Translating my model into the virtual world

I wanted to make my model three dimensional, as well as adding some content. I want the model to be interactive, and have controls to zoom in, out, look around the model and interact with it as you would with the real thing.

I first outlined my goals for the second part of the project to focus in on why i was making decisions, and to eliminate anything unecessary. I asked myself three questions:

1.How can putting my model into the virtual world enhance the experience?
2. Which features should i choose to change?
3. It is necessary to conform to the original framework/function?




Stepping back and asking myself these questions allowed me to focus on exactly what i wanted to do, and to find out why. I knew that i wanted a few things:

• To add detail which wasnt in the original due to lack of space/modelling medium
  
• Adding interactions which were difficult due to the size of the model
• Various levels of detail in different parts of the model: handing power back to the user
• Represent in some way the differences in interpretations: by different people or when re-investigating the model.
• I wanted to keep the apperance fairly similar, or at least the format. It is possible that a different shape could be more effective in the virtual world, and i will look into this
  

This is just preliminary, and i didn't forget the value of outside input on every stage of my ideation. This is criticism that i have recieved in the past i.e. limited production, and post production research, and not including this in the final design as much as i could have. This is usually due to running out of time, and i didn't want to continue making this mistake.

So, i decided to involve other people in more parts of the ideation process. I showed a few people my model to learnt what they thought of it i.e. if it was effective, what could be done to improve it, and if it was used in the way that i intended or some other way.

Before i did this, however, i had to ensure that my work was on track, so I decided to revisit my brief and research to ensure that my work was relevant and that i was going in the right direction.

Revisiting my previous research and process work

I revisted my research and reviewed my understanding of how books are read as this is what motivated my work. Each bit of information building a 'database' of characters which you change your opinions of during the course of the book. You can anticipate their behaviours based on what you know about them, and how well you identify with them is what draws you in. Narrative techniques such as the 'learning curve' i discovered in The Adventures of Sherlock Homes can cause you to feel behind a characters knowledge, creating intrigue, but the following landslide of information can shock and overwhelm and be very effective. Small sections of 'drips' of information can create tension. A book is read front to back usually, but i often find myself going backwards to re-read bits i missor really liked. If i am reading a book i dont like for educational purposes, i skim but this can also cause a lack of understanding. To combat this, books can use 'signposting', or an overview of the main things that i wanted to convey. The 'signposted' i.e. important themes/messages can be seen at a glance, and you can choose to focus on different sections as you please. This is subverting the conventions of the written word, and indeed even films or audiobooks. However, the model can be 'read' conventionally.

I realised that this 'diluting' of a book requires an 'editor', and perhaps different editors would prioritise different things. What if i allowed the user to be their own editor? Would this change the reading of the book? Yes. Books that allow the user input i.e. fantasy books which ask questions such as 'if you want the user to go here... skip to page...', but this wouldnt be an accurate representation of my model. Normal books are open to interpretation, and what it there is there.

The second half of the brief states 'The outcome will not be the recreation of the original physical book as a virtual interaction, but must challenge the notions of the very design of the book at all levels, including narrative, form and pace. It also may only be an aspect of your reading of the text and not the entirety of the book.'

I am quite secure that my design relates to the brief as it subverts absolutely everything that makes a book, a book, whilst allowing you to read it as you would a book. You can read the design quickly or slowly, go into as much or as little detail as you like, or even read it backwards or fowards.

Researching responses to my Model

I also decided to do a little bit of research into responses towards my model. I showed it to four people and got their responses. I put a 3 minute time limit on their interaction with the piece so that everyone had the same contact time, and to allow me to gain immediate and impulsive responses. I believe that the whole piece could be read in this timeframe. I did not explain what the model was of when interviewing two of my people, the other two i explained that it was a model of a book.

My list of questions was as follows:

1. What do you think that the purpose of the model is?
2. What did you learn from seeing the model?
3. What could i add to the model to help you understand it?
4. What could i add to the model that would allow you to get more out of it?
5. The model is intended to be a different way of obtaining information from a textual piece. Now that you know this, would it affect the way that you interacted with it?
6. If the model was virtual, what would you like to add to it to make it more engaging?

Some of my responses were as follows:







I then showed them my ideas for the 3D version of the model. My ideas were divided into two parts: one where i kept the original format, and the other where i didnt, but kept to the ideas that i presented in the original model





Responses to the virtual world model ideas pointed towards keeping the original format as it facilitated multi-level interaction. The idea of audio was well recieved, but i will have to look up audio-books for this as no films exist t the moment.

Also, i noticed form my feedback of the original model that it might be useful to have some kind of introductory screen to introduce the piece, much like a blurb in a real book so that the user has some idea of what they are interacting with as it is kind of an abstract concept. I understood that if a user is only interacting with one or two parts of the piece, it can be difficult to understand what it going on. I need to make sure that even at the shallowest level, a basic understand does come across. The pictrues and random words that are on the outside of my model, although they make sense to me and people who might have already heard the book, they dont necessarily convey much as i'd hoped.


I was planning on doing this with google sketchup; and importing various videos into flash then putting control handles.