Progress Report – Foldable Creatures

Progress Report

During the most recent installation and visit to the Children’s Museum, our creature encountered serious interaction robustness issues in regard to sheer survivability when interacted with. On multiple occasions, the origami piece was pulled completely out of the system, thus rendering the project useless. Even so, on multiple occasions children and adults were able to experience a moment of delight in the project whether dealing with interest, fear, or wonder. While fear and wonder caused harmless interactions, interest often ultimately led to the children beheading the project in an attempt to better understand how the project works. Of these interactions, the most surprising was that the children experienced fear when interacting with our project and were actively shying away from the project, although ironically in the sense that the creature itself was designed to be “shy” and “fearful”. From this visit, it was clear that, firstly, a separation between the user and the project would be necessary to prevent frequent accidents and breakage of the project. Secondly, it was also clear that the single creature alone, while interesting to some, others were uninterested, perhaps hinting that a more diverse field of unique creatures with different movements could become a more compelling visual experience that could augment the duration and level of interaction possible. Lastly, the level of complexity regarding the behavior of the creature was also clearly lacking and was having issues capturing and engaging the museum-goers for extended periods of time. Following this visit, our vision of the project has morphed into a group of different creatures generating a field that reacts uniquely depending on one’s location and how many creatures can sense them. By layering multiple creatures within a space, it is possible to generate higher levels of complexity and combined behavior even using relatively simple code. In conclusion, by adding more complexity into more creatures, it is then hopefully possible to generate more interest and delight regarding the project.
In regards to technical limitations, we are planning on adding an acrylic barrier to prevent museum-goers from dismantling the project in an attempt to better understand the project and satisfy their curiosity. Another issue that was brought up was the lack of more compelling light which may also be solved by using higher output LEDs and other techniques of lighting. Besides these issues, only through making can we better understand and ascertain mechanical issues that may come up with the other two creatures, although our group expects significantly less resistance than our first creature given our prior experience. In terms of the fundamental experience, there are no significant changes to be made other than the increase in the creatures, the generation and positioning of a field of creatures, and hopefully the augmentation of the complexity of the code to enhance the behavioral experience. In regards to changes compared to our initial objectives, our group had relatively ambitious goals from the beginning so it just comes down to executing the plan and making the three creatures, then improving the code. As the three creatures will be finished mechanically on different time scales, it will be possible to fold, make, then code in succession to increase efficiency.

VIDEO DOCUMENTATION:
Creature in Action