So I've been doing some work on playback and recording today. I had a look at c# and the .NET framework, however in order to get sound recording working you have to either use the weird microsoft windows sound library, or directX directsound. Once setting those up, it's *mountains* of code to get the actual thing working.
Too much.
There had to be a simpler implmentation.
And there is!
I went back to Processing and looked at the ESS sound library. Success! I quickly whipped up two programs. One plays a .wav file from a selected directory. The other, Records input from the microphone and saves it to the hdd as a .wav file.
Now the only problem with this, is that when recording, the microphone input is echo-ed through the speakers. I'm sure there's a way to stop this, so I'll figure this out when I next work on the project ( probably tommorrow or friday ).
Thankyou processing! you're awesome.
- Anthony
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Monday, May 7, 2007
Lecture - Liveblogging
Today we're doing a recap on our groups progress, and discussing the catalog essay ? Which is the new assignment I think, but more on that later.
Seems most groups seem to be getting along with their ideas nice and slowely. Still at the interum phases of design, which is good - because I think we're still at the start of the design phase too. Yay!
I'll be posting a progress report thisafternoon, write up a list of tasks milestones, things like that. Sort out who is doing what, and by when. Also need to post to the newsgroups, but they seem to be down at the moment.
Yay our presentation went well. Was only 2 minutes long, but Megan and I seem to know what we're talking about - yay for us. Pierre prolly doesn't have much of an idea as he wasn't here last week and I've been pretty slack communication wise. But we'll have a small group meeting after the lecture.
ok! on with the rest of the lecture
Catalog Essay ( 500,600 words, prettyness is ecouraged ) - Due Friday 18th, 9am :: Group Assignment
The catalog essay is a two page description of our project. Written to form part of a while studio catalog for the end of semester exhibit.
- Imagine the exhibit finished, get a picture of the work and give a description
- Give a description of the audience experience
- Talk about reasoning behind how you thing experience is achieved
Suitable for educated or un-educated gallery audience. Uninformed writing style, or informed "interactive art" experty person.
All of this is listed in the criteria sheet.
We'll be using google documents to write this if it's a group assignment. I love google documents. ( Multiple Editors of the Same File )
Seems most groups seem to be getting along with their ideas nice and slowely. Still at the interum phases of design, which is good - because I think we're still at the start of the design phase too. Yay!
I'll be posting a progress report thisafternoon, write up a list of tasks milestones, things like that. Sort out who is doing what, and by when. Also need to post to the newsgroups, but they seem to be down at the moment.
Yay our presentation went well. Was only 2 minutes long, but Megan and I seem to know what we're talking about - yay for us. Pierre prolly doesn't have much of an idea as he wasn't here last week and I've been pretty slack communication wise. But we'll have a small group meeting after the lecture.
ok! on with the rest of the lecture
Catalog Essay ( 500,600 words, prettyness is ecouraged ) - Due Friday 18th, 9am :: Group Assignment
The catalog essay is a two page description of our project. Written to form part of a while studio catalog for the end of semester exhibit.
- Imagine the exhibit finished, get a picture of the work and give a description
- Give a description of the audience experience
- Talk about reasoning behind how you thing experience is achieved
Suitable for educated or un-educated gallery audience. Uninformed writing style, or informed "interactive art" experty person.
All of this is listed in the criteria sheet.
We'll be using google documents to write this if it's a group assignment. I love google documents. ( Multiple Editors of the Same File )
Assignment 6 : Compare and Contrast Project
Introduction
This extended blog entry is intended as a examination and comparison between the project I'm currently undertaking for studio 5 ( “The Oracle” ), and another project. In this entry I'll be discussing the relation between the chosen project, as well as discussing the conceptual similarities, the intended audience experiences, and the technology behind each project. The interactive exhibit I have chosen to discuss is unfortunately not one that I found when searching for related assignments at the start of semester as it would have been a source of great information and advice. The project in question is “Interactive Radio : Exploring Visitor Stories using a Radio Interface” by Eoin Brazil and Mikael Fernstrom. It was showcased as part of the “Re-Tracing the Past” exhibition held at the “Hunt Museum” in Limerick, Ireland in 2003.
Description
“Interactive Radio” is an isolated aspect of a whole interactive experience as part of an exhibition entitled : “Re-Tracing the Past”. The radio itself is used as a medium for listening to the opinions of fellow gallery patrons. The full exhibition is divided up into two rooms: “The Study Room”, and the “Room of Opinion”. The “Study Room” is an inspired representation of a room in the home of the man whom the exhibit centres around. The room itself contains 4 interactive items; A Mirror, A Trunk, A Desk, and The Radio ( I'll only be examining the radio ). Within the “Room of Opinion” there are 5 podiums. Four of them contain representations of objects contained within the “study room”, while the final podium houses a telephone. This telephone records gallery patron's opinions and thoughts on exhibits. These recordings are then echoed around the “Room of Opinion” ( through speakers embedded in the plinths ), and then transmitted through to the radio where users can “tune” in to certain opinions on certain items within the collection.
Conceptual Focus
The concepts behind “interactive radio” are very similar to the underlying concept behind my project “the oracle”. Both centre around the recording of museum patron's opinions / thoughts, and then playing them back in a random or symbolic way. In a sense, both of the exhibits encourage active reflection and interaction from the participants.
