#videoprototyping

[annakorczak]

Week 5 (15.02 - 19.02)

During our crit on Monday this week, we got the advice to stick to the motion and develop this idea according to the insights from our interviews. The Milestone 2 is approaching fast and we really need to make a decision what movement would be optimal for us, our users and the plant.

We decided that we won’t specify any narrow target group - our product is suitable for all the people who feel like connecting more and caring more for their plants and since the movement is crucial in this concept, they shouldn’t be afraid of their plants moving. At the same time, we aim for a natural, almost windy-like rustling of leaves, so this kind of movement neither is disturbing for a user, nor should hurt a plant.

We also figured out that the most optimal solution would be to create a moving pot - a plant’s stem wouldn’t get hurt while prototyping and on the other hand, we still can effectively create a specific and explicit motion.

Video Prototyping Workshop

Tuesday’s workshop was very useful - we were acknowledged with some techniques and tips regarding video making, but what is most important, it speeded up our decision-making. We started to share our visions of how our video and particular scenes should look like. We got to know our limits and possibilities and that was when I started wondering if we are not complicating things and exaggerating a little bit with the functions of our concept. Using different types of plant’s movements for communication would not only make it more difficult for a user to distinguish between them and memorize what they  mean, but also it will be more difficult for us to prototype the movements. I started the process of implementing this idea within our group.

After a long talk, we decided to stick to one type of motion, swaying, but with changing speed. We left this idea to sink in until Wednesday:

Happy state (slow movement)

Sad state (medium movement)

Alert state (very intense movement)

We also started writing down what situations we are about to show in our video. They have to be very explicit to specifically show the functions, possibilities and values our product has to offer.

We also agreed on the value that our product would hold for its users:

An owner of a plant gets to know plant's needs and mood and receives feedback from a plant. It develops a relationship between them. A plant draws a user's attention, so it is less likely for a user to forget about watering it.

= PLANTS ARE BEING TAKEN CARE OF AND USERS THINK OF THEMSELVES AS BETTER PLANT OWNERS

Engaging Others Workshop

I found the workshop very interesting, because we were working on each others’ projects. We could get familiar with what other groups are preparing and it was insanely interesting to listen to their insights about our project. The other group (7) gave us some nice ideas about how to prototype the experience of using our product and I believe we helped them a bit, too. I think the workshop left us with a pretty decent script for our experience prototype!

Wednesday, 17.02

Today we were playing scriptwriters and we started writing down and sketching the scenes for our prototyping video. As we learned on the workshop, we wanted to make an experience of using our product very feasible to an audience, without using narration, text or any vocabular explanation whatsoever. We also needed to stick to the time limit of 2 minutes, aiming for 1 minute or a little more in total. We had a lot of ideas and the work went very smooth. Some people had problem with the time limit, but for me it was convenient. I must admit I like to know my limits as much as I like to know my potentialities.

These are the scenes I sketched on our Miro board. They were very helpful while making our video and they were crucial when we were starting to record the scenes.

Friday, 19.02

Today we met at school to finally do some serious movie making! Me, Carlo and Patrycja found a cozy study room with a piano at Orkanen, while Sanna was recording her part of the video at home. We had so much fun!

I brought a tripod and my iPhone, as it has 3 lenses and the most possibilities to offer. I also 3d printed two pot-supporters, which we called ‘tits’, designed to enable an easier swaying of an inner pot within the outside pot. Patrycja brought two plants and Carlo was our leading character. There always occurs something which doesn’t go according to the plan. This time, I forgot an outside pot, so we needed to improvise - Patrycja found a transparent container in one of the university’s fridges and we adapted it to play a role of a pot.

I edited our video during the weekend using the InShot phone app. I had an option to add some animated effects and since we weren’t allowed to use narration or captions, I figured that such animation will make a terrific support for visualizing plants’ reactions. Carlo as an actor did great too and in the end, we were very satisfied with the outcome. I also showed the video to my family and they had no doubts about what we are trying to convey. I guess we can call it a success and

VIDEO

[annakorczak]

Week 4 (08.02 - 12.02)

This week we continued developing our final concept. We put our focus on the plant’s movement itself as a crucial part of interaction within our project.

Wednesday, 10.02

After Monday’s crit session, we agreed on a following plan:

And this was the outcome of my interview:

These insights were very challenging for my group and me, because at first, they seemed to ruin the whole concept we have come up with. But we analyzed it and it actually helped us. We agreed that we don’t want to digitalize or impersonate plants - plants should remain plants and if they communicate, then the communication should remain as much natural as it gets. It confirmed our beliefs that we should stick to the natural movement as a way of communicating with their owners.

We decided to iterate on our interviews and insights. We were trying to find movements, which would be easy to distinguish, because we noticed that people find it hard to distinguish between various movements, and also their experiences and assumptions differ when it comes to judging which movement visualizes which mood or need. We were wondering if we should mimic human movements to express emotions of the plant.

We decided on creating another video and each of us chose one situation. This was the ‘script’ of the video:

I recorded a plant ‘waking up’ and ‘going back to sleep’ when the light changes. We put our recordings together to create one video, which we later showed to stakeholders, but what was important, without any captions. We wanted to see if people can read what plants are communicating in specific situations using specific movements.

