PIPP #1 - Pedestrian Interaction Patch Project

The Pedestrian Interaction Patch Project (PIPP) seeks to exert influence over and encourage abnormal pedestrian behavior. By placing an unadvertised (and non recording) interactive video manipulation system and projection source in a high traffic public area, the PIPP allows pedestrians to privately (and publically) re-engage with a previously inactive physical environment, like a commonly used walkway or corridor. This system, the results of which are projected in real time on the architectural surface, inadvertently provides pedestrians with questions around preconceived notions of self and space. In an attempt to re-activate our relationship with the physical surrounds we occupy each day the PIPP creates a new set of memories to be recalled as we re-enter known environments once PIPP has moved on and as such re-enlivens our relationship with the everyday architecture we stroll past everyday. The PIPP environment is controlled using the software program Isadora, devised by Mark Coniglio at Troika Ranch, and contains a series of video manipulation patches that are designed to not only grab the pedestrians attention but to also encourage a sense of play and interaction between the architecture, the digital environment, the initially unsuspecting participant(s) and the pedestrian audience. The PIPP was included as part of the planned walking tour for the “Playing in Urban Spaces” seminar day, and was an installation that ran for the length of the symposium in a reclaimed pedestrian space that was encountered by both the participants and general public during the course of the day long event. Ideally once discovered PIPP encouraged pedestrians to return through the course of the seminar day to see if the environmental patches had changed or altered, and changed their standard route to include the PIPP installation or to avoid it, either way, encouraging an active response to the pathways normally traveled or newly discovered each day.

Digital scenography for "Markus the Sadist" : UK National Tour

How does a digitally mediated environment work towards the ongoing support of the Hip Hop landscape present in the work of Jonzi D productions UK National Tour of "Markus the Sadist"

Interactive architecture

This chapter explores the development of concepts of interactive environments by comparing two major projects that frame the period of this book. The Fun Palace of 1960 and the Generator of 1980 both proposed interactive environments responsive to the needs and behaviour of their users, but the contrast in terms of the available technology and what it enabled could not be more marked. The Fun Palace broke new architectural, organizational and social ground and was arguably the first proposition for cybernetic architecture; the Generator demonstrated how it could be achieved. Both projects are now acknowledged as seminal architectural propositions of the twentieth century, and both were designed by Cedric Price.

The lens of ludic engagement : evaluating participation in interactive art installations

Designers and artists have integrated recent advances in interactive, tangible and ubiquitous computing technologies to create new forms of interactive environments in the domains of work, recreation, culture and leisure. Many designs of technology systems begin with the workplace in mind, and with function, ease of use, and efficiency high on the list of priorities. [1] These priorities do not fit well with works designed for an interactive art environment, where the aims are many, and where the focus on utility and functionality is to support a playful, ambiguous or even experimental experience for the participants. To evaluate such works requires an integration of art-criticism techniques with more recent Human Computer Interaction (HCI) methods, and an understanding of the different nature of engagement in these environments. This paper begins a process of mapping a set of priorities for amplifying engagement in interactive art installations. I first define the concept of ludic engagement and its usefulness as a lens for both design and evaluation in these settings. I then detail two fieldwork evaluations I conducted within two exhibitions of interactive artworks, and discuss their outcomes and the future directions of this research.