trial run

We did a Trial run at CAVS (center for advanced visual studies) at MIT. I built projection screens from a special paper and used rear projection. The most important lesson was I need to do a lot of re-tooling of the technology. The projections were hard to decipher, you couldn't see facial expressions, and the audio wasn't working well either. When the technology isn't working smoothly, it makes it hard to learn anything else.

Nevertheless Andi came up with some helpful observations on the aesthetics and interactive elements etc. :

Form:
I really responded to the 'floating doorway' form that the screen took. Taking the size and shape of a literal 'portal' helped me release into the communication experience. I appreciated also that there weren't divisions/partitions which will inevitably be a part of a multi-screen projection. The floating screen also had a warm, sensual feel to it. It wasn't at all invasive - - rather kind of elegant and crisp. Appropriate for an indoor domestic space. But certainly think about whether you want that kind of sleek subtlety. How do you want the intervention into that space to feel. Techy? Not?
I think it's important to try out the computer/tv set up and see how it feels to you and others. Based on pure site specificity, the rear projection seems to work best for the lobbies you have lined up, but not as much in a store window. (Thoughts of reclaiming the 'tech store front' and such come to mind.)

The challenge is the image quality, though. Perhaps the same kind of suspension of disbelief would occur if you could see facial expressions and hear the sound more clearly? There is something intriguing about the human interaction with the tv/computer screen. More contemporary now that so much communication is mediated by these screens.

Talked about but worth noting:

-- an 'x' marks the spot for where to sit or stand. It was hard to tell whether or not you were on screen
-- Definitely continue to block off the vid. conferencing window where you can see yourself. it's distracting and encourages self-consciousness or narcissism that limits the human connection with the person on the other side.
-- Interesting that people weren't motivated to walk on all sides of the projection. people seemed to be able to tell which was the activated side - - interesting.

Interactions:
Since that experience was mostly about testing technology, it was hard to get a sense for how people will really use it. I appreciated the way the kids were playing with it. It was great to see how much they got into performing for the camera - - the story that they created about kidnapping, etc. I think being able to see facial expressions more will help people know to actually communicate. One thing I notices was how little people actually spoke to the screen. I think three people just hung out or danced in front of it but didn't do much more than laugh or smile. I don't know if it was embarassment about being known that they were also being seen, or the auto-pilot reaction that you don't/can't really talk to a screen and have it talk back. I wonder what would happen say, if smith street residents were to sit
in front of the portal and tell personal narratives to the lobby/void of 10 williams? Would people crowd around? Would they know to respond. The same if the narrative came from the other side. It will be interesting to see how people respond. Was it a function of the screen/form itself or just poor audio? (a possibility)

It's a fun tool for certain, but I'm interested to see how it can be used. I wonder if people are more inspired to play with something like that than use it for actual communication and correspondence. I know I felt more playful than anything (but I think that may change if I didn't know the people on the other side.) For this reason, I think it's still critical to try different ways of utilizing the tool when you set it up in Dudley. A free day - - how do people use it unprompted? A directed conversation day? Question prompts - - like a box labled 'don't know what to say? look here!' or even a call and response board. Something like 'Have something to say or Want to talk about _____? What is it?' And definitely a response notebook. Or
even seeing what people do when prompted to use it for personal narrative (as stated above.) There's something interesting happening with the 'confessional box' as used in reality tv programming. Or even Story Core... Is this coming from a human tendency toward exhibitionism? a particular cultural moment? Is it a way for people to 'be heard' when there's so much frustration/malaise/throwing-up-of-hands regarding our institutions and the ability to impact their actions and policies? Your portal taps into this in an interesting way becuase it draws on the culture of human/technology interaction as confession (camera...booth...screen...) but brings them out in real time and with a real, reacting, audience. What do you think about that?

Last thought before I sign off for the moment -- - I loved the time-delay! It's so wild to be taken in by an image of 'real time' that's actually a few seconds behind. To feel compassion, intrigue, etc. with an image of a past event being billed as the present. I did a project a few years back where I played a search and find game with folks in Times Square in NY - - I was in BOston viewing them on the web cams - - we communicated by phone mic'ed into the installation space and per visual cues they saw and I saw we "found" each other. For the climax, we tried to dance together accross the web cam and across the space. Interesting moments of time-delay, connection with the images and the failure of really connecting accross space.
How easy it is to connect by voice when the body is still (the illusion that you're really communicating in real time) but when the bodies try to move in sync you discover that you're responding to a delay. What does that do to communication in the end? I noticed that when people were speaking to each other in your piece. One
would ask a question and be already on to the next one when the other finally hears it and is ready to respond. There's an exciting tension in the waiting for the answer- - get's us out of insta-response mode and into a slower, more patient communication sensibility.

--Andi