Category: F2024 – Mang

intro

Again, identifying the challenging aspect of the mission seemed the very first step I would take in approaching a new product. This time, while digitally/analog-ly reading/writing can be achieved easily, finding the right connection between the readings and the writings—in terms of both values and functions is what I’d like to focus on. As I found the light sensor we tried in class interesting enough, I came up with this product by combining the light sensors and a servo.

process

Although theoretically, maybe we should have a clear picture of the final product before getting our hands dirty (and I thought I had), sometimes it did take time to distinguish between ‘think of a function’ and ‘think of a product.’ In the first stage of my development, the ‘rotating to follow the light source’ function was already achieved, while the ‘product’ had only the electronics exposed blatantly:

Later on, the very simple concept of a sunflower following the sun finally popped up in my mind. With one piece of cardboard added to the product, although the concept may seem simpler than ‘Dual Light Sensor Servo Control,’ the gist is much more directly conveyed, I believe. On top of that, the additional layer of cardboard actually brought the bonus of normalizing the light sensors physically by shielding out the ambient light:

schematics & illustration

Both of the graphs are drawn and generated with TinkerCAD

Code

The servo rotation is based on the difference between the readings of the two light sensors:

/* 
‘Sunfbot’
Dual Light Sensor Servo Control
This program controls a servo motor based on the difference between two light sensors.
The servo moves to track the stronger light source.

Components:
- 2x LDR (Light Dependent Resistors)
- 2x 10kΩ resistors for LDRs
- 2x 3300Ω resistors for LEDs
- 1x Switch
- 1x 9g Servo
- 1x Blue LED
- 1x Green LED


reference:
https://www.arduino.cc/en/Tutorial/BuiltInExamples/AnalogReadSerial
https://www.arduino.cc/en/Tutorial/LibraryExamples/Sweep
*/

#include <Servo.h>

// Pin definitions
#define SWITCH_PIN 2      // Toggle switch input pin
#define SERVO_PIN 9       // Servo control pin
#define BLUE_LED_PIN 10   // Blue LED pin (standby indicator)
#define GREEN_LED_PIN 11  // Green LED pin (running indicator)
#define SENSOR1_PIN A2    // First light sensor
#define SENSOR2_PIN A3    // Second light sensor

// Constants
#define SENSOR_THRESHOLD 30  // Minimum difference between sensors to trigger movement
#define SERVO_DELAY 30       // Delay between servo movements (ms)
#define SENSOR2_OFFSET 30    // Calibration offset for sensor 2

Servo myservo;  // create servo object
int pos = 90;    // variable to store servo position

void setup() {
  // Initialize serial communication
  Serial.begin(9600);
  
  // Initialize servo
  myservo.attach(SERVO_PIN);
  
  // Configure pins
  pinMode(SWITCH_PIN, INPUT_PULLUP);
  pinMode(BLUE_LED_PIN, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(GREEN_LED_PIN, OUTPUT);
}

void loop() {
  // Read sensors
  int sensor1Value = analogRead(SENSOR1_PIN);
  int sensor2Value = analogRead(SENSOR2_PIN);
  int sensorOffset;

  // Read switch state
  int switchState = digitalRead(SWITCH_PIN);
  
  if (switchState == LOW) {  // System active (switch pressed)
    // Update status LEDs
    digitalWrite(GREEN_LED_PIN, HIGH);
    digitalWrite(BLUE_LED_PIN, LOW);

    // Apply sensor calibration
    sensor2Value -= SENSOR2_OFFSET;
    
    // Check if right sensor is significantly brighter
    if ((sensor2Value - sensor1Value) > SENSOR_THRESHOLD) {
      if (pos < 180) {
        pos++;
        myservo.write(pos);
      }
    } 
    // Check if left sensor is significantly brighter
    else if ((sensor1Value - sensor2Value) > SENSOR_THRESHOLD) {
      if (pos > 0) {
        pos--;
        myservo.write(pos);
      }
    }
    // If difference is below threshold, maintain position
    myservo.write(pos);
    delay(SERVO_DELAY);
    
  } else {  // System in standby (switch released)
    // Update status LEDs
    digitalWrite(GREEN_LED_PIN, LOW);
    digitalWrite(BLUE_LED_PIN, HIGH);
    
    // Return to center position
    myservo.write(90);
  }

  // Debug output
  String message = String(sensor1Value) + " " + 
                  String(sensor2Value) + " " + 
                  String(switchState) + " " + 
                  String(abs(sensor1Value - sensor2Value));
  Serial.println(message);
}

Hindsight

Cardboard Gang YES. While I thought I could use the laser cutter to prepare the parts of this product, it turned out that cardboard allowed the product to be finished on time. It’s still true that laser-cut acrylic may look nicer, but it surely should only be introduced when things are settled.

Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)

Tigoe’s Physical Computing’s explores common trends on themes found in physical computing along with their pros and cons. Ranging from implementing toys as touch sensors to using our voice to complete a task, the author emphasizes the versatility we have when it comes to designing our projects. This is particularly interesting because it reminds us how endless our creativity can go as we take mundane, everyday tools and make them into something so much greater. I find this to be particularly applicable in our case because as we make the transition from software based development to hardware, a new creativity block can be formed. In other words, working with physical materials takes an entirely new level of creativity and out of the box thinking as we turn our ideas into reality. The formal introduction of these themes or common trends not only gives us an idea for how we can implement these kind of tools, but also a starting platform of ideas for us to further develop.

Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen

In this article the author starts off by establishing the common, ineffective scenario in which an artist has to walk their audience through every stage of the their creation in order for them to follow what is happening. He highlights this as one of the most important issues to be addressed because of how it heavily hinders the experience of interactive media and art. Tigoe also states that similar to traditional art, viewers deserve the chance to interpret the art on their own and strike up conversations in regards to what it means to them. I find this advice to be extremely helpful because it reminds me of the piece we read early in the semester that said interactive media should think, listen, and speak on its own. In combining these two pieces we can clearly see what makes a strong interactive piece of art and going forward I will use these standards to assess my own work for creativity, originality, and usefulness.

Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)

I really liked the idea that you should not give up on your idea, even if it was already implemented. Instead, if you actually have thoughts on how this particular idea can be improved, it is definitely worth trying to implement it. We are all different in our own ways, so one can come up with something new that the other people did not even think about. There is always room for uniqueness, and if we will stop thinking about something that was done by other people, and rather focus on our imagination and unconventional perspective, we can achieve extraordinary things. This applies not only to the art field but also to life in general.

Other than the author’s idea, I quite enjoyed reading about the examples that he gave. I have seen or at least thought of many of the devices that are mentioned, but I am 100% sure that each of them can be enhanced in one way or another. Looking through some of them in particular, I noticed how people’s imagination can turn into something interesting and original. Some of the works that I liked the most are Troll Mirror and Hourglass Mirror by Daniel Rozin.

Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen

I fully agree with the author’s ideas in this reading. First of all, I really liked the line drawn between interactive artwork and ‘conventional’ art like sculpture and painting. It brings me back to the previous readings about interactivity and what is important to keep in mind while designing it. A user should be able to intuitively catch the idea of what to do without explanations needed. Secondly, I liked the comparison between the director and the artists. You do not want to ‘label’ your interactive artwork by imposing/prompting your idea to the people. They need to reflect on your artwork from their own perspective, which can potentially bring deeper understanding and open unique angles of interpretation of the idea, helping you to work on future improvements of the artwork.

I now understand why the professor did not allow us to describe or explain our midterm projects during the showcase. It was actually quite useful to see and hear (shut up and listen) authentic reactions and feedback from my classmates. It helped me understand which sides of my work I would need to improve in the future to ease the interaction and perception.

For this assignment, I decided to release an update for the Antiprocrastination Iphone Case as I promised in my last week blogpost.

Concept

The shortage of the conductive fabric (could not find it in the IM Lab where it was supposed to be) made me find a new way to track the presense of the phone on the surface. This time, I used the conductive tape, which was not that convenient to use, but I experimented with a normal tape to attach it to the phone case and put together the wires.

For my analog input, I decided to use the potentiometer that the professor showed us in class, but use it in an unusual way – track the movements in front of the tracking surface to enhance the phone protection. Whenever an object (hand in our case) is trying to touch the phone, the red led light turns on to signal the extraneous movements. Using the coding, I set the value of the potentiometer under which the led light would turn on. Moreover, I also added the analog output using the map() function that I used multiple times in p5.js to project the range of values of one object to another. Thus, the closer the hand to the phone, the brighter the red led light is. To achieve such an effect I needed to play with the values inside the map() function (as described in the comments for my code), and switch the order of the values for the led light.

