All posts by Preetha

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

March 9, 2015 Preetha

The following are the research questions that we have for our project, keeping in mind our GOALS of the research for Exploring Interactive Theatre. We have formulated these questions that fit our goals and our research.

1.1 What is interactive theater?

1.2

1.2.1 How is the performance of the actors influenced by the interactive parts?
How hard/easy is it to learn how to use it? Are they comfortable with the usage? Are there any disturbances between different parts? Do they have any tips, how to improve it?

1.2.2 How did the cooperation between designers and technicians influence the creative output? What kind of problems appeared? Was there anything that made working together harder
or easier?

1.2.3 Does the audience realize the interactive parts?
Are they able to get the interaction? Are they interested in how it works? Do they like it?
Does the audience get the whole concept of the play?

2.1 Are there conventional techniques that could be an alternative solution for the interactive parts?
Where does conventional theater end and interactive theater start? What are the differences,
what are the similarities between conventional and interactive theatre?

2.2 What is the motivation behind putting interactive props/costumes on stage?
What is the biggest advantage of using interactive technologies in that theater play? Is the usage of interactive parts enhancing the outcome of the play?

2.3 What do actors/audience/creators expect when they take part in an interactive theater play?
Where the interactive parts distracting or did the actors/audience like it?
How would actors/audience/creators participating in the project describe the term interactive theater?

Evaluation

Methods For Evaluation

March 9, 2015 Preetha

ACTORS		AUDIENCE		CREATORS
Semi – structured Interview (with Video & Audio)*		Semi – structured Interview**		Semi – structured Interview**
„Not-call-it -Focus-Group“- Discussion (with Video & Audio)**		“Audience Talk” Publikumsgespräch (record Audio)		Focus Group:divided in Tec. and Design groups (record Audio)**
——-		Questionnaires		——-
Observation	In field	Observation	In field	——-
	Direct(notes)		Direct(notes)
	Indirect(camera during rehersals and play)		—

* done by Project-teams

** optional

Actors:

Semi-Structured Interview:

Our method of evaluation for the actors is a semi-structured interview, where its an open conversation but we have a set of guiding questions to cover the same topics with each participant. Questions are open and closed. Interviewer follows a framework of questions but can react to the participants individually. By this method we are able to explore deeper into the questions and the best way to understand the experience of actors and experts (director, stage designer).

Observation:

In this observation method we directly observe the actors experience and reactions to the interactive technology when they are rehearsing in their natural environment (in field) and also during the final play. We instantly observe situations and take notes about the reaction of actors in rehearsal; thereby making the analysis suddenly(direct). In the final, (indirect) observation, we collect data about the development of the play, where the creators take notes of their activities on a regular basis; instrumenting the software to record users’ activity in a log; video-recording during rehearsals and plays.

Audience:

Questionnaire:

By using the Questionnaire method we get answers to specific questions from a large group of people, useful to confirm the conclusions from the audience after watching the play. Closed or open questions can be used to collect demographic data and users’ opinions.

“Audience Talk”:Publikumsgespräch

In the Publikumsgespräch, the audience can ask questions to the the actors, director and the creators. It is an open talk session where all question are open regarding the play, for example, questions to the actors about their acting, about the story to the director, technical questions to the creators and so on.

Observation:

In the Field observation we directly observe the audience and their reaction to the play in their natural environment. In the direct observation we instantly observe situations and take notes about the reaction of the audience during the play; thereby making the analysis suddenly. In the indirect observation we collect diaries (=notes), interaction logs, photos and videos material to analyze later, which is useful to track the audience’s activities during the play.

