Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
KCAI DESG 425
This class blog for DESG 425 will be an integral part of class and the central repository for projects and assignments.
Your Instructors
Michael Eppelheimer
Assistant Professor
meppelheimer@kcai.com
Garrett Fusselier
Teaching Assistant
gfuselier@gmail.com
Assistant Professor
meppelheimer@kcai.com
Garrett Fusselier
Teaching Assistant
gfuselier@gmail.com
Experimental Sites
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(25)
-
▼
February
(12)
- Troubleshooting Microsite Production
- Deliverables Next Week
- Sub Domains
- CAS Server
- Microsite Deliverables for Friday Feb 29
- Microsite Deliverables for Monday Feb 25
- Reading for Monday Feb 25
- Microsite Deliverables for Friday Feb 22
- Dematerialization of Screen Space
- Sitemaps, Sketches & Domain Names
- The Long Now
- TED Talks: Ideas Worth Spreading
-
▼
February
(12)
8 comments:
i always find Helfland so motivational, to go out and discover something new outside of the computer screen and somehow simulate that emotion back through to the media user. what she states in this article feel is true... there is no elasticity to our senses...yet. i think that slowly we are starting to understand that smelling and touching are much more interesting to out users than we realize. I think that this statement could pertain alot to matt and tyler's DPs because of the use of other senses rather than a limited computer screen.
she says "we remain preoccuppied with the space surrounding the technology rather than the space inside the technology." We have been so hung up on adding more sounds, chimes, dings and flashes of light that theres no room left for the user to put their own mark on it, if even their own opinion. Isnt that what society has become though? Everyone wanting to think for themselves, have their own direction, personalized objects? How can we do that with the screen? Why is the computer screen always 4 corners? just some questions i was thinking of.
So if I'm getting what Helfland is saying, the first part of this is essentially a critique of the medium of screen based interaction and how limited this is since it is such a non human non realistic method of seeing the world of accomplishing a task. That it is very backwards looking and the new avante garde is tackling the challenges of the next wave of screen based media. But maybe i'm misinterpreting because of my degree project.
I did really enjoy the fallacies of the virtual space which she points out, and how working in the z space can actually be less realistic, or for that matter more stylized for a fantasy world if thats what you going for.
I'm not sure if i really get the Demarcation part though, maybe because she gives no direction, in how to progress the medium, she merely says that we need a new beginning (very Mchluhan). She places a lot of stock in the interweb and all of its "tubes" and how this can play a role as equal to how we shaped modern cities int eh 19th century, but I still don't have any idea of how this could happen, but maybe thats the point.
I wish in the readings that we've been getting, that the essays would have more of a suggested direction to go. I understand that the internet is a somewhat "uncharted, undeveloped territory" but, why not have some kind of broad future idea? It's hard (for me at least) to be able to think out of the box that is the web without being shown examples first. I mean, without people taking risks, adventuring to other continents (if we're going to use Helfland's example of western colonization) there would be no reason to explore other "worlds" or wonder how other people live, thrive, and grow.
I agree with matt about the first part. Any medium we use is going to have restrictions. I think the screen/web just offers more options and is just another medium to be explored.
and while reading this I couldn't stop thinking about this site
http://www.geocities.com/scottcwells/
I haven't figured out why yet.
I don't think she has much faith in the computer screen. I think that Daniel Rozin's mirror introduces something different that I think answers and creates new questions for her.
http://www.smoothware.com/danny/woodenmirror.html
I agree with Tina with the internet being 'uncharted territory'. I do understand that it is infinitely expandable, but that relies on our creativity as designers also. Its hard for me to understand the web as having something other than the already coined term 'pages' of the web.
I appreciate the fact that Helfland brings up the question of what an actual screen can be. I feel that this will be changing in the near future. Yet i have no idea what that direction might be.
so while i'm excited about where the internet and future may be taking us, i'm still a bit frightened about it after that article. comparing it to the wide open west? well the west isn't so open anymore and that cheap (stolen) land went sky high in the last century, so could the internet. how and where will our society know when to end? soon the interwebs will be placed in our brains and we really will be a collective as in the borg (cyborg collective consciousness on star trek, have one mind) collective before too long. well, i guess then we just keep designing for brains instead of screens.
it's also depressing that we have this wide open field where it's intimidating where it can go, but today we are still so limited in how we can shape it. i guess it's our turn to see how we can change it, how we can push, and how we can adapt to whatever comes next. it's garenteed to keep changing so we will have to keep adapting, while still trying to fill in between the gaps of advances with our own pushes to something new.
i do feel motivated though after the reading, still a bit intimidated, but motivated to take whatever comes, and push it to where ever i can take it. plus i still really wish our lingo would change, home page makes no sense unless it can serve me cookies, and until technology integrates so it can, i will just keep trying to come up with something else to call it.
I like the point she made, that we are obsessed with the way media is portrayed and projected into our minds, and not the media itself. we get so caught up in the hardwear that our softwear is lacking. instead of making more interesting movies we just put them into a different player, like blueray. but perhaps the invention of better mediums to work in will spark better things to use them for.
I think that's kind of the nature of technology for us to be able to question but not necessarily be able to provide a new direction. I contend that (although there are definite obvious jumps in the speed, size, and mobility of technology) there have not been that many jumps in the physical interaction or truly new innovation with technology in the past couple decades. Perhaps we need another (Al Gore, note sarcasm) to "invent" the next great leap in technology.
Post a Comment