purify the in-door air or release air fresheners to cov-er the smell of food!

We were gratified to see the degree to which those surveyed were engaging with the proposal. One person thought it would be more interesting if nobody knows which seat can grow the tree. They proposed that body temperature or body weight could be contributing factors. For example, if the temperature is higher, the tree grows quicker and

thicker. Another wondered "Can the tree be seen from the outside?" (Certainly!) Someone hoped that the display would change to reflect the change in seasons.

We had two significant pieces of negat-ive feedback. The first was the opinion that the piece was not truly interactive because one can't choose the birds or the clouds. This foregrounds the problem of an ambient piece. If there is a relation-ship between cause and effect it must be subtly presented, lest the audience ex-pect a greater sense of control and feel disappointed in its absence. This is a bal-ancing act that requires sensitivity in the details of the implementation.

The second criticism is that this artistic representation of nature obscured the “real” nature and did it a disservice. When this paper was presented publicly a similar comment was elicited in the Q&A session. One audience member stated that they were "highly offended" at the "cartoon" representation of nature we had proposed. We will discuss these issues in more detail shortly.

Self-Evaluation

Before reaching our final discussion, it is beneficial to evaluate our experience of this project, since any problems we en-countered imposed additional con-straints on the design process.

Team CommitmentWe were initially to have five people on the team, but one member withdrew without completing assigned tasks. This hindered our early progress.

Timetable ConflictsHalf of the team is in one course of study and the other half in another. Due to conflicting timetables it was difficult for us to meet as a group more than once a week. Given the amount of teamwork re-quired, this was too little for an equitable division of labour.

Technological IssuesSeveral issues arose around video file formats and codecs, particularly compat-ibility from the Windows to Mac plat-forms. This forced us to change our presentation format at the last minute (literally), forgoing certain elements.

Language BarrierTwo members of the team are not native English speakers. This made email com-munications difficult, further restricting the work flow.

The Design ProcessThe ten-step process that we synthesised from existing methodologies worked well for this project. We encountered no sig-nificant issues with this system and would apply it again without hesitation.

Overall we enjoyed the design process. A great deal was learned along the way; we believe we succeeded in the pedago-gical goal of the project.


Physical Context Revisited

We now return to a discussion of the physical environment of the café, paying special attention to the vista available to inhabitants. We can then evaluate our project in light of how it augments or in-terferes with this context.

The photographs below show two views facing south. The first is taken from just inside the café and illustrates the general layout, seating and interior lighting. As can be seen, one side of the café is made up of an expanse of window; this is broken up by metal frames and doors. A portion of the larger glass has a horizont-al blind (here open) installed. Other parts of the window are partially blocked by a tray rack, an artificial plant and industrial fittings.

Directly in front of us is one of the four fire doors. This and two others are kept locked. The door to the far left in this pic-ture is propped open to permit people to move outside to the patio.

Ireland's typically overcast skies means that most of the direct light is from the zenith [Griffith 1957, pp. 3-4]. This is re-duced by the overhang that covers half the width of the patio. Hence a signific-ant amount of light is contributed by re-flections from the sky and grass. The res-ult is that the natural light that reaches the café is quite diffuse.

Thus there is little need for blinds. In fact pot lights are called upon to augment the available illumination. The lack of harsh lighting from either inside or out makes this situation ideal for a low lu-minance thin film display on the window.

The second photo was taken facing the same direction and with the same field of view. It shows the hedgerow immedi-ately beyond the patio, behind which is an expanse of grass, a pathway running at right angles to our line of sight and trees in the distance. These views can be interpreted in light of the map above. This has been turned upside down for clarity, so that "up" corresponds to

view of the café facing the window view outside the café window

CSIS Building in context (south is up)[University of Limerick 2009]


south, the same direction the photo-graphs face.

While at first glance we might consider this vista to represent "nature", it is ap-parent that it is no such thing. Every component of this scene has been chosen for purpose and efficiency. The hedgerow prevents people from step-ping onto the grass and routes them either directly left to the east side of the building, or to the right in order to follow another path. We are discouraged from stepping onto the grass at any point. The trees in the distance act as a screen to hide other buildings. The slight rise in front of us hides the pathway. The mono-culture expanse is chosen for ease of

maintenance. Little thought has been given to aesthetics. Even less has been spent on creating a view for those inside.

Not one respondent in any of our re-search commented on the view from the window. Indeed, in our time in the café we did not observe people looking out-side, for what of interest is there to see? Perhaps we might look for a friend out smoking on the patio. Or we might check to see if workmates are sitting at a table. But there is never any impetus to view nature itself from this vantage.

