Last week, I was unable to walk, so I worked at home. I've focused on my supportive narrative and my proposal.
I rewrote my proposal because I realized that my current research question was not really focussing on what I have been studying for the last three and a half years. I studying game art and all of the sudden I want to research toy design. Which is possible of course, but I think it is more interesting for me as a visual designer to focus on visual design. This way my study, project and research comes more together. My old research question was: 'does the amount of play affordances correlates with 'better' toys?'. Which to me is a fine research question, but it is too much focused on play design. I want to study the visual side of toys for this project, but I'm still very interested in affordances.
So my new question is: 'How can visual design in toys trigger play affordances and manipulate play behaviour?'. I'm going to research how visual design triggers actions, so it's all about communication in visual design. And I think this is very similar to the way you need to communicate in game art, or actually every other way of interaction and product design. So I'm planning to look at other products and how they are designed visually, what they use to communicate how people should interact with it.
vrijdag 30 maart 2012
woensdag 28 maart 2012
donderdag 22 maart 2012
dinsdag 20 maart 2012
First prototype Interactive conducting baton
This is the first prototype of the Interactive conducting baton.
It's made of wood and griptape. It is 30cm long.
At the moment I'm downloading several dj programs to see which one is best suitable for my first playtest.
In the first playtest I'm going to test this prototype with 6 year olds. I will play Griegs Peer Gynt nr.01 At the wedding. According to the movements the tester will make with the baton, I will adjust volume and tempo.
I've talked with composers Stan Koch, composer/non-linear music strategist Than van Nispen and sonic designer Laurens van der Wee about my concept and ways I could children let interact with the music.
Out of these talks I came to three concepts children can interact with the baton:
1: Volume/gain and tempo. The music will be linear. The tempo will adjust according to the tempo the child will sway with the baton. Volume will adjust according to how big the movement is. This is a very simple concept, but the composers predicted this way of interaction shall be interesting enough for children to play with the music.
2: Percussion, blowers, strings. The child can point in a certain direction to address percussions, blowers or strings and can make these instruments play harder or softer. The musical system will work in layers of percussion, blowers and strings.
3: Busy parts, quiet parts. According to the movement of the child (busy or quiet), a system will choose a quiet or a busy part of a composition. This will be a non-linear music system.
dinsdag 13 maart 2012
Concept: Interactive conducting baton
I love to see how children respond to music. They start to dance on it instinctually or move their arms to conduct the music. I though it would be a great idea to create an interactive conducting baton that reacts on movement by producing tones of different instruments.
Concept: Sleevy's
These hand dolls are designed so that they can make sounds by using your fingers/opening or closing their mouth.
Concept: Sleepy hero's
These enlightening little creatures beat every alligator underneath your child's bed. Your kids can take them to their bed at night and they will lighten up like a light lamp. They are also very cuddly instead of those hard barely playaffordable night lamp creatures.
maandag 12 maart 2012
Wild Wacky Action Bike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qPM7WK9e_Y
Now what exactly was the intended play affordance for this toy??? ;)
Now what exactly was the intended play affordance for this toy??? ;)
woensdag 7 maart 2012
Concept: Little Soapies
I got the idea for this concept when I read my blogpost about the discussion with media students about what a book is. One of them said that one of the fun factors of a book was to collect and that it was tangible. Kids make up the most amazing stories with their dolls. Kids use their imagination to experiment with different scenes or review a experience. What if you added some kind of Sim element to these dolls? Making them interactive, let them build up relationships, let them experience with social interactions. I used an Ipad 2 for this concept, but this would also work on your computer with a camera.
So this is actually some kind of app, but you can collect dolls and play with them in a analog way.
dinsdag 6 maart 2012
Design Play Studio about play affordances
http://www.designplaystudio.com/?p=658
A very interesting blogpost by Sheila from Design Play Studio. She states that toys should be simple to allow children to 'do things'.
She arguments this by explaining two theories; Architect Simon Nicholson’s Theory of Loose Parts and psychologist James J. Gibson’s Theory of Affordances.
Nicholson's Theory of Loose Parts:
'in any environment, both the degree of inventiveness and creativity and the possibilities of discovery are directly proportional to the number and kind of variables in it.'
In short: the more stuff there is to experiment with, the more experimenting one can do.
We see the opposite of this quite a bit in toys and playspaces designed for children. For example, if a playground or exhibit has all fixed components with only one or two ways they can be manipulated, then there are usually about one or two things children can do or learn. In Sheila's experience, these fixed components are often broken by children who are interpreting a hands-on design as something to use when it was actually only intended to demonstrate. The most successful exhibits and spaces for children are those that support children in playing, experimenting and learning. To do so, they must have props and loose parts that can be manipulated in creative (not just predetermined) ways.
Gibson's Theory of Affordances:
By his definition, an affordance is a “quality of an object, or an environment, that allows an individual to perform an action.”
