http://chi2010-cskach.blogspot.com/2011/02/paper-reading-5-weight-shifting-mobiles.html
Exploring the Design Space in Technology-Augmented Dance
Celine Latulipe, David Wilson, Sybil Huskey, Melissa Word, Arthur Carroll, Erin Carroll, Berto Gonzalez, and Vikash Singh, UNC Charlotte
Mike Wirth, Queens University
Danielle Lottridge, University of Toronto
Presented at CHI 2010: Media Showcase Session 1 from 10-15 April 2010, Atlanta, GA
Summary
In this paper, the authors (I'm not clear on who actually authored the paper; I have listed credit as the paper did, but I suspect that all individuals involved in any way were listed, possibly including even the dancers) describe a project using mice held, and later worn, by dancers to draw images on a computer screen as kind of a tie-in to the dance. Brief descriptions of the equipment used and some of the performances were included but in any great detail. Unfortunately, the algorithm defining what actions were mapped to what images was not included. However, it was explicitly noted that the dancers were not represented individually but only collectively.
Discussion
So, by coincidence or design it appears that my paper assignment for today was on the same research by the same people as the "special assignment" I completed earlier today. I did not know the subject of this paper when I completed that assignment; whether someone else had deduced I would choose the first pdf on the offered list for that post and timed this accordingly is a question for the conspiracy theorists. At any rate, further commentary is available there.
This paper represents a more advanced stage of the work; besides the dates on the respective readings, this was made most clear by the presence of worn mice rather than held mice, allowing the dancers to perform moves involving hands or moves of sufficient difficulty that their hands might possibly be needed to break any falls.
I can see parallels between this and the paper I covered earlier relating to cellos and computer graphics being generated; it is likewise combining a form of art with technology to create more, somewhat related art.
Critiquing the faults of the work and postulating the future directions are difficult. What makes "good" art and "bad" art? This work has been criticized elsewhere as a waste of government funding, which I'm inclined to agree with (I'm of the political stripe that feels deficit spending should be reserved for emergencies; neither art nor computer research are emergencies).
From a technical standpoint , the two most obvious flaws of occupied hands and 2D mice have been corrected in the last two years. The next step might be additional sensors elsewhere to allow for more inputs.
Something I would be interested to see as progression of this work would be the different images/image progressions for different forms of dance.
Dr. Latulipe, via GIS, from her website.
It sounds like a really interesting project. When you say that the mice created images that "tie in" to the dance, do you mean it was kind of like performance art, or was there some final image after the dance had concluded?
ReplyDeleteThe use of two mices just reminded me of the first chapter of HCI where William Buxton talks about bimanual input.It would be interesting finding out if she has based some of her work on him.
ReplyDelete