Another strong linking factor between the two projects is the use of metaphor in the design. Using a telephone and a radio to save and play back the recorded thoughts and ideas from the participants and in the oracles case, the Tarot cards, and illusion of a fortune teller behind a curtain.
The “Interactive Radio” uses two physical items for interaction, one for the recording, and one for the playback. “The Oracle” only uses one physical point of interaction; The Tarot Cards. The other form of interaction is based around the illusion that there is another person ( or persons ) in the room. The concept behind the “Interactive Radio” is based around physical interaction and audience participation, while “the Oracle” focuses more on audience participation and the intangible things that people say and think. It would seem logical for the “interactive radio” to produce it's sound from a physical source, and for “the oracle” to produce it's audio from a personified (albeit illusionary) source in keeping with the relevant metaphors.
One of the main differences between the two projects is in the playback of the recording itself. While in “The oracle” users select a category, and get a random response from within said category, in the “interactive radio” exhibit, users are able to select a category ( or radio “band” ), and then a “station” on that band. Each recorded sound byte is allocated it's own “station” and users can scan through these as if they were tuning a normal radio. This difference I believe is strictly tied to the metaphor. On a radio, one can select exactly what they want with precision, however when asking for your fortune, you never quite know exactly what sort of answer you might receive.
Audience Experience
The “Interactive Radio” project was designed to encourage active participation and reflection on the surrounding exhibits. The benefit of allowing users to comment and then listen back to their own ( and other users ) comments, is that users can get different feedback each time they visit the exhibition. This encourages the audience to make repeat visits, each time they receive a different experience. “The Oracle” aims to have a similar audience experience. As the database of conversation grows, “the oracle” will be able to provide new and ever changing answers to the selected categories and questions put to it by the participants.
The exhibits themselves are nothing without the audience to interact with them. The more users take part, the greater the project experience will be for those who choose to interact with it. The main differences between “The Oracle” and the “interactive Radio” experience would be the locative distance. The “Interactive Radio” has it's recording and playback facilities in different rooms, whereas “the Oracle” has the entire set up within the one booth. Both situations have advantages and disadvantages. By having the recording and playback facilities at different locations, the “Interactive Radio” allows two people to be interacting with the same system at the same time. “The Oracle” only allows one person into the booth at any particular time, this however suits the metaphor behind the project itself and helps to create the intimate atmosphere that one would expect in a fortune teller's booth.
Although there are differences in the intended audience reaction and interaction between the two projects, the underlying experience is fundamentally the same. To encourage active participation and reflection from the users in order to gain an understanding of people's thoughts and ideas, but to increase the exhibits knowledge base and create a new and changing experience for patrons.
Technology
The technological requirements of both projects are extremely similar : Both require the ability to select and categorise input. Both require the ability to record and store live audio. Both require the ability to playback and listen to pre-recorded audio. The implementation of these technologies differ slightly however. Inspiration could be taken from the “interactive radio” project as a more efficient method of recording, playback and storage.
Although the technology for “the Oracle” has yet to be entirely finalized, it is already understood that we need to use some sort of programming language to record, save, and catalogue a collection of sound bytes. While also being able to play back particular sounds based on the category selected by the participant. The Tarot cards will use a form of RFID for selection criteria, and would therefore need some sort of interface with the computer system; Most likely a phidget. Audio experiments have been made in “Processing”, however the possibility of change to C# or Java is still possible at this stage of development. Comparing this to the technology behind the “interactive radio” there are some possible areas of influence. In order to save a statement or opinion into the telephone, participants must insert a 'key card' into a slot to trigger the recording process. Not only does this start the recording, it also tells the program which of the 4 objects the user is commenting on. These key cards use a form of RFID ( similar to our Tarot Card RFID system ) to categorise the recordings into certain locations. Once recorded, the sounds are stored in a series of directories which are analysed and read by a Microsoft .NET based system, with the main coding written in C#. The Microsoft .NET structure was chosen because it has the ability to analyse directories and their contents on the fly so as to keep up to date with the amount of .wav recorded data stored on the computer. “The Oracle” was going to use a database to store this information, however it would seem the .NET framework provides a much more efficient and detailed option for data storage and retrieval.
Conclusion
The “Interactive Radio” project is fundamentally very similar to the concepts and ideas that were collected together to make “the oracle”. They both have a strong concept metaphor, they both have elements of physical interaction, they both work with recording conversations and opinions and playing them back to users. There are slight differences in the implementation and in the metaphors used, but the principles behind the two remain the same. After analysing this project for this blog report, I've taken into consideration possible technological implementation techniques that may prove useful when developing the program backbone for “the oracle” itself.
This extended blog entry is intended as a examination and comparison between the project I'm currently undertaking for studio 5 ( “The Oracle” ), and another project. In this entry I'll be discussing the relation between the chosen project, as well as discussing the conceptual similarities, the intended audience experiences, and the technology behind each project. The interactive exhibit I have chosen to discuss is unfortunately not one that I found when searching for related assignments at the start of semester as it would have been a source of great information and advice. The project in question is “Interactive Radio : Exploring Visitor Stories using a Radio Interface” by Eoin Brazil and Mikael Fernstrom. It was showcased as part of the “Re-Tracing the Past” exhibition held at the “Hunt Museum” in Limerick, Ireland in 2003.