Code

// pin definitions
const int potentiometerPin = A3;     // potentiometer
const int ledPin = 3;      // LED connected to analog-reading capable pin number 3

// the setup routine runs once when you press reset:
void setup() {
  // initialize serial communication at 9600 bits per second:
  Serial.begin(9600);
  
  // initialize 
  pinMode(ledPin, OUTPUT);
}

// the loop routine runs over and over again forever:
void loop() {
  // read the input on analog pin
  int sensorValue = analogRead(potPin);
  
  // setting up the mapping so that would work as intended - 
  // the closer the hand, the brighter the led. Putting the values 0 and 255 vice-versa for this
  // and limiting the values of the sensor from 500 to 825 (I put 825 intentionally, so that red led would be bright if the phone is removed from the wires)
  int ledBrightness = map(sensorValue, 500, 825, 255, 0);

  // print out the values we read to give more intuition: 1st for potentiometer and 2nd for led
  Serial.print("Potentiometer: ");
  Serial.print(sensorValue);
  Serial.print("   LED: ");
  Serial.println(ledBrightness);
  
  // setting the LED brightness
  analogWrite(ledPin, ledBrightness);
  
  delay(1);  // delay in between reads for stability
}

Schematic

Video

Reflection

For my first assignment, I did not use any code. Here, I needed to figure out the syntax and commands required to make things work. So far I find it pretty challenging to think in both dimensions – physical and digital, but it is also extremely interesting. Although I did not yet implement the sound effects as I wanted to when the phone was removed from the surface, I am happy with the result that I achieved, especially with how fast I managed to find the substitute for the conductive fabric.

I am looking forward to next week’s classes and assignments to further enhance my Arduino skills.

 

Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)

This reading was insightful as it helped me to demystify some of my own misconceptions regarding making works that have already been done before. He tells us that it is okay to make something which has already been made before, as long as we apply our own ideas into it – add that unique touch. For example, he discusses a work made in the theme of music instruments. . The examples he shared with us, tells us that while recreating existing projects is a common starting point, it’s crucial for designers to innovate by incorporating their unique perspectives. Key elements for creating meaningful interactions include considering the context and purpose of the interaction, designing physical structures that complement intended use, and developing natural gestures that feel significant to users. Analyzing both successful and unsuccessful projects reveals important lessons: simplicity can be powerful, user experience is paramount, and innovation often arises through iteration. By understanding these principles, creators can develop more impactful physical computing projects, pushing the boundaries of interactive technology while learning from the successes and failures of their predecessors.

 

Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen

When I read this, I came to understand that an interactive project is a performance. When it comes to the works I make, especially the ones I have made for this class. I often find myself explaining a lot before the person gets to interact with it. But now I came to understand why that can be harmful for the user. Our work itself should be intuitive to the extent where we don’t have to explain anything — if a button is supposed to be pressed, make it approachable. Essentially, the essence of interactive art lies in its ability to engage users without extensive explanation. Just as a well-designed stage set can convey the mood and context of a play before a single word is spoken, an interactive piece should invite engagement through its visual cues, layout, and interface design By minimizing verbal instructions and allowing users to approach the work with fresh eyes, we empower them to become active participants rather than passive observers. This approach not only enhances the sense of discovery and exploration but also opens the door to unexpected and delightful interactions. The joy of interactive art often resides in the process of figuring out how to engage with it, much like solving a puzzle or exploring a new environment. As artists, our role shifts from being explainers to becoming facilitators of experiences. We set the stage, carefully crafting the environment to encourage exploration and interaction. Then, we step back, observe, and listen. This process of watching users interact with our work without intervention provides valuable insights for refining and improving the intuitive aspects of our designs.

Articles:

• Physical Computing’s Greatest hits and misses
• Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen

 

In Tigoe’s two articles, he explores the ways in which artists can find inspiration from the work of others, offering both insights and reassurance about the process of building on existing ideas. A particularly compelling aspect of these articles is how Tigoe illustrates the concept of ‘copying’ among artists—not as mere replication but as transformation. He shows that while artists may draw from each other’s work, they often create something entirely new and unique, reshaping the borrowed elements into original expressions. This idea aligns with the well-known notion that artists often remix various sources, juxtaposing them to create fresh, unique works. In interactive art, this approach can ease the burden of starting from scratch, which can be overwhelming and anxiety-inducing. Without inspiration from existing works, artists may struggle to bring their ideas to life fully—unless they are among the rare few who don’t rely on external inspiration at all.

Tigoe discusses various interactive pieces that appear to share certain traits but yield vastly different experiences for the audience, such as ‘Video Mirrors’ and ‘Body and Hand Cursors’. One of my favorite examples is the gloves that produce music when tapped on a surface. This design is not only interactive but fun and highly engaging, embodying the playful spirit of interactive art.