For example, a tree is climbable only when it’s of a scale that the person assessing it can climb. It is a functional view of the built and natural environment and this functional perspective is how children assess the world around them. Children view the physical world through affordances. Simply stated, what does the environment offer me the ability to do? Ever wonder why kids climb on statues, benches, and other things they “shouldn’t?” Its because if the object is scaled so that a child can climb it a child reads the object as climbable, or for climbing. It’s a really different way of looking at the world than how us adults do, and makes a lot of sense once you open your eyes to it (although every skateboarder I know still views the world this way). So, what does this mean for design? In my experience, this means that the best designs for children are developed from a functional framework. The process begins by asking “what is it that we want children to be able to do here, and how to we make sure that this environment supports these actions?” This may sound obvious, but if form is held above function, an exhibit or toy can end up looking very flashy and sophisticated and fool us adults into thinking it supports a child’s learning. On first glance however, children quickly assess whether or not it supports action and experimentation. And as children learn best by doing, supporting these pursuits is no small matter.
Don Norman expains affordances
LINK TO YOUTUBE
This video was made in 1994, but it is still very relevant today. Norman explains what affordances are. Play affordances work the same. A toy is a 'thing' that has at least one play affordance (a way to play with the object). If a toy has at least one play affordance, it is a toy. If it hasn't got play affordance, it isn't a toy. It would sound logical that a toy with more play affordances is a better toy, but it is not proved yet. I would like to find out if more play affordances correlates with better toys. I think this would be a good subject to write my supportive narrative about.
Affordances can be different depending on how big you are. A chair affordance sitting for adults, but when you are 3 years old, you're way smaller and a chair would be more interesting to climb and stand on (ofcourse sitting will still be an affordance as well).
http://rethinkingchildhood.com/2012/01/30/affordance/
donderdag 1 maart 2012
Concept: The Beatlies
A mix between fantasy, sensory and constructionplay (and maybe even a little challange play, but not intended): The Beatlies. You can collect these dolls, they're one big family and they love to make noise. A Beatly is very cute and active and makes his own noise/beat. But when you put him together with other Beatlies, the fun really starts. Combining different Beatlies means combining different 'sounds' to make your own beat.
describing the play of a toy concept
'When referring to toys, the term play value could be the likeliness that a toy will be
played with by the user. Play value could also be used to describe a measure of the
benefit of the play. Play value could also refer to the amount, variety or length of play.
For the purpose of this paper, we will say that a toy has play value if it affords play (i.e. it
affords activities that are enjoyable, captivating, intrinsically motivated and process
focused).
While a designer may believe that their toy concept has play value, the user is the one
that ultimately makes this decision. A toy is in the mind of the user, but a toy product is
in the mind of a designer. Ideally, the toy product is similar in the mind of the user and
the designer. This is not to say that toy products should only be used in the intended
manner, but rather, the designer should have a sense of what the user desires so to create
appropriate play affordances.
Brian Sutton-Smith writes “it is dangerous to pretend we know what a child will do
with a toy just from its characteristics alone; children have a way of doing things with
toys over and beyond the apparent character of the toy (1986, p.38)”. It is true that
children (and adults) can find play value in things that are not toy products (what we call
transformed toys) and children and adults will play with toys in ways that are not
expected or intended. However, when designing a toy product, the designer should ensure
that it affords at least one type of play, thus suggesting play value. A classification, such
as the play pyramid, can be used to determine if a toy product affords play.*
I want to come up with a spider plot to describe the play of a toy concept.
Spider plots would require assigning a quantity to the play value, which might be more difficult to determine than a binary present/not present.
It would be interesting to see the difference between the designer’s intended play affordances and what affordances are
actually perceived by the intended user.
QUANTITY TO THE PLAY VALUE
the difference between the designer's intended play affordances and what affordances are actually perceived by the intended user.
*Barry M. Kudrowitz and David R. Wallace about the Play Piramid
played with by the user. Play value could also be used to describe a measure of the
benefit of the play. Play value could also refer to the amount, variety or length of play.
For the purpose of this paper, we will say that a toy has play value if it affords play (i.e. it
affords activities that are enjoyable, captivating, intrinsically motivated and process
focused).
While a designer may believe that their toy concept has play value, the user is the one
that ultimately makes this decision. A toy is in the mind of the user, but a toy product is
in the mind of a designer. Ideally, the toy product is similar in the mind of the user and
the designer. This is not to say that toy products should only be used in the intended
manner, but rather, the designer should have a sense of what the user desires so to create
appropriate play affordances.
Brian Sutton-Smith writes “it is dangerous to pretend we know what a child will do
with a toy just from its characteristics alone; children have a way of doing things with
toys over and beyond the apparent character of the toy (1986, p.38)”. It is true that
children (and adults) can find play value in things that are not toy products (what we call
transformed toys) and children and adults will play with toys in ways that are not
expected or intended. However, when designing a toy product, the designer should ensure
that it affords at least one type of play, thus suggesting play value. A classification, such
as the play pyramid, can be used to determine if a toy product affords play.*
I want to come up with a spider plot to describe the play of a toy concept.
Spider plots would require assigning a quantity to the play value, which might be more difficult to determine than a binary present/not present.
It would be interesting to see the difference between the designer’s intended play affordances and what affordances are
actually perceived by the intended user.
QUANTITY TO THE PLAY VALUE
the difference between the designer's intended play affordances and what affordances are actually perceived by the intended user.
*Barry M. Kudrowitz and David R. Wallace about the Play Piramid
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)