Description
“Interactive Radio” is an isolated aspect of a whole interactive experience as part of an exhibition entitled : “Re-Tracing the Past”. The radio itself is used as a medium for listening to the opinions of fellow gallery patrons. The full exhibition is divided up into two rooms: “The Study Room”, and the “Room of Opinion”. The “Study Room” is an inspired representation of a room in the home of the man whom the exhibit centres around. The room itself contains 4 interactive items; A Mirror, A Trunk, A Desk, and The Radio ( I'll only be examining the radio ). Within the “Room of Opinion” there are 5 podiums. Four of them contain representations of objects contained within the “study room”, while the final podium houses a telephone. This telephone records gallery patron's opinions and thoughts on exhibits. These recordings are then echoed around the “Room of Opinion” ( through speakers embedded in the plinths ), and then transmitted through to the radio where users can “tune” in to certain opinions on certain items within the collection.
Conceptual Focus
The concepts behind “interactive radio” are very similar to the underlying concept behind my project “the oracle”. Both centre around the recording of museum patron's opinions / thoughts, and then playing them back in a random or symbolic way. In a sense, both of the exhibits encourage active reflection and interaction from the participants.
Another strong linking factor between the two projects is the use of metaphor in the design. Using a telephone and a radio to save and play back the recorded thoughts and ideas from the participants and in the oracles case, the Tarot cards, and illusion of a fortune teller behind a curtain.
The “Interactive Radio” uses two physical items for interaction, one for the recording, and one for the playback. “The Oracle” only uses one physical point of interaction; The Tarot Cards. The other form of interaction is based around the illusion that there is another person ( or persons ) in the room. The concept behind the “Interactive Radio” is based around physical interaction and audience participation, while “the Oracle” focuses more on audience participation and the intangible things that people say and think. It would seem logical for the “interactive radio” to produce it's sound from a physical source, and for “the oracle” to produce it's audio from a personified (albeit illusionary) source in keeping with the relevant metaphors.
One of the main differences between the two projects is in the playback of the recording itself. While in “The oracle” users select a category, and get a random response from within said category, in the “interactive radio” exhibit, users are able to select a category ( or radio “band” ), and then a “station” on that band. Each recorded sound byte is allocated it's own “station” and users can scan through these as if they were tuning a normal radio. This difference I believe is strictly tied to the metaphor. On a radio, one can select exactly what they want with precision, however when asking for your fortune, you never quite know exactly what sort of answer you might receive.
Audience Experience
The “Interactive Radio” project was designed to encourage active participation and reflection on the surrounding exhibits. The benefit of allowing users to comment and then listen back to their own ( and other users ) comments, is that users can get different feedback each time they visit the exhibition. This encourages the audience to make repeat visits, each time they receive a different experience. “The Oracle” aims to have a similar audience experience. As the database of conversation grows, “the oracle” will be able to provide new and ever changing answers to the selected categories and questions put to it by the participants.
The exhibits themselves are nothing without the audience to interact with them. The more users take part, the greater the project experience will be for those who choose to interact with it. The main differences between “The Oracle” and the “interactive Radio” experience would be the locative distance. The “Interactive Radio” has it's recording and playback facilities in different rooms, whereas “the Oracle” has the entire set up within the one booth. Both situations have advantages and disadvantages. By having the recording and playback facilities at different locations, the “Interactive Radio” allows two people to be interacting with the same system at the same time. “The Oracle” only allows one person into the booth at any particular time, this however suits the metaphor behind the project itself and helps to create the intimate atmosphere that one would expect in a fortune teller's booth.
Although there are differences in the intended audience reaction and interaction between the two projects, the underlying experience is fundamentally the same. To encourage active participation and reflection from the users in order to gain an understanding of people's thoughts and ideas, but to increase the exhibits knowledge base and create a new and changing experience for patrons.
Technology
The technological requirements of both projects are extremely similar : Both require the ability to select and categorise input. Both require the ability to record and store live audio. Both require the ability to playback and listen to pre-recorded audio. The implementation of these technologies differ slightly however. Inspiration could be taken from the “interactive radio” project as a more efficient method of recording, playback and storage.
Although the technology for “the Oracle” has yet to be entirely finalized, it is already understood that we need to use some sort of programming language to record, save, and catalogue a collection of sound bytes. While also being able to play back particular sounds based on the category selected by the participant. The Tarot cards will use a form of RFID for selection criteria, and would therefore need some sort of interface with the computer system; Most likely a phidget. Audio experiments have been made in “Processing”, however the possibility of change to C# or Java is still possible at this stage of development. Comparing this to the technology behind the “interactive radio” there are some possible areas of influence. In order to save a statement or opinion into the telephone, participants must insert a 'key card' into a slot to trigger the recording process. Not only does this start the recording, it also tells the program which of the 4 objects the user is commenting on. These key cards use a form of RFID ( similar to our Tarot Card RFID system ) to categorise the recordings into certain locations. Once recorded, the sounds are stored in a series of directories which are analysed and read by a Microsoft .NET based system, with the main coding written in C#. The Microsoft .NET structure was chosen because it has the ability to analyse directories and their contents on the fly so as to keep up to date with the amount of .wav recorded data stored on the computer. “The Oracle” was going to use a database to store this information, however it would seem the .NET framework provides a much more efficient and detailed option for data storage and retrieval.
