Interaction Design presentation video FinalPosted: May 12, 2015
to see the earlier (longer) edit of this video, click here
to see the “Rumblebee reactions” video, click here
After making the first video, I realised that there were several flaws with it. Firstly, the video was far too long (although I made it purposely 2 minutes 30 seconds as that was the brief I was given), and if I were to make a video that long again I would certainly film more shots and perhaps add a more involved narrative. Before starting this project I didn’t have any real concept of how long time was in terms of filming, and something that you feel takes a long time to film and will fill a good portion of the video, may in fact turn out to feel very short or have to be shortened in order to fit the tone or rhythm of the film. I have definitely learnt that when filming I should aim to film at least twice as much footage as you think you will need. Another problem was that feedback from people who had watched the first video commented that it could be interpreted as being sexual, which is the absolute last thing I wanted! I expect this is also down to the lengths of some of the stroking shots, and I found that shortening the video, as well as changing the wording of some of the text has helped (I hope) eliminate that problem.
Ideally, I would have liked to film the video again from scratch with the knowledge that I have now, and I found it frustrating having to work with only the shots I took originally and being able to see all the flaws in them (such as the camera being at a slight angle, the footage being grainy due to the lack of light), but at this stage in the project I don’t feel I have the time to be going back and redoing things simply because I’m being picky, and I think the final video itself is of a good enough standard that I can leave it be.
I think the video editing more than anything has been the part of this project that I have taken forward the most, while I would like to have a better range of skills with actually making interactive projects and arduino, and I am still aiming to use arduino in two of my projects, it is the video editing where I have been able to focus the majority of my efforts. I find it really interesting how it gives your object a completely different platform to be engaged with, and rather than having made an object and have others look at or interact with it in order to judge it, they are shown it within a specific context and narrative which you dictate. In this context, the object I have created is viewed in a consumer context, as a product which may be sold rather than a more artistically focused piece. Certainly from the reactions I have had with people interacting with it, it fulfils the purpose that I designed it for, to foster and encourage happy and affectionate interactions between the user and the object, with it being treated almost as a pet or a baby. This is created not only by the shape, but greatly reinforced by the sound, and most people very easily seem to adopt it very quickly. There were those who were very hesitant and confused around it and didn’t know what it was they were “supposed to be doing with it”, but I am inclined to say that these are a demographic of people who are not likely to be playing with cuddly toys and there will always be people who don’t react positively to a product or a piece of work.