Chris Crawford really gets it right when he talks about interactivity. He explains it in a clear and organized way, especially when he connects it to our senses. Making this connection between interaction and our senses is a big deal. I think interactivity gets super powerful when it tugs at our feelings and expressions.

Imagine interactive games or events that use special sounds, words, colors, and lights. They make a whole new experience for the person taking it all in. It’s like diving into the art itself. Regular movies might not have a lot of interactivity but think about formats like 4DX. They change the game. You’re not just watching; you’re feeling things like air blowing, water splashing, and chairs moving. It’s like the movie comes to life, playing with your senses. As Crawford points out, a vital part of interactivity is making you think, feel, and express yourself. When art really hits you deeply, it makes you stop and feel. This feeling is what kicks off the real interaction with the artwork, creating a strong bond between you and what you’re seeing.

In my view, interactivity goes even further. It’s about connecting with individuals on a deeper level, creating an experience that really resonates with them. This, in turn, leads to the kind of reaction Crawford talks about – a reaction that truly does justice to the interactive nature of the encounter. It’s like a dance between the viewer and the medium, each responding and influencing the other in a meaningful way. This, to me, is the true essence of interactivity.

The Infinite Canvas

Concept

This project came about by chance. Initially, my goal was to design two color-changing balls. While I was exploring ways to enhance the project, I stumbled upon the idea of removing the background function. This allowed the ball from the previous frame to remain on the screen. I eliminated the stroke and implemented a color gradient transition, which produced a visually pleasing effect. To expand on this concept, I decided to create multiple duplicates of both balls, aligning them with the “mother” ball. Then, I began experimenting with adjusting the hardcoded bounce variables. Each time I increased the value by 0.1, it resulted in a distinct pattern, sometimes even yielding unique “art pieces” that had an appealing element of randomness.

The “random” Art pieces

 

Furthermore, I developed different versions of this project. The first version functions as a standard screensaver-like visual effect. By tweaking the bounce function variables, users can generate their own one-of-a-kind art pieces. In the second version, I introduced user interaction. Initially, the screen displays two beams, and when a user clicks on it, an additional beam appears, leaving a trace on the screen. The beam stops when the user releases the mouse button. This change opens up endless possibilities for creating an unlimited number of distinctive patterns.

Version ONE

Version two

Code that i’m proud of

//Ball colors
var r = map(sin(frameCount), -1, 1, 50, 255);
var g = map(cos(frameCount / 2), -1, 1, 50, 255);
var b = map(sin(frameCount / 9), -1, 1, 50, 255);
fill(r, g, b);

//creating ball/ ellipse
ellipse(this.x, this.y, 24, 24);

//adding second beam on click
let count = 0;
if(mouseIsPressed)
{
count += 24
}
for (let i = 0; i < 12 + count; i += 24) {
ellipse(this.x + i/4 , this.y + i * 2, 24, 24);
}
}

Reflection and IMPROVEments

In the future I would love to add a feature that enables the user to pause the moving beams and save the sketch.

 

 

The first chapter in Chris Crawford’s book “The Art of Interactive Design” identifies some of the essential traits of great design and addresses common misconceptions about interactive design. 

He begins the chapter by analyzing the increasing popularity of “interactivity” over the years, as well as the numerous ways that “interactive design” has been mischaracterized as a result of its unexpected popularity. He specifically mentions the overuse of the term “interactivity” in marketing campaigns for products ranging from children’s toys to shampoo and even cereal. 

Before getting into the fundamentals of great design, he attempts to describe interactivity through metaphor, stating that interactivity must allow for hearing, speaking, and thinking. Crawford acknowledges that there are degrees to interactivity but emphasizes that without these qualities, true interactivity cannot be achieved or done so to the greatest extent. He also provides numerous instances of non-interactive items, such as books, movies (not yet), and paintings, since these items fail to meet all three elements of interactivity. 

Later on, Crawford touches on the differences between user interface design and interactive design, stating that UI design focused on “…optimizing communication between people and electronic devices”, while interactive design “…addressed the entire communication between the user and computer.”.  

Crawford’s concept for great design as “speaking, listening, and thinking” was very intriguing to me in this chapter. Each of these activities has an enormous effect on the individual, allowing for full-body engagement with whatever they are observing. For me, this will always be what I find most astonishing about the work being done in the IM field. Interactive media/design transcends passive observation and evokes emotion, showcasing the most beautiful parts of life.

The way the author explains interactivity is quite interesting. What caught my attention was when the author talked about a falling tree branch in the woods, and how what happens next is a reaction, not a true interaction. The author was able to present a well-structured step-by-step approach to defining interactivity. He started by discussing communication and the roles of different actors, then went on to propose the idea of categorizing interactivity into two levels: low and high, and explained how to tell them apart.

Chris’s viewpoint on interactivity is really unique and got me thinking that we might need a new word to describe what He’s talking about, especially since the term “interactivity” has been used incorrectly so often. This also brings up the question of how we decide if a digital artwork or project is interactive or not. On the flip side, it seems like he is mostly focused on human interaction (communication) as the main type, comparing computer limitations to human communication and interactions which might be insufficient to create a strong argument. This might mean they’re missing out on considering other forms of interactivity that don’t involve humans.

Furthermore, the author gave good examples to differentiate between an interaction and a reaction. For instance, he spoke about a reader reading a book where they only react to what they read rather than “interact” with it. Even though I believe these examples are prevalent, they were essential in explaining the difference between both terms. However, if we refer back to the initial examples presented in the beginning of the paper, such as the image of a child playing on an “interactable” rug, it could indeed be considered a form of interaction if it provides distinct feedback to the child based on the specific actions they take.

In general, the author has made a compelling case and touched upon a subject that could be relevant to various contemporary buzzwords we employ nowadays. Take, for instance, the phrase “Immersive experience.” Lately, numerous businesses have adopted this term to describe their offerings as immersive, even when they fall far short of delivering a high-quality, enjoyable experience for the user.

Concept

The concept behind “Collecting Falling Bricks” was to recreate a nostalgic gaming experience from my youth where players control a vibrant block using the right and left arrow keys. The game revolves around the simple yet addictive task of collecting falling grey bricks. As you collect these bricks, your score gradually increases, prominently displayed on the canvas’s top left corner. The game is designed to be endless, allowing players to collect as many bricks as they desire without facing a game-over scenario.

Highlight of the Code

One of the code highlights that I’m particularly proud of is the implementation of the continuous gameplay loop. This loop ensures that new falling bricks are introduced at regular intervals, maintaining an engaging pace and preventing the game from becoming too static. Below is a snippet of the code responsible for this:

// Continuous gameplay loop
setInterval(() => {
  objects.push(new FallingObject());
}, 1000);

Reflection/Improvements

Creating this interactive game art was an exciting journey for me as I combined my creativity and coding skills. For future work, I envision adding a new layer of challenge to the game. Instead of an endless loop, I plan to implement a game-over mechanism that will test players’ skills and add excitement to the gameplay. When a player misses collecting a brick, they would start the game anew, providing a sense of accomplishment and motivation to improve their score.

Edit Link