Conclusion
The “Interactive Radio” project is fundamentally very similar to the concepts and ideas that were collected together to make “the oracle”. They both have a strong concept metaphor, they both have elements of physical interaction, they both work with recording conversations and opinions and playing them back to users. There are slight differences in the implementation and in the metaphors used, but the principles behind the two remain the same. After analysing this project for this blog report, I've taken into consideration possible technological implementation techniques that may prove useful when developing the program backbone for “the oracle” itself.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Lecture - Liveblogging
I thought I'd try something different, yay liveblogging, or quasi-live anyway
Megan and I are here, so is mitchell, no sign of pierre. Great lecture turnout today! There's about 22 people! yay!
So we're currently talking about plagarism and assignment 6. People focusing on the same ideas, collusion, things like that. Basically we've got to take it seriously and understand it, but we're not meant to panic.
And now on to assignment 6 itself.
- Deadline for the final assignment is 9:00 Monday the 7th of May.
Public Holiday on monday! So now we're moving to 9:00 TUESDAY morning. Huzzah. Not that we'll really require the extra day, but it would be nice.
oh, Format, that's a good idea :
- Responding in First Person is fine
- Context is a blog post
- Not expecting full blown academic prose ( ie, report )
- It's about "you doing a comparison with your project"
So we're able to write from our perspective, which makes is neat!
What should we look for :
- Audience Experience
- Conceptual and artistic satement
- Constraints
- Technology ( smaller part )
How does this influence our project ? Reflect about what we want to achieve and where we want to head.
"Using (y)our time wisely"
- Concerned about low lecture attendance ( :O )
- Timetabled for teamwork
- Lecturers available for feedback/Questions
- Tutors are paid to help us! excellent.
Proof of Concept
- What is required from us at the end of the semester.
Prototype has to convey the concept.
Exhibit Requirements
- Please Post to Newsgroups ( One Post Per Group )
- Physical Space Required
- Preferences for Specific location
- Any Technology Requirements
- Projector
- Phidgets, sunSPOTs, etc
List Possible Scenarios. Best case, Worst case etc.
Portfolio
- Based around description of design for ubicomp
- html
- use portfolio drive in home directory.
Criteria is still not finished, but start thinking about what is going to be put into the report.
- Extended blog is halfway point to the final portfolio.
- Report is combined with portfolio. Allows for linking, images, all sorts of fun things like that.
And that was the last slide, so I think that's it. There's a few more questions. one about the portfolio system not working, but Im pretty sure it is working - Not using the VPN perhaps ?
And that's it.
Yay liveblogging.
- Anthony
Megan and I are here, so is mitchell, no sign of pierre. Great lecture turnout today! There's about 22 people! yay!
So we're currently talking about plagarism and assignment 6. People focusing on the same ideas, collusion, things like that. Basically we've got to take it seriously and understand it, but we're not meant to panic.
And now on to assignment 6 itself.
- Deadline for the final assignment is 9:00 Monday the 7th of May.
Public Holiday on monday! So now we're moving to 9:00 TUESDAY morning. Huzzah. Not that we'll really require the extra day, but it would be nice.
oh, Format, that's a good idea :
- Responding in First Person is fine
- Context is a blog post
- Not expecting full blown academic prose ( ie, report )
- It's about "you doing a comparison with your project"
So we're able to write from our perspective, which makes is neat!
What should we look for :
- Audience Experience
- Conceptual and artistic satement
- Constraints
- Technology ( smaller part )
How does this influence our project ? Reflect about what we want to achieve and where we want to head.
"Using (y)our time wisely"
- Concerned about low lecture attendance ( :O )
- Timetabled for teamwork
- Lecturers available for feedback/Questions
- Tutors are paid to help us! excellent.
Proof of Concept
- What is required from us at the end of the semester.
Prototype has to convey the concept.
Exhibit Requirements
- Please Post to Newsgroups ( One Post Per Group )
- Physical Space Required
- Preferences for Specific location
- Any Technology Requirements
- Projector
- Phidgets, sunSPOTs, etc
List Possible Scenarios. Best case, Worst case etc.
Portfolio
- Based around description of design for ubicomp
- html
- use portfolio drive in home directory.
Criteria is still not finished, but start thinking about what is going to be put into the report.
- Extended blog is halfway point to the final portfolio.
- Report is combined with portfolio. Allows for linking, images, all sorts of fun things like that.
And that was the last slide, so I think that's it. There's a few more questions. one about the portfolio system not working, but Im pretty sure it is working - Not using the VPN perhaps ?
And that's it.
Yay liveblogging.
- Anthony
Compare and Contrast
Interactive Radio : Exploring Visitor Stories using Radio Interface
Eoin Brazil, Mikael Fernström
Although this wasn't listed in our original ideas, our project has evolved so much that almost none of the original listed ideas would be suitable for comparison.
This project allowed visotrs to explore and investigate artifacts housed within a museum, the "radio" itself stores previously recorded visitor stories, and allows for listening through the metaphor of a "1940's style radio". The repository of opinions grows over time.
