Author: Jackson Pruitt

Posted on

Recitation 3 – Sensors by Jackson Pruitt

Question 1:

What did you intend to assemble in the recitation exercise? If your sensor/actuator combination were to be used for pragmatic purposes, who would use it, why would they use it, and how could it be used?

During the recitation, my partner and I intended to assemble as many of the various sensors provided using the analog function of the Arduino computer.

The first sensor was the “Moisture sensor”, which can be used to detect the various levels of moisture the sensor touches. This could be used by those that would like to grow plants that require a consistent or specific amount of water as they could use the sensor to detect the amount of moisture within the soil.

The second sensor was “Vibration Sensor”, which allows users to detect the distance of objects through the varying vibrations emitted by the object. I’m not sure if it’s the same mechanisms, but a similar usage of this device are seismographs which detect the levels of earthquakes by sensing the amount of vibration in the ground. 

The “Ultrasonic Ranger” allowed for us to detect the distance of objects through varying levels of sound being emitted by the object. With a bit more fine-tuning in the accuracy, this could be used for people who are blind in being able to detect the distance of objects around them, similar to how bats use echolocation. 

The next sensor was the “joystick sensor”, which used a joystick device to maneuver information on the screen. This, of course, is most commonly used in gaming which allows users to control characters’ motions with joystick sensors. 

Lastly, the “variable resistors” or “light sensor” could measure the varying amount of light being taken in by the sensor. This is useful again for farmers who require a certain amount of light for different plants that may be light sensitive or require consistent amounts of light. 

Question 2:

Code is often compared to following a recipe or tutorial.  Why do you think that is?

This is because code is the compilation of information, or “ingredients”, that result in a desired outcome. You also have to use the precise ingredients, otherwise, the outcome may not be what you wanted. 

Question 3:

In Language of New Media, Manovich describes the influence of computers on new media. In what ways do you believe the computer influences our human behaviors?

I believe that computers influence our behavior in many ways. The first being that computers allow humans to interact without being in the same space, which results in a level of confidence and openness that might otherwise not occur. For example, people are perhaps more likely to say something hurtful to another person because they do not have to see the emotional effect it creates on them. However, this also means people are perhaps more open and honest about how they really feel when communicating through computers because of this distance. Secondly, computers have allowed for our daily lives to access or achieve tasks more conveniently. One result of this could be that humans are now lazier, but it also could mean that humans are more efficient and capable of completing tasks much faster. 

*My computer would not allow me to download media from Wechat and I was unable to attach any photos. However, my partner was 午后白蝶 and the photos can be found on her post. 

Posted on

Group Project Individual Reflection by Jackson Pruitt

What is Interaction?

For several years now, the term “interaction” has recurrently come to my attention. I’ve heard it when buying video games that are supposedly “more interactive”, I’ve heard it when a new movie came out that was “the first interactive film”, and of course I’ve heard it when my mom tells me I need more “human interaction”. Although this term has popped up around me countless times, I never once thought to know what it means. Throughout the research I’ve conducted, the definition most fit is that of computer game designer Chris Crawford, who beautifully summarizes interaction as “a cyclic process in which two actors alternately listen, think, and speak”. This definition of interaction is exactly what my group had in mind when creating our interactive device and, almost as importantly, thinking about what interaction is not.

For our interactive project, my group and I decided to create a device called the “Fit Box”. The purpose of the Fit Box is to bring the capabilities of a personal trainer right into your own home without the need for a gym membership. Once turned on, the device tracks your workout routines and ensures that you are correctly following the exercises with scanning technology. A hologram display also allows for customers to receive the highest quality experience as it provides real-time examples of exercises and moral support when exercising alone. The Fit Box is perfectly aligned with Crawford’s definition of interaction as the customer and the device are recurrently undergoing a conversation, metaphorically speaking. In other words, the customer is able to speak to the device in order to turn it on, to which the device then sees the customer with scanning mechanisms. From there, the device thinks as it watches the customer perform exercises and speaks when it notices a mistake. This idea can be seen in other interactive projects using the same definition. For example, Scott Snibbe’s Shadow Bag fits within this same definition of interaction as a device “sees” the shadow of the recipient and then “thinks” to perform a movement as the recipient continues to stand in front of the device. 

Although coming up with an idea for an interactive project was challenging, I found it somewhat more difficult to think of something that does not fit within this rather broad definition. As our group discussed the possibilities of non-interactivity, it was clear that something non-interactive would lack the ability to see, think, and speak in Crawford’s metaphorical definition. Therefore, our second project of something non-interactive was placing a thumbtack on a corkboard. Although the action of placing the thumbtack on the board requires one actor to think, there is no interaction because the recipient does not reciprocate with any “thought” or “speech”. The tack remains on the board without a cyclical conversation to be held and therefore is not interactive.

In summary, interaction is the ability of two actors to repeatedly see, think, and speak with one another, or in short, to have a conversation. Our first project represented this definition of interaction as two actors conversed with one another to achieve the task of performing exercises. Our second project, on the other hand, lacked the ability to have a conversation as only one actor had the ability to see, think, and speak. So now that a definition has been made clear, why is it important to know what interaction is? For me personally, interaction is important to understand because we have the opportunity to learn something from our interactions– or conversations. When one actor has the ability to see, think, and speak for itself, and a recipient is there to reciprocate this seeing, thinking, and speaking, a conversation is held that may allow for new ideas or information to be shared that would otherwise be kept to one of the two actors. 