Yet, as Alexander has noted, people "prefer windows with meaningful views". Though they might respond in surveys

that light is the most important factor in choosing a "room with a view", this is not born out in observation [1977, p. 891].

So, how might we improve the view?

Reflecting (On) Nature

"When plate glass windows be-came possible, people thought that they would put us more dir-ectly in touch with nature. In fact, they do the opposite. They alien-ate us from the view. The smaller the windows are, and the smaller the panes are, the more intensely windows help connect us with what's on the other side."― Alexander et al [1977, p. 1109]

This statement leads us to improve the south-facing vista by creating smaller panes. Sky Grid does this by pixellating the entire expanse of glass. Furthermore, the areas of pixellation change over time, as a tree grows or a cloud passes. Given that these movements are slow and fluid, this has a beneficial effect. Light passing through the translucent portions will gain a dappled quality simil-ar to light passing through the branches of a tree. "Light filtering through a leafy tree is very pleasant.... leaves are special because they move" [ibid, p. 1106-7].

existing pattern on café window


It should be noted that our inspiration for imposing pixels on the glass came from the existing design. There are in-deed patterns of dots on the windows. These are found in vertical and horizont-al rows, as seen in the previous photo-graph. We root this aesthetic component of Sky Grid in the situation as it currently exists.

The inscription of natural forms into the exterior of a building has been imple-mented successfully in previous projects. One intriguing example is the Utrecht

University Library, described here by Philip Jodidio: "When we come nearer we see that the outer skin of the building ―whether concrete or glass―is tattooed with a texture based on a close-up photo of reed by photographer Kim Zwarts. Through the tattooing of the black skin, between which sunlight and outside vista are filtered simultaneously, the na-ked functional body of the library, the apparently "hard" dimension, acquires a "soft" dimension. The massive nature of the library suddenly becomes a fragile accumulation of reed stalks behind which books and people can be de-ciphered" [2006, p. 76].

This points to the fact that adding an ap-parent screen between the inside and outside of a building can paradoxically make the building more permeable to the gaze of those passing. Attention is at-tracted and directed within by the re-peating pattern. It is our intention that Sky Grid shall do the same, acting as an attractor for those on the outside. But it will also pull inside eyes out, in an equal but opposite motion.

We can now return to the criticism that this installation “obscures” the real nature outside, producing a cartoon rep-resentation. This misinterpretation might in part be the result of our oversimplified prototype video, which did not illustrate the true aesthetic mode the project was operating within. It might also stem from a naive belief that a manicured garden is a form of "nature" that needs to be pro-

tected from harm, whether physical or conceptual. It could indeed be based on a lack of understanding of the multi-valent relationships of our installation to its situation. In any case, we are confid-ent that our previous discussion suffi-ciently answers all such criticisms.

Summary

We propose Sky Grid as an ambient me-dia installation for the CSIS Building café. This interactive piece will:

• Improve the view from the café by creating from it a multitude of new views.

• Call attention to the world beyond the café by energising the boundary layer between inside and outside.

• Provide a dynamic of dappled light to residents of the café, like that found under a tree in leaf.

• Occupy no space, produce no sound and hinder no primary activity its audience may be engaged in.

• Reward attention but not demand it, allowing for a range of possible inter-actions depending on the viewers' in-terests.

• Create a permeable screen of the CSIS building that will attract positive at-

The Utrecht University Library [Jodidio 2006]


tention from those passing by.

• Stimulate viewer curiosity about the relationship of weather effects to the display, increasing awareness of the meteorological environment.

• Involve viewers in a new relationship with “nature” by growing a tree due to their presence.

• Encourage participants to think about their relationship to their ecosystem.

• Create new social relationships to the degree it becomes a talking point.

• Foreground the dialectic between nature and its artistic representation.

• Question assumptions about what is manufactured, real and simulated.

Finally, and most importantly, we trust that Sky Grid will be a meditative experi-ence. Its audience can contemplate the patterns produced, just as visitors to Ryoanji Temple meditate on rock and sand in order to learn about themselves and their inter-relationship to their envir-onment.

About The Authors

Ye Meng (China) is currently studying for an MA in Interactive Media. She holds a BSc. in Information Management and In-formation Systems and previously worked as a computer teacher. Her con-tributions included prototyping, inter-viewing, brainstorming and surveying.

Robin Parmar (UK + Canada + Ireland) is studying for an MA/MSc. in Music Tech-nology. He holds an HBSc. in Applied Mathematics (Theoretical Physics). His roles in life have included information ar-chitect, theorist, media artist and audio engineer. His contributions to this pro-ject included prototyping, brainstorming, photography, layout and research.