One critical reflection I have is about Tigoe’s reference to the “Scooby Doo painting” example, where he highlights a common mistake among designers: confusing presence with attention. He states, “Presence is easy to sense… but it’s harder to tell whether someone’s paying attention.” I think that in cases where artwork detects a person’s presence and responds by moving, it naturally draws the viewer’s attention, fostering interaction. For instance, in a crowded space, artwork that moves autonomously could spark collective interest, showing how even unintended effects can enhance user experience.

This concept connects with Tigoe’s advice in the second article about avoiding interference with a finished product while users engage with it. I wholeheartedly agree with this perspective, and I believe it’s an essential practice to adopt in designing interactive experiences. Even if I don’t incorporate this approach all the time, it’s a valuable insight I’ll certainly keep in mind.

Physical Computing’s Greatest hits and misses

Here the article describes the various projects seen from interactive media design ranging from instruments design with gloves or pads to reactive art with various sensors or computer vision. Although the author describes these project as common themes amongst physical computing courses, they do not disregard or look down upon the repetitive theme because to them each project brings with a unique idea and innovated process. For me, reading his opinion on this issue brings me comfort because I have been trying to brainstorm ideas for the final project for IM and with each idea, I fear it isn’t original or creative enough. Of course, I would not copy another’s work, however I feel the art I have seen and interacted with has shaped my ideas and influenced my creative thinking process. I believe everyone is shaped by the world around them, so I think it is cool to see how people can reimagine a concept and build upon past works.

Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen

The following articles writes about how interactive artist should design their works a degree of intention that allows the users to explore their art, but also leaving room for the user to decide on the art’s interpretation. The author mentions how interactive artist should avoid bluntly telling the user what to do and how to interpret their art. Although I do see the point the author is trying to make, I think there are exceptions where the artist should have the freedom to express themselves the way they want the user to appreciate and experience their art. For example, in activist artworks, oftentimes they shed light to forgotten/ overlooked history, and I believe in these cases, it is critical for the user to understand the concept behind the art to fully be immersed with the artwork. I don’t think the idea of simply setting up the stage and observing user is enough and there needs to be balance of artist intervenes and user appreciation. As such, I feel it okay if an artist feels the need to describe their works. I rather much learn the passion behind the work, than be completely open to interpretation.

Norman:
When I first opened the article titled “attractive things work better”, I was completely unaware that I would leave with such profound insights.
Norman’s premise—“attractive things work better”—initially appears straightforward, but as he dives deeper, it’s clear that he challenges the pure function-over-form mindset often seen in technology and design. Reading his analysis, I found myself reflecting on my own relationship with technology and my understanding of utility, aesthetics, and the human experience in design.

One example Norman uses to illustrate the power of emotional design is color screens on computers. He recalls initially perceiving color screens as unnecessary, a view that aligns with a utilitarian perspective focused on measurable, practical outcomes. However, he soon realized that, despite offering no overt advantage, color screens created a more engaging experience. I can see this reflected in my choice of smartphones, where choosing a sleeker more aesthetically pleasing model is a priority even if the it performs identically to a model that is cheaper but less aesthetically appealing. Though a basic model could perform many of the same tasks, I choose a high-end model because it simply feels right. While utilitarianism would label this decision inefficient, Norman’s work suggests that emotion has its own kind of utility.

An interesting case where Normal emphasizes utility over looks is his example of emergency doors, where design has to be immediately intuitive, especially in emergencies. It’s an example where utilitarianism, focused on maximum efficiency, clearly benefits the user. However, in low-stress situations, attractive designs with aesthetic details enhance the user’s experience. This reflects John Stuart Mill’s “higher pleasures” in qualitative utilitarian philosophy, which suggests that intellectual and emotional satisfaction are inseparable from true utility. Norman’s view implicitly critiques a rigid, form-over-function approach by suggesting that design must incorporate both utility and aesthetics to meet the full spectrum of human needs.

As a student, I see Norman’s work inspiring me to think differently about the intersection of technology, utility, and emotion.  Rather than dismissing emotional design as indulgent, Norman helps us see that “attractive things work better” not because of a superficial appeal to aesthetics but because they engage our emotions in ways that functionality alone cannot.