This is a good candidate for conmpare and contrast as it deals with a large collection of recorded thoughts and opinions, allows for custom recordings, and uses a strong metaphor with which to recieve the information ( Radio, vs "oracle" ).
http://www.idc.ul.ie/data/publications/28.pdf
Eoin Brazil, Mikael Fernström
Although this wasn't listed in our original ideas, our project has evolved so much that almost none of the original listed ideas would be suitable for comparison.
This project allowed visotrs to explore and investigate artifacts housed within a museum, the "radio" itself stores previously recorded visitor stories, and allows for listening through the metaphor of a "1940's style radio". The repository of opinions grows over time.
This is a good candidate for conmpare and contrast as it deals with a large collection of recorded thoughts and opinions, allows for custom recordings, and uses a strong metaphor with which to recieve the information ( Radio, vs "oracle" ).
http://www.idc.ul.ie/data/publications/28.pdf
Monday, April 16, 2007
WHERE WERE YOU?!
We were asked to blog where we were the monday of the gallery excursion. I find it a bit strange that we *all* have to do this, when only 20 students said they were able to attend. It should be those 20 students, not all of us. Anyway. I wasn't one of those 20. I was working.
Personal Notes
These are just some personal notes for me, more on these later.
Usenet Oracle http://cgi.cs.indiana.edu/~oracle/index.cgi
Tarot Cards RFID - Phidgets
Usenet Oracle http://cgi.cs.indiana.edu/~oracle/index.cgi
Tarot Cards RFID - Phidgets
Monday, March 12, 2007
Speech Recognition and Phenomes
I sat down thismorning and did some basic research on speech recognition, speech analysis and the study of phenomes. If we're going to be analysing the speech patterns / words of people, then we'll need to have a good understanding of all of these. We've got studio5 today, so I will discuss this with my group today. As it appears we may have a new group member, we have to discuss ideas with him too - so we can all be on the same level and understand what each member would like to do. Research follows.
Speech Recognition : The process of converting a speech signal ( Audio ) to a sequence of words.
Most Systems today use the “Hidden Markov Model”
- “Statistical model in which the system being modeled is assumed to be a “markov process” with unknown parameters, and the challenge is to determine the hidden paramaters from the observable parameters.”
- the “state” is not direcly visable, but variables influenced by the state are visible. A Sequence of tokens generated by a Hidden Markov Model gives information about the sequence of states.
Also can use “Artificial Neural Network”
Modern day systems us “Noisy Channel Formulation”
- The task of the recognition system is to search for the most likely word sequence given the acoustic signal. Ie, System is searching for the most likely word sequence among all possible word sequences
( W~ = Most likely word sequence, all possible word sequences = w*, the acoustic signal = A ).
W~ = arg maxWeW* PR(W|A)
Audio Visual Speech Recognition
- Technique that uses “image processing” technology to Lip read, to aid in speech recognition.
- Each system ( lip reading / speech recognition ) work separately, then the results are mixed at a later stage
Speech Synthesis
- Artificial production of human speech.
- Text to Speech
- Symbolic Linguistic Representations ie
- Phonetic Transcriptions
- Artificial production of human speech.
Voice Analysis
- The study of speech sounds for purposes other than linguistic content.
- Ie, analysis of vocal quality of medical patients
- speech therapy
- The study of speech sounds for purposes other than linguistic content.
Phonetics
- Sound is a series of pressure changes in the medium between the sound source, and the listener
- Oscillogram / waveform = most common representation, pressure increases / decreses the signale.
- Pitch Analysis = Another representation of a speech signal
- Speech is a physical process consisting of two parts
- Product of a sound source ( vocal chords )
- filtering ( tongue, lips, teeth )
- Pitch Analysis tries to capture the “Fundamental Frequency of the sound source” by “analysing the final speech utterance”.
- Fundamental Frequency – Dominating Frequency of the sound procuded by the vocal chords.
- Difficult to perform.
- Speech is a physical process consisting of two parts
- Spectrum
- Specrtum gives a picture of the distribution of frequency and amplitude at a moment in time.
- 3d graph required to plot time – ie , spectrogram
- Spectrogram
- Time = horizontal axis, frequency = vertical axis. Amplitude ( 3rd axis ) represented by shades of darkness.
- Voiced sounds appear more organised.
Some Links
“Speech Analysis Tutorial”
http://www.ling.lu.se/research/speechtutorial/tutorial.html
“The CMU Sphinx Group, Open Source Speech Recognition Engines” - http://cmusphinx.sourceforge.net/html/cmusphinx.php
“Praat : Phonetics by Computer”
http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/
“Speech Analyzer”
http://www.sil.org/computing/speechtools/speechanalyzer.htm
“lingWAVES : Signal Analysis”
http://www.lingcom.de/english/products/lingWAVES/lingWAVES_overview.htm
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Group Selection
Well, the groups have been chosen.
I'll say once again that I absolutely abhor group work - but I can understand *why* we need to be able to work as part of a team , especially as we're going to be working with groups / teams out in the field. It is just in my experience that there's never enough people, or experienced people, or enthusiasm in a group in order to make it actually relevent to be in one. Oh well.
I'm working with Megan and Pierre. I've worked with both Pierre and Megan before, so I know what to expect from both of them.
