Anna Heinrich & Leon Palmer

An account of work during ‘Under Construction’ 1996

Introduction

Our work with The Gallery of the Future at Loughborough University focuses upon the development of interactive spaces. Within these environments, changes in ambient conditions and the movement and touch of people can simulate transformations of visual and aural information. The visual imagery can be outputted through video projectors onto translucent or opaque materials to form an architecture of image and screen.

The first stage of this work resulted in the construction of a simple interactive environment that we set up as part of the ‘Under Construction’ exhibition in the James France Building at Loughborough University in April 1996. The project was a collaboration between ourselves and members of the Computer Studies Department and the department of Electrical Engineering at the University.

Description of the Project

The project involved the construction of a room approximately 4.8 metres square and 2.4 metres high. Across one corner of this room was a back-projection screen approximately 2.4 metres wide and 1.8 metres high and 40 cm off the ground which was framed to fit in with the room. Around the base of the walls of this room were a series of infrared sensors and emitters that created an invisible grid across the entire floor of the room. A person entered the room through an opening diagonally opposite the screen. As they moved around the space and beams were broken, a co-ordinate was generated and sent to a silicon graphics computer behind the screen. The camera position was designed to replicate the position of the viewer as they walked around the room. As they moved so did the view of the 3D scene on the screen.

The 3D scene was constructed using the ‘inventor’ software on the silicone graphics machine. This comprised of a series of static vertical and horizontal planes scattered throughout a ‘virtual space. As the viewer entered the space, the scene moved. It became evident that the planes making up the scene did not join together but were separated from each other. As one walked around the space the parallax of the scene moved these disparate elements apart. They moved back together again at two other points in the room to form two other spaces on the screen.

Concept

Our objectives for the project were very clear from the start. Although the work was simplified and revised into a form that would be achievable within the time limit we retained a number of core concepts.

The first was that the viewer would not need to wear a headset or any other peripheral device for the interaction to take place. Secondly, it was important to us that the format of the images had the potential to evolve in some way.

The images could have simply been accessed from a database of 64, pre-saved views of a 3D computer model. This would have meant that the potential for the scene to evolve would have been closed as a change in one image would not have followed through into the next and so on. Instead of 64 separate images we chose the slightly more problematic method of a single 3D model. This rendered in real time according to the position of the viewer in the space relative to the virtual space defined in the image. Any change in the virtual model, for example a number counter responding to past movements and numbers of viewers, was consistent as one moved around the space. This is because the viewer was looking at the virtual 3D computer model rather than 64 snapshots taken from the model.

This open ended relationship between the viewer and the interface was very important to us as the third objective was to establish as far as possible, the parameters for developing and refining the work in the future. The experimental nature of the project meant that we were end users as much as the viewers that came to see the show in April.

Collaboration and technical support

This project would not have been achieved without the collaboration and technical support we received from the Computer Studies Department and the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering. An important link that the Gallery of the Future is trying to make is that between artists and technologists and this project is a direct result of such a relationship. The sensor system was devised and programmed by Dr Bill Marshall at the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering. Michael Quantrill, from the Computer Studies Department, wrote the computer program that translated the information from this system into a form that could control the image.

Everyone worked to an extremely tight deadline to make sure that a working vision of the concept would be ready for the ‘Under Construction’ exhibition in April. Despite the time limitation the collaboration provided some very interesting insights into the relative technologies each of us employed in the project. It became clear that we all had a lot to learn from each other and that common ground had to be established for an effective communication of ideas. This involved a very intense debate about the philosophical reasons for using one method over another and why the means of achieving the work was an integral part of it’s concept.

Potential for Future Development

Overview

In the process of developing the work to this initial stage we have thought of many ways we would like to take these concepts further. We would like to extend the scope of the project to include areas such as the use of sound and the incorporation of techno-textiles as part of a far more detailed consideration of the architecture of the interface.

The next stage will require planning on a longer-term basis to include strategies for funding, exhibition and publicity. This should also take into account the possibility of collaboration with other areas of the University and College and outside organisations.

Conceptual Parameters

We have compiled the following list covering both physical and conceptual areas of research. There is considerable overlap between these areas which will form the basis of a constant philosophical appraisal of the work as it reveals new and unexpected ideas.

Site

How the work relates to the form, function and use of the site in which it is installed.

Perception

The experience of perceiving the work relative to it’s context and site.

Interaction

The nature of an overtly interactive information structures.

Aesthetics

Aesthetic experience of these hybrid structures.

Image

The fabric and the structure of the digital image.

Sound

The fabric and the structure of sound.

Touch

Interactive responses to touch.

Fabric

Research into a variety of materials including ‘intelligent’ materials and techno-fabrics.

Structure

Physical structures for digital spaces using high tensile, membranous or folding techniques.

Space

How an interactive architecture defines space.

Time

How an interactive architecture defines time.

Planning and Management

Planning and effective management will be vital in order to develop the work further. This process needs to allow for an ongoing program of research and development. This will include experimentation into different and more effective sensor systems, fabric technology, sound, programming and structural engineering. Underpinning this will be a constant philosophical appraisal of the work as it reveals new and unexpected ideas.

The planning should also identify the appropriate level of resources required for each stage of development. This includes careful consideration of the collaboration and technical support that will inevitably be involved. It is important that these people are given adequate time and the necessary funding is available to cover their costs particularly if this involves other departments within the College and University.

As the project becomes more sophisticated, it will be important to set up a mechanism for the quick and efficient allocation of resources when required. This will greatly help everyone involved especially when the hardware, software or components need to be ordered. This mechanism could also act as a central means of communication between participants.

Collaboration and Technical Support

As with work already undertaken, developing the project will require collaborations between departments and technical support. We have already established good working relationships between the Computer Studies Department and the Department of Electrical Engineering. We can also see possibilities creating links with the Textiles department and the Department of Structural Engineering. Others may become apparent as the project develops.

Collaboration with other organisations

Whilst discussing future work we had mentioned that this may involve other organisations. This remains a strong possibility and would allow us to integrate the work into other installations. One possibility is a project that we will be producing with the Lighthouse in Brighton to be shown at the De La Warr Pavilion, Bexhill on Sea in early 1999. Making a link with this would provide a very real objective to work towards including a venue and a means of publicity.

Funding

Additional funds would obviously need to be sought. At this moment we can think of two possible sources that could be utilised. The first is related to some funding that Professor Ernest Edmonds has raised for work to be undertaken in the Computer Studies Department. The second is to link up with the project we will be installing at the De Warr Pavilion next year. Substantial funds have already been raised for this and the collaboration may prove to be very exciting.

Conclusion

We feel that our initial work for the Gallery of the Future has created a firm foundation from which to develop and refine the concept of interactive environments. The working relationships that have been established here are proof that these collaborations by their very nature, can engage the creative skills of technologists as well as artists. There is every chance that an opportunity to develop this further will produce unique and exciting results.