w1 - raiding the pantry

03/03/26

Write about your work on your blog describing:

• the methods you used

• your chosen ingredients

• what worked and what didn’t

• what you learnt from working with constraints of time and scale

approached this assignment with two angles:

1. exploring the transformation of intangible concepts (sound, soundwaves) into tangible ones through engagement of senses (sight, touch)

2. exploring materiality of interaction interfaces through touch and object/material associations (using conductive materials to create various touch sensors)

explanation of iterative process and artefacts made:

1. with environmental data:

   1. wanted to work with sound (not something I normally work with) - also to transform something intangible (untouchable) to something tangible

   2. dealing with public space - brainstormed word associations with sound in these spaces, including ones associated with touch and sight:

      1. how do loud, dissonant sounds FEEL? eg. in loud, urban space

         • emotions: disruptive, opressive, suffocating, grating, angry

         • tactile: rough, hard, sharp

         • visual: red, bold, striking, clashing, harsh lines/edges

      2. how do quiet, consonant sounds FEEL? eg. in quiet greenspaces

         • emotions: soothing, calming, peaceful

         • tactile: soft, smooth, rounded

         • visual: pastel/muted, complementary, soft lines/shapes

   3. took sound recordings in different environments: around AUT/CBD and in Albert Park

   4. transformed recordings into waveform and spectrogram graphs using MATLAB (5 min)

   5. changed how the graphs could visually communicate the sound environments they were taken from by processing them in photoshop (10 min)

      1. eg. the loud, urban ones I transformed into red and black images with stark, contrasting lines, and the quiet, greenspace ones I transformed into soft blue tones

      2. this was influenced by my word association brainstorm as well as the appearance of the spectrograms themselves: the loud, urban environments had inconsistent colours in the graphs where sudden loud sounds of higher frequency would occur, whereas the quiet environments were consistent in frequency and intensity of sound

   6. laser cut waveforms and spectrograms (15 and 30 min)

      1. experimenting with material (MDF and acrylic) and speed and power settings to achieve different textures that represented where the sounds came from (eg. more rough wood texture on the loud environment waveforms, smooth acrylic on the quiet environment ones)

      2. glued pieces together and added materials such as embroidery thread to further experiment with visual representation of sound

      3. had laser cut before, but never raster laser cutting, so was interesting to experiment with the settings for the first time

   7. weaving (30 min)

      1. made a cardboard loom and then represented snippets of the photoshopped spectrograms with weaving, allowing for both a tactile and visual experience of the sound

      2. new skill I picked up [CITE SOURCE WHERE I LEARNED]

2. with interaction interfaces:

   1. started by brainstorming with sketches and words (5 min)

      1. realised i wanted to experiment with more organic shapes and soft materials, because typical interaction interfaces are normally smooth and hard (eg. buttons, touchscreens, etc.) based on mass-manufacturing and high-precision engineering

   2. tried making some paper-based works with copper tape and conductive paint, playing around with shape and texture (eg. adding holes in the paper for roughness, painting touch points in organic, viscous shapes); also played around with metal memory wire and conductive thread, incorporating it with cross stitch (5 and 10 min)

   3. used some of the lasercut pieces to turn into touch interfaces (eg. painting with conductive paint, covering with copper tape) (15 min)

   4. wanted to try a new skill, so used the band saw in the wood shop to cut different shapes, again focusing on organic shapes (30 min)

      1. realised I was subconsciously inspired by children's toys and incorporating a sense of play - reminded me how interaction is often present in children's exhibits and with play-focused learning, but seems to disappear in education as children get older

      2. focus then shifted to turning the blocks into buttons through adding 3D-printed parts that could interface with a spare key cap I had, and then adding materials onto the wood blocks to experiment with the feeling of said buttons

      3. also laser cut rastered one of the blocks with increasing roughness to mimic a slider, inspired by my work with the laser cut spectrograms/waveforms, and also took inspiration from brainstorm phase with organic shapes painted onto the block with conductive paint

   5. experimented with softer materials, again taking inspiration from earlier iterations, by crocheting, knitting and cross stitching with copper tape, conductive thread and regular yarn (30 min)

   6. made 3 interactive interfaces with actual outputs (more feasible with longer time) (1 hour)

      1. weaving with copper tape onto a wood frame I made, touching the surface to turn on the light, experimenting with adding softness to a hardware interface

      2. made a pinch block with wood and covered in copper tape to form different touch points that allowed for colour mixing of an RGB LED, experimenting with different, multidimensional finger movements in interaction

      3. made a wire flower garden where each flower, made out of metal wire, would turn on if you touch it, experimenting with aesthetics and form in interaction and output

chosen ingredients:

• solid - dealing with the 3-dimensional realm, physicality and materiality of concepts to make them tangible and explore different interactions with them

• processed - transforming materials and intangible concepts into tangible and interactive ones

• viscous - this word relates more to my practice as a whole, wanting to explore interaction design within the context of public space / spatial design and how it allows people to flow in/around a space. this is based on a paper I read last year [CITE PAPER]. due to the size and time constraints of this week's artefacts, I decided to focus more on the interaction design aspect than the spatial one, but still felt this word is relevant to my practice as a whole. this word also went on to influence the visual language of my work through incorporating more organic shapes (embodying "viscous" fluid shapes), which also inspired me to

methods used:

• brainstorming through sketches and writing down words, often in a self ethnographic way through evaluating my own observations and feelings associated with different visuals, sounds and materials (touch)

• sound recordings (environmental data)

• software (MATLAB, Photoshop, Illustrator) to process sound recordings into different visual media (graphs, laser cut files)

• machines (laser cutter, band saw) to process wood and acrylic into different forms

• manual hand labour (sewing, crocheting, knitting, cross stitch, weaving) to process textiles with conductive materials

what worked and what didn't:

• what worked:

  • progression of using different conductive materials and working towards the final 1-hour artefacts - playing around with different materials helped spark ideas for these final forms

  • starting with a base of sound recordings and brainstorming word associations for their environments, helping to drive experimenting with different materials and visuals based on these words

• what didn't work:

  • specific technical aspects: eg. attaching wires to copper tape is very difficult to do, leading to a poor interaction experience where it often wouldn't work

  • my dual approach to this assignment was perhaps a bit disjointed and led to some random, sporadic making, where some of my outputs felt like I was just ticking a box. this was also partly due to my insistence to make almost entirely different things with each artefact, making it more difficult to ideate sometimes

what I learnt from working with constraints of time and scale:

• constraints meant a lack of pressure to produce something of high quality, taking any fear or immobilisation out of the making process. this actually encouraged me to try new techniques more, despite the limited time

• time and scale constraints restricted what I could make - I wanted to try more spatial design and installation focused works (eg. projection mapping) but felt this wasn't the best assignment to do so as it would take too long and be more suitable for bigger works

• sometimes I struggled to come up with ideas to produce all of the required artefacts, often struggling on the last 2-3 items in each time bracket. this did sometimes force me to try new things which helped spark new ideas, but other times felt like I was just coming up with something different to tick a box. even so, I was glad for the opportunity to exhaust all possible outcomes of the materials and methods I was trialling with each new iteration