The lecturers split us into groups based on the general themes they picked up in our ideas ... apparently. It's just unfortunate that they picked my least favourite of my 5 ideas to work from ( Chatter Critic ). To be honest! I actually would have thought that it would be vitoed because of ethcial issues ( Monitoring peoples conversations ? Hello Big Brother! ) - However, it's what Ive been given, and I've been given worse assignments in the past. I will just have to make it as challenging as possible.
I'll be posting all my research into the assignment here, as well as in our group blog which is located here : http://silentradios.blogspot.com/
And I think that's a long enough disgruntled post for tonight.
- Anthony
I'll say once again that I absolutely abhor group work - but I can understand *why* we need to be able to work as part of a team , especially as we're going to be working with groups / teams out in the field. It is just in my experience that there's never enough people, or experienced people, or enthusiasm in a group in order to make it actually relevent to be in one. Oh well.
I'm working with Megan and Pierre. I've worked with both Pierre and Megan before, so I know what to expect from both of them.
The lecturers split us into groups based on the general themes they picked up in our ideas ... apparently. It's just unfortunate that they picked my least favourite of my 5 ideas to work from ( Chatter Critic ). To be honest! I actually would have thought that it would be vitoed because of ethcial issues ( Monitoring peoples conversations ? Hello Big Brother! ) - However, it's what Ive been given, and I've been given worse assignments in the past. I will just have to make it as challenging as possible.
I'll be posting all my research into the assignment here, as well as in our group blog which is located here : http://silentradios.blogspot.com/
And I think that's a long enough disgruntled post for tonight.
- Anthony
Sunday, March 4, 2007
5 Design Ideas
Another bit of assessment we had to hand in today was a selection of 5 ideas. We had to submit as a pdf file, but here are my 5 :
Personalised Insult Machine ( Anthony Massingham ) -
A digital ( or physical ) reprentation of a machine or monster ( ambiguous to its sex / species / lineage ) analyses users who walk past it and delivers a personal comments towards each participant. Hidden video camera ( or web cam ) records live footage of users passing by the installation and passes the data on to the computer. The computer then analyses various bits of data aquired in the image, such as hair colour, clothing colour, height and sex – and builds a unique vocal comment based around that information. The machine then generates this statement and speaks it ( through a hidden speaker ) to the people walking past it. Depending on its “mood” it may compliment, or insult the users.
Deja Vu ( Anthony Massingham ) -
A digital portrait that steals its facial qualities from the people who examine it. Cameras take still images of users faces and apply elements of that to the facial mesh that is displayed on the portrait. Each face contributes a small element, whether it be facial shape, nose shape, hair colour or even lip size. The displayed face is a combination of a large number of different faces to produce a completely unique person. The face continues to evolve as more people add their own likeness to the mix.
Gallery Spy ( Anthony Massingham ) -
Gallery Spy observes the movement of gallery patrons around the space and the duration they spend at each location. A camera tracks the movement of each user around the space locking on to each person indivdually. The movement data is graphically represented as an abstract version of the gallery floorspace, with each person represented by a various colour. The thickness / boldness of the persons colour depends on the duration of time spent in any one location. The visual data itself is displayed back on a screen which is surrounded by a picture frame. The Gallery spy shows people branching off from work to another in a vine / tree like fashion.
Chatter Critic ( Anthony Massingham ) -
An ambient and background conversation monitoring tool. Microphones are placed throughout the gallery at various artworks. Each microphone monitors the conversations that people have about each painting / exhibit. Each conversation is analysed for positive and negative comments. These words / phrases are then sent to the computer, and are saved, edited, cut apart and re-arranged into new phrases and comments and played back through speakers as well as being displayed on screens. Depending on the frequency of use of a particular word of phrase it will determine the amount of times it is repeated or displayed.
Sound Canvas ( Anthony Massingham ) -
Experimentation into the visual aspects of sound. Microphones are placed at various points of the installation. Each monitoring high, mid, and low frequency sounds ( both ambient and focussed ). These sounds are then translated into visual data and displayed on a digital canvas. Users are encouraged to make various noises and see how they appear on the canvas. The stereo field determines the location of the visual data ( Sounds to the left appear on the left side of the canvas ) and volume determines the colour and strength of the digital paint. The type of sounds ( and sound waves ) used also have an effect on the style of the painting.
Limitations - IAG
The most obvious limitation of the Ipswich Art Gallery is the amount of space available for students. It's almost impossible to have anything of any great size in the small corridor we've been assigned. Although there are two projectors mounted on the roof, There's only really one small projection environment, limiting the number of projects that can use projection as an option. The floorspace is adequate enough to create various floor sensitive devices, but at the same time it will not be easy to fit all that is required into the space.
Limitations - Multi-Touch Interface
There are many limitaitons behind this system. Finding a surface with enough sensitivity to monitor multiple points of contact would be essential to ensuring that this project worked at all. As this is still in the research phase - there's still many more limitations to discover, such as the number of touch registration points at any one time, or the differences in pressure sensitivity and the effects on the screen.
Limitations - Khronos Projector
This project is incredibly well documented. There are backup plans for almost every scenario. It is almost impossible to find a single flaw in its construction. If you dont have the available materials, it offers possible solutions. One limitation that is mentioned throughout this list, is the use of the tactile fabric. Without it, the feeling of "touch" is lost ( ie, if using a touchscreen or graphics tablet or tablet PC ). You dont get the same feel for the artwork and you dont get the same levels of sensitivity.
