week 5 - DP2

DESN801 // 26/05/2026

Overview of Week 5 Progress

This week, due to being sick, I focused on creating a CAD scale model of The Strand Station that I could laser cut as soon as I was recovered, as well as developing the installation concepts I had come up with in the week prior through methods such as sketching, storyboarding, and rapid prototyping. My goal was to create materials that could communicate my ideas for the upcoming Summative Presentation to gain feedback that could go on to support my work in the thesis component of my master's.

Table of Contents for this week's blog:

1. CAD Scale Model of The Strand Station

2. Development of Installation Concept 1

3. Development of Installation Concept 2

4. Additional Notes on Both Concepts

5. Reflections on This Week's Methods and Progress

CAD Scale Model of The Strand Station

Considering I'm unable to make repeated, frequent visits to The Strand Station due to its public inaccessibility, I wanted to make a scale model of the station so I could visualise it in a 3-dimensional sense and potentially use it for prototyping later on if I continue to develop concepts for this site beyond the proof-of-concept project timeline. I also wanted to practice this method in general as I hadn't made many scale models of sites before.

With the help of the measurements I took onsite as well as the photogrammetry scan I had done of one of the canopy columns in Polycam (which has a built-in measurement tool), I created the model in CAD using Onshape with a scale of 1:66.66667 mm (in integers, 3:200 mm). This scale was chosen so that the smallest measurement taken on-site (the column width of 0.4 m) could be represented by two 3mm MDF sheets or one 6mm MDF sheet, allowing most of the model to be made at this scale value while still being manufacturable by laser cutting with MDF. Screenshots of the resulting CAD model are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. CAD scale model of The Strand Station disused platforms for laser cutting.

I plan to laser cut these parts (excluding the base due to its size) next week so that I can physically assemble the scale model using MDF. The parts are designed with a press-fit tolerance so that they don't need glue for assembly, allowing the model to be taken apart and put back together again if needed.

Development of Installation Concept 1

Continuing from last week's concept ideation, I wanted to further develop the first concept for blurred[borders] by sketching the installation onto a photograph of the site, as well as storyboarding the interactions that would take place between nearby people and the installation. These sketches and storyboards can be seen in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2. Sketches of first installation concept, depicting light structure and interactions via benches; storyboards of interactions as people sit on the nearby benches.

In these storyboards, the interactions between people and the installation can be seen: the installation is initially off when no one has triggered it, but when someone sits on a nearby bench placed underneath the canopies, the lights starting turning on and "travelling" down their paths on the sculpture. If someone else sits on another bench while the first person is on theirs, the lights travel from their end and meet in the middle with the first person's lights. From there, various light patterns play out, triggering a performance that the people sitting on the bench become spectators to, just as if they were watching trains departing and arriving at the station. If people leave these benches, the reverse response plays out, with the lights "departing" and turning off as people leave. Thus, the installation in its responsive form only exists as long as people are actively interacting with it.

The contextual mapping surrounding this installation concept draws from notions of performativity in tangible interaction (Hornecker & Buur, 2006), where people in interactive settings (such as when interacting with an installation and/or space) take on certain roles as part of that interaction. For example, someone in a train station may sit on a bench and observe others coming and going, thus acting as an observer in the site and occupying a more passive role in this "performance". I wanted to build on this idea of an observer who is waiting in this location, given that this is already a form of lingering, but turn it into a more active role in this installation by making the act of sitting and waiting a trigger for the installation itself.

By turning the bench into the trigger for interaction, I also aim to integrate the concept of sense of place of a site, which is based on not only physical attributes such as the existence of benches in a space, but also what activities feel appropriate to take place there, such as whether it feels appropriate to sit and linger (Harrison & Dourish, 1996; Sime, 1986). Implementing a sort of "performance" that users can actively trigger and take part in thereby motivates this activity of sitting and lingering.

Finally, by providing different benches that can each trigger the installation in different ways, I aim to provide multiple access points, a concept in tangible interaction both presented by Hornecker & Buur (2006) and also suggested as feedback by studio peers from Design Practice I. Multiple access points help to lower the barrier for entry into interacting with an installation, especially in a large space, and avoids putting a "spotlight effect" onto any one participant. This effect may be desirable in some installations, but if lingering is to be promoted by making the act of sitting and watching into an active role, such an effect may discourage people from staying in that position for extended periods of time.

Development of Installation Concept 2

For the second installation concept explained last week, I decided to demonstrate it by physically prototyping it using TouchDesigner and a projector. As stated previously, I was inspired by Anna Zhang's Change Capture camera effect (n.d.) that only captures motion of things being filmed (in other words, the differences between frames), and wanted to create a similar effect in TouchDesigner in line with the theme of motion vs. stasis I had previously identified. My TouchDesigner network (Figure 3) takes differences between frames using optical flow and applies a feedback loop with an opacity effect to fade out the "trails" of these differences over time.

Figure 3. TouchDesigner network that displays the differences between frames of a webcam feed or pre-recorded video, triggered by proximity sensors via an ESP32 microcontroller communicating over Serial. Bottom image depicts the network contained within the base nodes after the optical flow nodes.

I pre-recorded a video of myself walking past a camera and used this as a "ghostly visual" that would be projected onto nearby surfaces when triggered by passersby in the space. To test this interaction, I used time-of-flight proximity sensors that detect when someone is within a metre of them and that would send a signal to the TouchDesigner network via an ESP32 microcontroller communicating over Serial to play the pre-recorded video of myself walking past. A video demonstration of this concept, as well as a video depicting the concept in The Strand Station, is shown below (Figure 4).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxKGhlYlTp4

Figure 4. Video demonstration of the second concept of blurred[borders], projecting real-time interactive visuals from TouchDesigner onto my living room wall, and showcasing how these visuals might be projected on the floors and columns of The Strand Station platforms.

