▩▩▩▩▩▩▩ WEEK 7 ▩▩▩▩▩▩▩

Visualising my Pillars

To enhance my comprehension of the research pillars, Andreas assigned me the task of creating three short 10-15 second videos, with each video corresponding to one of the research pillars. Originally, his idea was for me to employ various software tools to produce visuals for each video. However, I saw this as an opportunity to get myself familiarised with TouchDesigner, considering I’ve never used it.

When approaching a new software, my preferred method involves dedicating initial time to grasp its tools, and interface, and, notably, familiarize myself with shortcut keys. I've discovered that this approach significantly enhances my workflow and efficiency.

Having prior experience with Spark AR, another node-based software, certainly facilitated my comprehension of how operators in TouchDesigner interconnect. However, I did encounter a bit of confusion when it came to connecting operators from different families. Furthermore, there were instances in the tutorials where Python scripts were introduced, adding another layer of complexity. Personally, I'm inclined to steer clear of these scripts to maintain simplicity in my approach.

Drawing from my past encounters with computational design, I've found that it's more productive to begin by exploring references and tutorials before shaping a specific concept. Understanding the software's capabilities, which operators to employ, and the types of input and output it generates is crucial. Armed with this knowledge, I can subsequently rearrange and interchange the operators to achieve my desired outcomes.

Learning TouchDesigner

Experiment 1 – Algorithm Dilemma

While exploring ASCII tutorials involving DatTables, replicators, and the webcam, I noticed that the concept of pixel characters resembled what I had encountered in p5.js, using similar variables. As I delved into the code and experimented, I decided to switch the input to noise. What stood out was the availability of various types of noise in the dropdown menu, offering more options for visual experimentation compared to p5.js, where I often had to refer back to the p5 reference for specifics. By adjusting the TOP noise operator slider, I achieved several generative outcomes that I could potentially piece together to construct a narrative related to my research pillar.

Noise filter options


Algorithm Dilemma Visualisation

Experiment 2 – Algorithm Literacy

In my second experiment, I took a different approach. The tutorial I followed led to significantly distinct visual outcomes at different stages of the process. This experiment involved more complex operators, including particles, a longer string of DatTable, and transformations of the xyz-axis of the camera.

I was introduced to how I can map expressions to parameters. In this experiment, I generated tx, ty, and tz values from my noise data and mapped them to the xyz axis of my camera, effectively controlling the camera rotation with noise data. Following a similar process to my first experiment, I documented several outcomes while creating the 'Tunnel' and later edited them into a video.

Camera rotation mapped to noise


Algorithm Literacy Visualisation

Experiment 3 – Speculative Design

I stumbled upon an intriguing visualization of a QuadTree filter on YouTube. A QuadTree is a data structure where each internal node has precisely four sub-nodes, and it struck me as an effective way to represent how data is processed, contextualized, and utilized in algorithmic decision-making.

Unlike previous experiments, there wasn't a step-by-step tutorial to follow this time; instead, there was only a .toe file containing the actual filter. I dedicated some time to figuring out how to make it work, especially since there wasn't a clear input and output operator. It turned out that this file contained several networks, a detail I discovered thanks to my knowledge of keyboard shortcuts U and I (to jump in and out of networks). Inside the main network, I encountered several Python extensions that were beyond my comprehension. Rather than delving into the scripts, I opted to insert some of the operators I had used before, eventually achieving an inverted version of the original visualization.

Pleased with the outcomes I achieved, I proceeded to search for video clips online that could effectively convey a dystopian world. Using these clips, I constructed a speculative narrative illustrating a society fully aware of and compliant with algorithmic data collection.

Filter run by Python extensions


Speculative Design Visualisation

Repository Curation

Extensive reading has been a crucial aspect of my research journey so far, primarily to attain a deep understanding of my chosen research topic before I begin on the making process. It's imperative not only for my own comprehension but also to facilitate clear communication of my research to others.

Amidst this extensive reading, I had to curate a repository of selected readings that would underpin and substantiate my research, its processes, and methodologies. The challenge lay in balancing a comprehensive foundation with the need to avoid overwhelming the repository with an excess of supplementary readings.

In my effort to strike this balance, I revisited my reading list to identify the key readings that had a big influence in shaping my understanding. These selections were not merely chosen for their relevance but also for their ability to convey my perspective and situatedness in the context of my research topic.

In order to maintain clarity and coherence in my research journey, I have consciously chosen to include just four readings in my repository that closely resonate with my current research stage. This decision emerged from a realization that many of the readings within my Are.na collection had started to veer away from the core focus of my research. As my methodology and approach gradually solidify, I found that numerous readings, although valuable in their own right, no longer align with the evolving trajectory of my research.

Repository Section


Catalogue of Making

For my catalog of making, I opted for a 1-page microsite. After looking at many process documentation sites, I find this to be the most user friendly format, as it doesn’t require the user to click into pages and it’s also generally easier to locate projects.

Instead of collaging my process and outcomes together, I separated them instead to keep the showcase area tidy. Even though the process images were tiny, I enabled the zoom function for viewers who are interested to view it in fullscreen. I didn’t go into too much detail about my process since it was already in my CPJ, and let the images explain themselves. However, I did include a comprehensive write-up for each experiment and a label indicating the software(s) used.

For the videos in my catalogue, I deliberated whether to embed them from Vimeo, considering potential issues with file size and website loading speed. For now, I think I will just stick to local files first, if in the future my site slows down because of file size, I’ll potentially switch over to Vimeo.

Initially, I believed that I could use Cargo for hosting, provided I had a subscription allowing me to host my website. However, Andreas preferred a manual HTML build. Nevertheless, the work I put into the Cargo template didn't go to waste, as it served as a reference for building my site. It wasn’t too difficult to create my own, I just didn’t really fancy the messy system where I had a long list of code in a html file. I know I can organise them in a .json file like the repository in the CPJ but after countless attempts, I couldn’t really get it to work. Nevertheless, the process didn’t take too long since the layout wasn’t too complicated and I already had an established wireframe.

Wireframing in Cargo


Building in HTML

Consultation

As I entered week 7, I found myself still grappling with some uncertainty about how to effectively frame my research approach and methods. Despite my attempt to refine it, I repeatedly received feedback suggesting that I was delving too deeply into the details. It seemed that I was struggling to strike the right balance between adequately justifying my research and delving excessively into the step-by-step processes.

Fortunately, Andreas stepped in, helping me to anchor the main framework of my research approach and methods. He clarified that the critical journal would serve as my primary approach, while prototyping would be my chosen method. With this, I gained a clearer understanding of how speculative design and RtD (Research through Design) fit into these two central components. Having sort out my uncertainties, I now get a clear sense of direction in how to work out this section of my RPO.