Limitations - Electric Moons
Space is another big issue in this installation. And it seems like it will be for most of the projects, especially since the space in which these projects will be presented is TINY. This would take up the entire space, and would lose its entire effect.
Limitations - SoniColumn
The biggest limitation ( for me personally ) to construct something like this is I have absolutely no experience in engineering. None whatsoever. And it is obvious from the excellent construction work that that is what's required to build something of this magnitude.
Limitations - External Measures
The obvious limitation of this system is people. Without an audience, there is no artwork. However with no audience, there's nothing to see. So that limitation is silly. Another thing I noticed from the videos, is the speed. While it's talking about kinetic drawing and fluid motion - the motion seen on the screen is actually anything BUT smooth.
Computer and processing speed is an obvious limitation.
Computer and processing speed is an obvious limitation.
Limitations - Interactive Waterfall
Technology and the price of technology is the limitation in this project. In fact, in the original version the designer wanted to use an array of plasma tvs / screens. However this proved too expensive, and had to opt for the lower resolution LCD "Pixels". However out of this limitation he came up with an interesting abstract effect that seemed to justify his original design intent.
Limitations - Audiopad
The limitations of Audiopad mainly consist of the storage device and collection of samples in the program. The installation also requires the use of the control 'stone' type objects. Limiting the number of people that can interact with the system at any one time.
Limitations - L.A.S.E.R. Tag
I could say space again, as it is entirely obvious that space would be a huge issue for such a project. Considering it requires an entire building to use as a projection space. The concept could easially be scaled down. Although it wouldn't be as impressive, and most of the purpose would be defeated, it would still work. So another limitation of this project are the obvious legal ramifications ( in fact I think the original team were arrested, charged, or at least questioned over this original projection bombing run ).
Limitations - Shadow Monsters
The limitations of shadow monsters are mainly space issues. There has to be a decent enough space to provide not only the projection space and projection unit, but the area for the shadows too.
[ Related Project ] : Squeezebox
Project : Squeezebox
by Iain Mott, Marc Raszewski and artist Tim Barrass
Squeezebox incorporates spatial sound, computer graphics and kinetic sculpture.
Participants manipulate the sculpture to produce real-time changes to the spatial location and timbre of the sound, as well as to manipulate digitised images. The sound and images are presented as an integrated plastic object, a form which is squeezed and moulded by participants. The artwork consists of a frame supporting four sculpted pistons on pneumatic shafts. An interactive image is displayed on a monitor beneath a one-way mirror at the centre of the sculpture. Four loudspeakers are situated at the outer four corners."
This is a form of interactive sculpture with a computer backing. By moving bits of the sculpture, users can manipulate not only sound, but digitised images.
Project Link : Squeezebox
[ Related Project ] : Multi-Touch Interaction
Project : Multi-Touch Interaction
by Jeff Han
Bi-manual, multi-point, and multi-user interactions on a graphical display surface.
More research than a project, but It has been presented in a few locations, and is looking at the breakdown of modern day "interfaces" and touch screens. Removing the technical computerish aspects of interaction, and replacing it with intelligent gesture based interfaces. Using multiple points of contact ( See Minority Report ;) ) to interact with the data on the screen.
Project Link : Multi-Touch Interaction Research
[ Related Project ] : Khronos Projector
Project : Khronos Projector
by Alvaro Cassinelli
a video time-warping machine with a tangible deformable screen
The Khronos projector aims to give users a new way to look at video by offering a tangable screen. Users are able to physically interact with the screen and not only modify the linear time of the film, but is able to send particular parts of the image forwards, or backwards through time. "Waves" of time can be seen if the user shakes the screen. The installation uses a video projector, a large tissue-based deformable projection screen, and a sensing mechanism capable of acquiring in real time the deformationof this tissue
Project Link : Khronos Projector
[ Related Project ] : Electric Moons
Project : Electric Moons
by Christopher Bauder
A hundred white balloons in a totally dark room are floating in space like the atoms of a molecule.
"The interactive ballon ballet is built out of synchronized movement and lighting. A screen based interface telecommands the balloon ballet in sync to a chosen musical piece. The user can control the movement and lighting of each balloon independently. Morphing 3D shapes and patterns are blended with an overlay of supporting or counteracting light animations."
A very interesting exhibit. Large floating spheres fill the space and move up and down in time with lighting and in time with each other.
Project Link : Electric Moons
[ Related Project ] : SoniColumn
Project : SoniColumn
by Jin-Yo Mok
"The lucid sounds coming from a simple play mechanism stirred me up with my old memory echoed with them"
SoniCoumn is an interactive sound installation that can be played by a person’s touch. In a sense, its a glorified version of an old fashioned music box - but it's fully customisable. The user selects what notes they want to play by turning on LEDs. Then they turn a crank, which turns the cylinder and plays the sequence of notes selected by the user when they pressed the LEDs.
Project Link : SoniColumn
[ Related Project ] : External Measures
Project : External Measures
by Camille Utterback
External Measures is a series of interactive installations that explore the possibilities of projected "kinetic sculptures" or "living paintings".