VIDEO

Then, we set our plan for Friday:

Friday, 12.02

After showing to my interviewees (1 and 2) the video with plants’ different reactions which we prototyped, I obtained such answers:

The rest of the insights we got were:

Sanna and Patrycja also worked on videos iterations and produced another two of them. This week was all about videos and the video prototyping workshop is still ahead of us!

We were still left with the decision on which motion or motions to choose for our prototype.

Also, we wrote down some questions about the things we need to find out and also some questions for our teachers about the instructions they are giving us in announcements.

[ixdveronicaprototypes]

Short reflection on the showcase of video prototypes

It was so exciting to see all the video prototypes of the class. A few thoughts I drew from watching the videos:

One thing that was quite common: groups not reading the brief or just ignoring what it says, like demonstrate user value.

Following this, a lot of videos completely lacked a storyline, though one of the requirements for the video prototype task was to sketch out a storyboard. I wonder how that works for just one scene showing actions.

Many projects focused on making the prototype rather than making a good video that enhances the qualities of a lo-fi prototype. I feel the main point of doing a video prototype is the way it allows by using video tools, such as smart cutting, to make the prototype act/work in a way that is not yet possible (or it is too early in the design process to go for high fidelity).

Not setting the scene and context for the video: filming just one space in class or demonstrating the prototype on a table.

I guess the task that the teachers give us have a particular goal, and even though there might be an urge to do something that is fun or just what we want, we should stick with the brief and fullfil it. Misinterpreting briefs is something I still see in the programme, something we struggled with since starting it.

[ixdveronicaprototypes]

STORYBOARD for Video Prototyping

[ixdveronicaprototypes]

Video Prototyping: Filming (Sunday, 17th Feb)

Finalising our prototypes by adding UI screenshots from popular platforms like Spotify, Netflix, Foodora website, Facebook Messenger:

At first we intended to attach the earphones to the back of the cardboard, but we figured they will “plug” into the cardboard equally well as to a real device, which was an amazing thing to discover:

Behind the scenes. Attaching the prototype in newspaper-mode to make it stand on the table:

Prototype of the device in TV-mode on a coffee table:

[ixdveronicaprototypes]

Video Prototyping: Prototyping a Flexible Device (Saturday, 16th Feb)

For the video prototyping our group decided to make a lo-fi prototype of a flexible screen device that could be used as a tablet, smartphone and laptop-sized TV-screen. Here are our sketches of the prototype and storyline for the video:

First rough storyboard:

Sketching out the way to make one piece of cardboard fold to 3 different devices – TV/laptop, tablet and smartphone – and also make them stand on a surface when user needs it:

We made several cardboard versions to imitate the device in the video prototype being able to fold into smartphone as we figured we can’t actually fold a cardboard four times, but it will be possible to show our idea by using different forms in the video by cutting the story in the right places as it would allow us to change between the different prototypes:

[ixdveronicaprototypes]

Video Prototyping Workshop

I had no idea what video prototyping is before Monday’s lecture. It was eye-opening to realise video prototyping can take an idea beyond physical prototyping and project a near-to-reality vision of a sophisticated concept without having to use physical materials and making the prototype work. On the other hand, I guess, video prototyping is a demonstration of an idea lacking the important purpose of a prototype - the possibility to test it on users. One can only watch and judge/assume from what they see whether the portrayed concept would make sense in the real world.

However, what concerns the lecture topic, there was a bit of repetition on the use and purpose on prototypes, also my eye twitched a bit hearing such basics like the rule of three thirds, the golden cut, or how an object shouldn’t be centered to make an interesting composition. I loved the examples though and that we discussed a little why they were good/bad.

I really liked the Netflix gesture exercise: We got to think about which gestures would make sense to control the Netflix interface and how to make the video self explanatory thus keeping the storyline and timing logical.

Though we didn’t have much time to do make the video prototype we got quite a lot of critique on it’s features (like picking the right movie/show) which seemed a little unfair, having in mind the short time for this exercise, but oh well. It was interesting and we got to test what video prototyping is like, so I think that was was a positive experience after all.

[protojuice]

This week has been all about video prototyping. Filming, editing and choosing music. With shapeshifting object as a focus, we quickly decided on clothes. More specifically, a jacket that would change thickness depending on weather and temperature. Image number one shows the first draft of our storyboard. Person wearing a thick jacket, moving from train to school. While walking up toward the warmer outdoors - jacket changes without her having to do a thing. The first shooting session followed the storyboard fairly close, but when editing it together and trying it on a person (who did not know the concept), we saw that the message did not go through. Back to the drawing board and up with the camera, we decided to add more to the transformation of the jacket.

The second image shows how the second video would be like, in more detail than storyboard number one.

Link to the final video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_D8ocoMt90

Important lessons to take with me: - Film alot, more than you think you’ll need. Take multiple shots of the same scene. - Don't cut the scenes short. Film a few more seconds than needed. - Angles say loads. Think about what message you want to bring forward. - Placement of objects and people in the picture. Think of the 1/3 rule! - Syncing audio with video is important. Placement of audio in edit can create different moods, off-sync might make someone frown. - Having stabilizers on the camera helps if it's hard to keep it still (or a tripod). - Don't get caught on small things in editing. They might be so tiny that no one will notice or think about in the end.