Works Cited

Crawford, Chris. “Art of Interactive Design.” Art of Interactive Design | No Starch Press, nostarch.com/interactive.htm.

Wilson, Steven. “ArtScienceNow-CH6-AlternativeInterfaces.pdf.” Google Drive, Google, drive.google.com/file/d/1q7adHt5BCv0QQMwBVBaGEfG6pGGfQX9b/view.

Posted on

Recitation 2: Arduino Basics by Jackson Pruitt

QUESTION 1:

Reflect how you use technology in your daily life and on the circuits you just built. Use the text Physical Computing and your own observations to define interaction.

Looking back, I feel that I’ve often neglected or undervalued the technical process of interactive devices that allow me to achieve daily tasks. During our recitation class, we were asked to assemble a circuit that would light an LED with a fading effect and a circuit that would result in the sound of a buzzer using both the analog and digital functions of the Arduino. 

Here is the completed “fade” circuit.

Here is the completed “toneMelody” circuit. 

Considering Chris Crawford’s definition of interaction as “an iterative process of listening, thinking, and speaking between two or more actors”, it’s apparent how these two relatively circuits operate within this definition as both the light and speaker require our own involvement in order to reciprocate with an action. However, once we essentially combined these two features to create the “speed game”, it showed how these less apparent examples of interaction can be utilized to form something we commonly identify as interactive, which in our case was a two-player computer game.

Here is an image of the completed “speed game”. 

Schematic of speed game circuit. 

QUESTION 2:

Why did we use the 10K resistor with the push button?

We used the 10k resistor with the push button in order to prevent shortening the circuit, which could potentially harm the push button. As mentioned in my last blog post, the resistor is able to lessen the flow of electricity throughout the circuit while not completely diminishing energy reaching the desired component. 

QUESTION 3:

If you have 100,000 LEDs of any brightness and color at your disposal, what would you make and where would you put it?

With 100,000 LEDs of any brightness and color at my disposal, I would make a life-sized mirror made of lights. Similar to how we use pixels of lights on computers or phones to make images appear on our screens, I would arrange these LEDs in rows so that a full image could be displayed. Ideally, this would be displayed in a closed environment, like a museum, so that the lighting could be controlled to capture the object being displayed and the LEDs could be more apparent. I think people enjoy seeing themselves displayed in unique ways, and the LEDs would allow for people to see themselves beautifully displayed in light and color.

Posted on

Documentation 1 – Jackson Pruitt

During our recitation class, my partner and I were assigned to complete three different circuits in order to achieve three mechanisms: a doorbell, a lamp, and a dimmable lamp. Starting with the lamp, we attached the power source to a voltage regulator and a capacitor on the breadboard. The voltage regulator allowed us to receive the proper amount of voltage to power the speaker without harming it. The capacitor is used to stabilize the flow of electricity as it moves across the breadboard to the other components. We then connected a wire from the voltage regulator to the speaker, which is of course the mechanism that emits sound. The next step was to attach a switch, or in our case a button, to the speaker. This allows for us to physically control when electricity is received, completing the circuit and therefore emitting sound.

 

Here is our completed doorbell circuit.

For the lamp, we pretty much kept the same layout except for the addition of two components: a resistor and an LED. We connected the resistor to the voltage regulator, which allowed for us to further the control of electricity reaching the LED. The resistor was then connected to the LED, our source of light for our lamp. This is where we ran into some problems. While reassembling our circuit, we placed the switch button facing the wrong direction. This meant that the flow of electricity wasn’t properly reaching our desired destination and had to be switched.

Lastly, we built a dimmable lamp using one additional component placed between the resistor and LED, a variable resistor. This variable resistor simply allowed us to physically alter the flow of electricity reaching the LED and therefore dimming the light. Here, we were faced with perhaps the most challenging problem. After several attempts at refiguring the wires and other components, we could not get the LED to turn on. After receiving help from a TA, we found that we were given a faulty variable resistor, and once replaced, we were able to complete the task.

Question 1:

After the assigned reading, I found that all three of the circuits we built included interactivity in the sense that my participation in the action of touching the switch button resulted in the circuit reacting with a response. As the article defines interaction to be “a cyclic process in which two actors alternately listen, think, and speak”, the case can be made that my pressing of the button caused the computer to “listen” to my request and come up with a response, or metaphorically “speak”.

Question 2:

I feel that the goal of art is to reach the audience with an emotion or feeling. This same idea can be transmitted through Design and Physical computing as is shown in Zach Lieberman’s work. His technology allowed for a man who was paralyzed throughout his entire body to create graffiti art using just his eyes. This incredible feat amplified the emotional reflection felt by the audience, as it captured the spark of relief that this man’s passion was not lost due to his illness. Physical computing extends the capabilities for artists, hence allowing for more impactful and more interactive forms of art.