This series of interactive artworks focuses on the evolution of a painting that is being manipulated and drawn using the movement of participants. The program analyses the position of people as they move around a space and draws the painting based on movement. The painting is composed of algorithmic generated textures and patterns that are then displayed depending on the movement of the people around the space.
Project Link : External Measures 1, External Measures 3, External Measures 5
[ Related Project ] : Interactive Waterfall
Project : Interactive Waterfall
by Charles Forman
"I think that space should be functional and it should serve an effective purpose."
The Interactive Waterfall is an array of "pixels" that move and ripple in response to proximity and movement. Creating an ambient aesthetic mood. Using an overhead infra red camera to analyse the movement of passers-by. It serves as both an interactive display, and a peice of art.
Project Link : Interactive Waterfall
[ Related Project ] : Audiopad
Project : Audiopad
by Localfields
Audiopad is a composition and performance instrument for electronic music which tracks the positions of objects on a tabletop surface and converts their motion into music
Audiopad is a table-top music composition and mixing device. Users move sensors around on the table to mix different sounds and effects, changing volume, pan, and levels. Audiopad not only allows for spontaneous reinterpretation of musical compositions, but also creates a visual and tactile dialogue between itself, the performer, and the audience.
Project Link : Audiopad
[ Related Project ] : L.A.S.E.R. Tag
Project : L.A.S.E.R. Tag
by The Graffiti Research Lab
Laser Pointed Projected Graffiti on Buildings
Interesting project by the GRL. Using a powerful Projector, an even more Powerful Laser Pointer, and a computer - the designers have created building-size graffiti. Users "draw" using the laser pointer. The computer picks up the pointers location, and projects the now drawn material onto the side of the building.
Project Link : L.A.S.E.R. Tag
by The Graffiti Research Lab
Laser Pointed Projected Graffiti on Buildings
Interesting project by the GRL. Using a powerful Projector, an even more Powerful Laser Pointer, and a computer - the designers have created building-size graffiti. Users "draw" using the laser pointer. The computer picks up the pointers location, and projects the now drawn material onto the side of the building.
Project Link : L.A.S.E.R. Tag
Friday, March 2, 2007
[ Related Project ] : Shadow Monsters
Project : Shadow Monsters
by Philip Worthington
Monsters appear from the shadows cast by the hands of participants.
This is a project I saw a while ago and I was quite interested in. It's a play on hand shadows and the creatures and forms you can make by projecting your hands shadow onto a wall. The program ( coded in processing ) examines the movement and placement of the shadows, and not only adds teeth, hair, spikes, and other monster-ish appendages, but sounds. A great little interactive exhibit, fun for all ages.
Project Link : Shadow Monsters
COMP3000 Introduction
Evening.
This is the blog for my Studio 5 subject ( or COMP3000 as the uni would like you to know it ). I'll be posting various things in here over the semester. This is basically just an introductionary post. This subject, the 5th iteration in the series of "studio" subjects that we've had at uni is focusing on "Ubiquitous computing and the dissapearing computer in interactive art". Interesting stuff! I welcome comments from both people at the university as well as people external to the uni.
The first few posts here are in response to our first "assignment" I guess. We've got to Identify 10 existing projects / nstallations which are relevent to the ubiquitious computing theme. We've then also, got to identify 10 constraints for such projects. Wether that be work-specific, or a more general constraint due to the space we've been presented with ( which is actually the Ipwsich Art Gallery in QLD, Australia ). Each of these will be in a separate post. So enjoy lots of random posts!
I'll endeavour to keep this blog updating over the semester. If you're interested in seeing another studio subject blog, then I've also got my Studio 4 blog ( well, my Team's studio4 blog ) linked to this account, its at : http://theweatherroom.blogspot.com/ . The weather room is an interactive weather simulation using macromedia flash and motion capture.
And that's it for now. Hope this blog all makes sense. It's really to be used as a means to document the process behind the project, as well as a guide for fellow students and my lecturers, but as I stated earlier - any visitors are appreciated.
- Anthony
This is the blog for my Studio 5 subject ( or COMP3000 as the uni would like you to know it ). I'll be posting various things in here over the semester. This is basically just an introductionary post. This subject, the 5th iteration in the series of "studio" subjects that we've had at uni is focusing on "Ubiquitous computing and the dissapearing computer in interactive art". Interesting stuff! I welcome comments from both people at the university as well as people external to the uni.
The first few posts here are in response to our first "assignment" I guess. We've got to Identify 10 existing projects / nstallations which are relevent to the ubiquitious computing theme. We've then also, got to identify 10 constraints for such projects. Wether that be work-specific, or a more general constraint due to the space we've been presented with ( which is actually the Ipwsich Art Gallery in QLD, Australia ). Each of these will be in a separate post. So enjoy lots of random posts!
I'll endeavour to keep this blog updating over the semester. If you're interested in seeing another studio subject blog, then I've also got my Studio 4 blog ( well, my Team's studio4 blog ) linked to this account, its at : http://theweatherroom.blogspot.com/ . The weather room is an interactive weather simulation using macromedia flash and motion capture.
And that's it for now. Hope this blog all makes sense. It's really to be used as a means to document the process behind the project, as well as a guide for fellow students and my lecturers, but as I stated earlier - any visitors are appreciated.
- Anthony
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