Although I tested this concept with proximity sensors, I don’t necessarily imagine this to be the final interaction trigger. Given my focus on tangible interaction, I had the idea of using past or present artefacts on-site for the triggers, such as the telephone box located on the platform columns, where someone would need to pick up and "answer" the phone to trigger the projected visuals. This interaction would exemplify the performativity element of tangible interaction explained above, this time getting someone to occupy the more active role of answering a phone at a station or listening to important information from audio sources around them. I also thought this could add a multisensory element through both touch and sound: perhaps the telephone triggers overlapping "ghostly" voices of past lives of people at the train station through passenger announcement speakers, such as voices of passengers or conductors, or could even open a literal communication channel with another section of the platform. This audio element adds to the atmospheric experience of the site through engaging multiple senses in both central and peripheral perception, drawing on theoretical writings of Pallasmaa around atmospheric architecture (2014). Alternatively, the interaction could be triggered by footsteps in the space through pressure-sensitive touch points implemented on the ground, adding to the tangibility of the interaction. I also imagine the motion of the visuals could take the form of people's movements in the site rather than being pre-recorded, adding an "echo" effect to the site that could invite more playful interactions. Finally, the motion of the visuals walking along the space is designed to guide people's eyes and movements along the platform in a similar manner, mimicking the past use of this space while promoting exploration and lingering along the platforms in the present.

Additional Notes on Both Concepts

To apply feedback from my Formative Presentation, I wanted to consider the duration of my imagined installations: both the short-term interactions and the long-term existence of the work in the site. Short-term, each installation is designed with temporary interaction in mind: a cummulative effect can be observed when more than one person interacts with it through providing multiple access points that trigger different responses, but this effect (as well as any response at all) is only obvious when someone is actively interacting with the system, and cannot be observed after they stop. Thus, an ephemeral aspect is incorporated into the work, echoing the ephemeral nature of railway stations through how they are constantly in motion and changing.

Additionally, the time of year that the installations take place could also determine how they change over the course of a day: given these are light-based concepts, they could be situated such as to occupy nearby shadows while changing depending on how these shadows shift throughout the day. The light structure could be built in the shape of these shifting shadows, and the projection-mapped visuals could be mapped to these shadows as they move. This would add another layer of temporality to the installation, one dependent on external environmental factors in addition to audience interaction.

Long-term, I imagine both concepts as temporary installations, existing on-site for a month or so, to be eventually replaced by other works. My goal would be for these works to transform the site into a 'meanwhile' space, similar to Te Tuhi's Parnell Project Space at the Parnell Train Station (n.d.), while still leaving some of the site open-ended for public appropriation. Such support for adaptation and appropriation is crucial for establishing a sense of place in users (Harrison & Dourish, 1996). In this case, I am particularly inspired to do so by both a similar example of Tempelhofer Feld Park in Berlin, an abandoned-airport-turned-park used for skating, walking and cycling (n.d.), and by a comment from a KiwiRail employee accompanying me on the site visit: that they would love to have a picnic there. Such comments and examples show the importance of leaving aspects of publicly-accessible spaces open for the public to adapt for their own purposes, helping to encourage the establishment of a sense of place that thereby promotes lingering in the site.

Reflections on This Week's Methods and Progress

This week, I moved towards developing the installation concepts I had ideated the previous week using a variety of methods ranging from sketching and storyboarding to digital/physical prototyping. Although I wish I had more time to undergo more physical prototyping (I had ordered additional components to do so but was unable to get them working in time), I am still happy with the methods I was able to trial and how they were able to communicate my concepts. Sketching/illustration was a particularly unfamiliar concept for me as I normally jump straight into creating a physical prototype or model, so being able to sketch out the concept and map out potential interactions via storyboarding helped me to slow down and think deeper about the concept itself before a prototype is even conceived. On the other hand, I find sketching to be limited when testing concepts with other people and gaining feedback, as the interactions must be explained and visualised rather than tested directly. I much prefer having a prototype (full-scale, if possible) when sharing and testing my work with other people, something I will keep in mind when I complete user testing in the thesis year.

Going into the final week after the Summative Presentation, I plan to reflect on the proof-of-concept project overall, on feedback received from the presentation, and discuss what I plan to carry into the thesis year from this project and from Design Practice I. I also plan to laser cut and assemble the scale model I’ve created of The Strand Station which will help with any further concept development and prototyping centred around this site, thus finishing off the last six weeks of making and testing new methods.

References:

Harrison, S., & Dourish, P. (1996). Re-place-ing space: The roles of place and space in collaborative systems. Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1145/240080.240193

Hornecker, E., & Buur, J. (2006). Getting a grip on tangible interaction: A framework on physical space and social interaction. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 437–446. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124838

Pallasmaa, J. (2014). Space, place, and atmosphere: Peripheral perception in existential experience. In C. Borch (Ed.), Architectural atmospheres (pp. 18–41). Birkhäuser.

Sime, J. D. (1986). Creating places or designing spaces? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 6(1), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(86)80034-2

Tempelhofer Feld. (n.d.). Berlin's largest open space. Retrieved June 5, 2026, from https://www.tempelhoferfeld.de/en/ 

Te Tuhi Contemporary Art Trust. (n.d.). Parnell Project Space. https://tetuhi.art/parnell-project-space/

Zhang, A. (n.d.). Change capture. Retrieved June 4, 2026, from https://change-capture.anna-zhang.com/