Literature

Designing the Spectator Experience

December 13, 2014 Preetha

Designing the Spectator Experience

Paper by: Stuart Reevea, Steve Benford, Claire O’Malley and Mike Fraser

Summary of paper:

In the paper Designing the Spectator Experience by Stuart Reeves, Steve Benford, Claire O’Malley and Mike Fraser, they have discussed about how the spectators should experience a performer’s interaction with a computer? To show the ways in which interaction affects and is affected by spectators. Every action that is performed has its manipulations by the performer and the effects of it hidden, partially revealed, fully revealed or amplified to the spectators. The manipulation by the performers is the input in the interface and the effects that the spectators see is the output of these manipulations. In a broad view of performance the artists, musicians and the actors implicitly perform interactions to be seen in a public environment, whereas in workplace studies, the interactions are performed in a controlled room environments. But we observe how these design settings in theatres, exhibitions, galleries amusement arcades, theme-parks and museums interact with the spectators. The aim of this paper is to help interface designers to familiarise them public interface designs and also the techniques.

Public and Private interactions:

Personal phone calls is often a private action, where the outsiders cannot view the action conducted though in a public environment. A performance by artist using interactive technology but are careful in what they reveal in a public setting. There are some in-between interactions such as in museums, where one user is directly involved in the interaction while the other bystanders learn and watch. A more expressive way to show distinct possibilities, the interaction is sub-divided into manipulations and effects.

Manipulation:

Actions carried out by the performer which may include physical controls like buttons, mouse or a joystick and also gestures, movements and speech which may not directly be the input. Using gestures sometimes play two important roles, one: interactions are more than just the contact with the interface and secondly, performing interactions helps spectators to appreciate, express skills or control and use aesthetic components of the technology.

Effects:

It is the result of these manipulations which can be display of images, audio or video. These effects include the apparent action of the interface on the performers as well. When performers display physical or emotional reaction to the interface, the output as gestures, movements or expressions around the interface can be seen as part of the effect.

Hidden:Manipulations and effects are hidden for the spectators but are only accessible by the performer. e.g: Kiosk photo booth

Revealed:Both effects and manipulations are revealed to the spectators. e.g: Single Display Groupware – people collaborate around a shared display

Partially revealed/hidden:The effects are revealed but the manipulations are hidden sometimes even from performers (magic like effects). e.g: Wizard of Oz

Amplified:Here the manipulations are revealed by the performer but the effects are hidden. e.g: immersive head displays used in public settings allowing the spectators to only see the performer’s manipulations.

Picture from: Designing the Spectator Experience Stuart Reeves1, Steve Benford1, Claire O’Malley1 and Mike Fraser2 – PowerPoint PPT

http://www.powershow.com/view1/bc305-ZDc1Z/Designing_the_Spectator_Experience_Stuart_Reeves1_Steve_Benford1_Claire_OMalley1_and_Mike_Fraser2_powerpoint_ppt_presentation

Performances:

When artists perform with interactive technology are not always content in revealing their manipulations, but amplify the manipulations to make their performance more expressive. Sometimes amplification is not involved in all performances.

Taxonomy:

There are four genera approaches to design public interfaces.

Secretive: Interface tends to hide both the manipulations and the effects

Expressive: Interface tends to reveal sometimes amplify both the manipulations and the effects.

Magical: Interface tends to reveal effects but hide the manipulation that led to them.

Suspenseful: Interface tends to reveal manipulations while hiding the effects.

We can also see that there are more possibilities for our interfaces that simply reveal or hide manipulations /effects.

Partially revealing: the interface partially reveals the manipulations and the effects depending on the scale of the interface or the distance of the performer form the spectators.

Transforming: A possible way to transform our manipulations, either through non-linear mapping or aggregating multiple inputs when mapping it to the effects.

Amplifying: The performers may amplify their manipulations and effects rather than revealing them.

Other facets:

There are many other aspects for designing the performer interface, which some are discussed in the paper which is relevant to works related in this research.

Interactive spectators:

Possibility of the spectators to interact with the interface. While performing, a performer is aware of spectators and how their reactions shows the flow in the performance. For example, the authors have talked about the techniques for aggregating the spectator input form audience voting system to video-tracking crowd behaviour which are expressed for the interactive experiences and how the presence of the spectators brings a sense of liveness to the performance.