Hamilton:
Margaret Hamilton’s contributions to the Apollo Program and software engineering are monumental feats accomplished against all odds. Her ability to work under high pressure, to predict and plan for critical failures and her creative thinking made the moon landing a resounding success. At the same time it saddens me how little I had heard of Margaret before this article, everyone always talks about Neil Armstrong or Buzz Aldrin, and famous lines they said while diminishing the ever important work of a brilliant woman.

Hamilton built in a priority task scheduling system and robust error handling which came in handy when multiple alarms threatened to abort the Apollo 11 mission. She also coined the term software engineering, providing more legitimacy to a field which now permeates through every major and minor world avenue. As a woman leading a crucial team in a male dominated field, she broke significant barriers and paved the way for more gender diversity within STEM.
Her legacy extended beyond the Apollo Guidance System, she continued working on error prevention and development of UML  showcasing a lifelong devotion to her field and love for computers.
I am truly inspired by the immense impact that Hamilton has had on the field, contributing to one of humanity’s greatest feats while also shaping how we think of software development today. Her story is a powerful reminder to push boundaries, think creatively and to plan rigorously for every outcome even in the face of insurmountable challenges.

 

 

Concept: 

While thinking of unusual switches, the first thing that came to mind was how suitcase locks work. How setting some sort of combination and pressing a button would make that into a ‘password’ that you could repeatedly use to open the suitcase. Inspired and fascinated by the workings of such a simple concept I came up with the idea of mimicking a combination lock but instead using buttons on a breadboard. Although using our hands wasn’t technically a part of the assignment, I do believe that being able to set a combination using the code, and having the circuit only work when the correct combination is entered is a creative switch.
Code Highlight:

Approaching this problem I had to think very creatively about how the Arduino code would work with multiple switches. In the end the best solution I arrived at was setting a lock using the pins each switch was connected to and then checking if each switch pressed in order was one corresponding to its index in the combination array.

const int buttonPins[] = {2, 3, 4, 5}; // Digital pins connected to the buttons
const int ledPin = 13; // Digital pin connected to the LED
int combo[] = {0, 1, 2, 3}; // The correct sequence of button presses (in order)
int input[4]; // Array to store the user's button press sequense
int index = 0; // Keeps track of how many correct buttons have been pressed
bool isUnlocked = false; // Flag to indicate if the correct combination has been entered

void setup() {
  // Set up each button pin as an input
  for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
    pinMode(buttonPins[i], INPUT);
  }
  // Set up the LED pin as an output
  pinMode(ledPin, OUTPUT);
}

void loop() {
  if (!isUnlocked) { // Only check for button presses if the lock is not yet unlocked
    for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) { // Iterate over each button
      if (digitalRead(buttonPins[i]) == HIGH) { // Check if the current button is pressed
       delay(50) //Small delay to ensure one press is not registered multiple times
        if (digitalRead(buttonPins[i]) == HIGH) { // Confirm the button is still pressed
          if (i == combo[index]) { // Check if this button is the next in the correct sequence
            input[index] = i; // Record the correct press in the input array
            index++; // Move to the next position in the sequence
            delay(500); // Delay to avoid multiple readings from a single press
          } else {
            index = 0; // Reset if a wrong button is pressed
            break; // Exit the loop to start checking from scratch
          }
        }
      }
    }

    if (index == 4) { // If all buttons have been pressed in the correct order
      digitalWrite(ledPin, HIGH); // Turn on the LED to indicate success
      isUnlocked = true; // Set flag to indicate that the lock has been unlocked
    }
  }
}

Demonstration:

The led only lights up when the correct combination is pressed
In this case the correct combination is yellow, red, green, blue for clarity of demonstration.

Her Code Took Us to the Moon

Reading about Margaret Hamilton’s work on the Apollo mission taught me a lot about how careful and exact programming needed to be. The mission depended on software, so even a small mistake could lead to failure. This reading reminds me that when working on physical programming projects, I need to pay close attention to every detail. As we move into the hands-on part of the course, I’ll focus on testing my projects carefully, just like the Apollo team used simulations to catch problems early and make sure everything worked as it should.

Norman’s “Emotion & Design: Why Good Looks Matter”

In Norman’s reading, I found it interesting how he connects emotions and looks with how well things work. He says that when something is nice to look at, it makes people feel good, and that makes it easier to use. This idea makes me want to design things that aren’t just useful but also make people curious and excited to try them. Moving forward, I’ll try to add features that make people want to explore, while keeping things simple to use. Norman’s ideas showed me that good looks can improve the whole experience, helping people enjoy and connect with what they’re using.