Shaun Wallace (USA) is studying for an MA/MSc. in Music Technology. He has a BSc. in Management Science and Inform-ation Systems and has worked as a con-ference planner, sound designer and computer technician. Contributions in-cluded technical operations, statistics, presentations, mapping and brainstorm-ing.

Tong Xu (China) is currently studying for an MA in Interactive Media after achiev-ing a BA in English Literature. Her contri-butions included prototyping, interview-ing, brainstorming and surveying.

We wish to thank our instructor Parag Deshpande of the course Interactive Me-dia in Public Spaces.


References

ISO 13407: "Human-Centred Design Pro-cesses For Interactive Systems" (1999) Geneva, Switzerland: International Or-ganization For Standardization.

Alexander, C. et al (1977) A Pattern Lan-guage: Towns, Buildings, Construction, New York: Oxford University Press.

Beck, K. (2000) Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change, 2nd ed., Boston, Massachusetts: Addison-Wes-ley.

Bolter, J.D. and Gromala, D. (2003) Win-dows and Mirrors: Interaction Design, Digital Art, and the Myth of Transpar-ency, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Bring, M. and Wayembergh, J. (1981) Ja-panese Gardens, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Brooks, F. (1995) The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineer-ing, 20th Anniversary Edition, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Building Research Institute. (1957) Win-dows And Glass In The Exterior Of Buildings, Washington, DC: National Research Council, available: http://books.google.com/books?id=3GIrAAAAYAAJ [accessed 1 May 2009].

Burgin, V. (1997) "Art, Common Sense and Photography" in Evans, J., editor, The Camerawork Essays: Context and Meaning in Photography, London: Rivers Oram Press, 74-85.

Gallagher, W. (1993) The Power Of Place,

New York: Harper Perennial.Gissen, D. (2002) Big And Green, New

York: Princeton Architectural Press.Goffman, E. (1963) Behavior In Public

Places: Notes On The Social Organiza-tion Of Gatherings. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe.

Griffith, J.W. (1957) "Principles of Day-lighting For Buildings" in Building Re-search Institute 1957, 3-7.

Hwang, I. et al (2006) Verb Natures: Ar-chitecture Boogazine, Barcelona: Actar Editorial.

Ishii, H., et al (1998) "ambientROOM: In-tegrating Ambient Media with Archi-tectural Space", Summary of Confer-ence on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI '98, Los Angeles: ACM Press, 173-174, available: http://tan-gible.media.mit.edu/content/papers/pdf/ambientROOM_CHI98.pdf [ac-cessed 16 April 2009].

Jodidio, P. (2006) Architecture: Nature. London: Prestel.

Klawe, M., Whitney, T., Simard, C. (2009) "Women In Computing - Take 2", Com-munications of the ACM 52(2), 68-76.

Norman, D. A. (1998) The Design Of Everyday Things, London: The MIT Press.

Portoghesi, P. (2000) Nature And Archi-tecture, trans. Young, E.G., Milano: Skira Editions.

Rettig, M. (1994) "Prototyping For Tiny Fingers", Communications of the ACM 37(4), 21-27, available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/175276.175288 [accessed 20 April 2009].

Stigler, C. R. (1957) "Fixed Glass Installa-

tions" in Building Research Institute 1957, 93-95.

University of Limerick. (2009) "Campus Map", available: http://www2.ul.ie/pdf/156289860.pdf

UPA Resources (2009) "What is Usability?", available: http://www.us-abilityprofessionals.org/usability_re-sources/about_usability/definitions_of_usability.html [accessed 6 April 2009]

UsabilityNet (2009) "Methods: ISO 13407", available: http://www.usabil-itynetorg/tools/13407stds.htm [ac-cessed 18 March 2009]

Van Tonder, G.J., Lyons, M.J. and Ejima, Y. (2002) "Perceptual Psychology: Visual Structure of a Japanese Zen Garden", Nature, available: http://www.nature.-com/nature/journal/v419/n6905/abs/419359a.html [accessed 16 April 2009].

Yeang. K. (2006) A Manual For Ecological Design, London: Wiley-Academy.

Wikipedia (2004) "Dry Garden in Ryoanji (Kyoto, Japan)" [image online], avail-able: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RyoanJi-Dry_garden.jpg [ac-cessed 22 April 2009].

Photographs not otherwise referenced are © 2009 Robin Parmar.

Sky Grid: Project for CSIS Cafe

Technology

Transcript of Sky Grid: Project for CSIS Cafe