Performer awareness of spectator:

The awareness of spectators may also have a negative impact on the performer making him pressurised, to perform better or potential embarrassment of making mistakes. An example that was discussed here was Uncle Roy All Around You, a game-like performance where public used wireless PDAs to search the city for mysterious characters. This was a see a performer’s experience in a public environment which enhanced the awareness of the spectators.

Transitions and Handovers:

There are many transitions between the spectators and the performers, especially in exhibitions or museums where the visitors change the controls of the exhibits to each other. An example to emphasize on the transitions, where a painted scene with two figures and their faces were painted on the doors. There were small screens behind the door linked to mirrors. When a person performed the act by looking into the mirror, their face was captured on a hidden video camera and then it was displayed on one of the screens in the painting. As a result the performers could not see the effect of their own manipulations but it was the spectators that pointed to the performer that his/her face can be seen on the screen.

Orchestration:

Most stage performances usually have a set of activities that are used to having a smooth running of the experience. These set of activities can be the people such as the ushers, receptionists or announcers that deal with the front end of the theatre and the back end of it is done by for example, the stage managers, floor managers, prompters or the technical crew. The orchestrators will have to be aware of the manipulations and the effects of other participants, spectators and even the performers.

Conclusion:

A significant raise in designing the interfaces is a new challenge for HCI, one being the spectator interface. To validate the approaches the authors have developed a taxonomy that expresses the differences and brings out the underlying approach to design. The taxonomy is to complement other frameworks for designing public performances. The performer’s use of interface is the actions or the manipulation which then lead to the effects. The event that are viewed by the spectators that is the effects from the manipulation of the performers can be hidden, partially hidden, transformed, revealed or amplified.

Some of the other design issues were, can the spectators also interact; the performers awareness of the spectators, supporting fluid transitions between spectating and performing; and support for behind-the-scenes operation. Designing the spectator experience will be an increasing and challenging part of HCI which requires deeper understanding of new issues such as expression, suspense and magic. This taxonomy that was published is just a start for the challenges involved and also to the range of potential solutions available.

Concept, Pre-Observation

TO BE OR NOT TO BE : PROPS!!!!

November 20, 2014 Preetha

General description:

The props that were utilized in the play Michael Kohlhaas were simple props but was interactive with the characters and was used throughout the play. Some of the props that were used in the play, to show that the characters were relaxing and some when the characters were anxious or agitated. The prop that was used to show them relaxing was a shell shaped bath tub which was filled with warm water (so the actors don’t fall ill). Another prop was pieces of cartons which was used to show the audience, that the character was sending letters to ask for his horse. Another prop used to represent agitation, anxious and sometimes relaxation were cigarettes. A toy lobster was also used as a prop to enact that they were having a feast, which did not play an active role in the play.

There were also props like a small table, some chairs, cutlery and food that was used, which did not represent an important role in the play but was still used by the characters to exhibit as a meeting place. An important prop was a horse which was a main part of the play. The horse was depicted as a dead horse, which the actor brings out towards the end of the play which persuades the audience that he found the horse but it was dead.

Specific Description:

The shell shaped bath tub and the warm water was often interactive with the actors. When the characters decided to relax and talk about the horse they used the tub as the mode of relaxation and interacted with the warm water. A beach umbrella was also used as an interactive medium with the actor when he used the umbrella to cover his face to hide himself from Michael Kohlhaas, to enact that Michael Kohlhaas was talking to another person. Aside from some crucial props for example the paper castle, the ink and the letter the rest of the props were not so impact and they are traditional linear props.

Kohlhaas writing the letter on the cartons

Picture from: Designing the Spectator Experience Stuart Reeves1, Steve Benford1, Claire O’Malley1 and Mike Fraser2 – PowerPoint PPT

Welcome to our project blog!