Computing Research and HCI
Our
meeting with Celine Latulipe was a general introduction into her world of
Human-Computer Interactions. As she
explained her dealings in this field, one thing that she said really stuck with
me. It’s the question of design and how do we avoid designing a solution to a
problem that doesn’t exist? We should avoid putting forth our efforts to
something that fixes nothing, but at the same time, there is a sense of
excitement involved in creating something that is completely new and
unexplored. I see it not as a solution
to a nonexistent problem, but as an opportunity to prevent a problem from
arising in the future.
Celine
introduced us to a project that she was working on that she felt fell into this
category. This was a dual cursor program
that allowed a user to manipulate two cursors at once to control points on a
spline. She and her colleagues applied
this to photoshop style saturation editing for photographs, and used this as a
test to prove its efficiency. The
results from this testing proved that the dual cursors could indeed be used to
drastically increase the speed in which test participants could match an
un-edited photograph to one that was changed. Unfortunately, the niche market
for this type of program as well as the accepted practice of only using one
mouse makes this a solution for a non-existent problem.
The
same concept could be applied to the Body-Centric Design Space for Multi
Surface Interaction study from the CHI 2013 conference in Paris. While reading this paper, I was stunned by
the simplicity of the ways that one could interact with motion tracking cameras
beyond pointing. These pointing gestures
could be easily combined with a variety of regional body touches to create an
interaction language similar to sign language.
This interaction is still in a developing phase, just like Celine’s dual
cursor program, and as of now presents a solution to a problem not yet
presented. It seems to solve an
interaction problem on a much more mature form of large interactive screens or
rooms not yet created.
Both
of these programs utilized trial and error testing and focused on how others
interacted with the programs. The big
pitfall for designers is that we may design a program, interface, or building
that simply reflects our own desires. We
have to involve others in our design process and run tests with people to see
if we are getting the desired fluidity and ease of use that was intended. It is only when we use this data to help us
determine what works and what doesn’t that we can create a program, either in
the building or computing sectors, that works well.
With all this
being said, I believe that this is a healthy way in which to proceed with this
type of research. There is research
defined for problems that exist in the world, be they computer based or
otherwise, and then there is exploratory research. Both of these fields need to exist for the
growth of technology to continue in a healthy manner.
1 comment:
Steve this is great!
Post a Comment