Testing the Prototype

Evaluative research attempts to gauge human expectations in relation to a designed artifact through testing of prototypes. 

After four workshops and hours of work we had a working prototype to test with real users. The prototype consists of our converted table inside of which is the book and the projector. Sitting in front of the table is a lantern. As users interact with the lantern they trigger the videos to play.
We set up the installation and then allowed people to interact with it. The aim of this testing experience was to see if people could understand what was happening with the installation and how it worked, how people interacted with the lantern and what effect it had and if the videos told a story.

We recruited ten people to test the installation. They were divided into two groups of three and three groups of two. The only question asked before the users were allowed to investigate the installation was whether they had any knowledge of Nano Nagle or South Presentation Convent. A short description of who Nano was and what the South Presentation heritage site is proposed to be was described to those that did not have any previous knowledge.

Before users were directed to the large scale prototype they were quickly talked through the small scale model of the room which would hold the installation so they could get a sense of the space they would be in when they came across this piece.





We observed people for the first few minutes of the testing, taking note of which elements first caught their attention, how they interacted with the lantern and how they reacted to the videos.

• Only about 20% of users went to the lantern first, most people were interested in what what they could see through the opening. However their interest quickly faded when they realised that it was just a book. 
• Three of the groups had to be instructed to interact with the lantern. (The positioning of the lantern is important, during testing it was set up beside the box. It was mentioned by one user that if the lantern had been in front of the box they would have been more inclined to make the connection between the two).
• About half the users went to pick up the lantern expecting that carrying the lantern had something to do with the interaction.
• The user that was controlling the lantern were more interested and animated in the installation than those just watching the videos.

After the users had investigated the installation we asked them a few common questions and then asked them to describe their experience while using the installation.

The questions included:

1. What is the most interesting thing about the installation?
2. Did you understand what was happening in the video?   
3. Imagining you are in a museum setting would you be more or less inclined to touch the lantern?
4. After discovering this interaction what would you do next in the museum?
5. Is there anything missing or could anything be added to enhance your experience?

Question 1

Question 2

Question 3

Question 4: 100% of people said that they would try to interact with the other lanterns in the room. They would check each of them and see what they did.

Question 5:  

Users were divided whether or not audio would add to the experience. Audio would be helpful in understanding the video but would be too distracting if many videos were playing at once. Having ambient sound in the room, using optional headphones or making the lantern the primary audio source was suggested.

It would be helpful if there was something to prompt you to interact with the lantern, make the knob stand out possibly with a different colour.

The room we tested in was too bright, the area needs to be dark. We could use light as a prompt. 

The video starting could be more exaggerated.  One user mentioned that once they realised they could interact with the lantern they became engrossed in discovering what the lantern could do and did not notice the video playing straight away.

After analysing users responses and suggestions were brainstormed how each suggestion could be used to enhance the piece.

Walkthrough testing - Focus group 2

While testing the video installation prototype I also did another round of walkthrough testing with the newer version of the models. These tests also proved extremely insightful and would influence further development of the prototype.

FINDINGS

The Map:

1. A prompt is needed in order to encourage people to touch the lantern.
2. The piece could consist of more than one lantern and by turning each on the lights spread out throughout the world.
3. As a decorative piece the map stands on its own however if it wants to inform then more context is needed

The Text:

1. There needs to be a stronger connection between the two sections of the installation - people didn't think that they would put the two together
2. Where the parts are positioned is also important - people noted that if they noticed the interaction but had to double back on themselves to see the second part they would not bother

Workshop 4

We carried out our fourth workshop across 2 days, the 24th and 28th of May. 

A table was sourced from a second-hand furniture store. The table had two shelves, the first having a squre hole in it, which was ideal for what we wanted to create. The second shelf was unscrewed and poeistioned further at the bottom to create the depth that was needed. A cardboard box was used to elevate the book to the level needed. The projector was placed above the book using shelf hinge and and nails, the mirror was placed on the other side using string and nails. The entire thing was cover with cardboard to encase the book in darkness.

In this weeks workshop we needed to create the physical elements of the large scale projection mapping. This installation consists of four stations. Each would contain a book, projector and a lantern in front of it. A small-scale model of this had already been created(see pervious blog posts), it was now time to create a a large-scale version of one of the stations. 

The Table:
FIrst we needed to find something which would resemble the bookcase in the small-scale model, but would also allow us to demonstrate the technology. We all spent a couple of weeks keeping an eye out for possible options. We thought buying a second-hand cabinet would be best and this would then be altered to suit our needs. We looked in local newspapers, online and in charity shops. Finally we came across a table at a second-hand furniture shop in town. It was ideal.
                                
The table had two surfaces. One on top which had a square hole and one just underneath this. By placing the table on side, the square hole was ideal for a viewing point. The second surface would have the book on it. It would to be moved further back in order to make projection on this possible. This was done by using a drill to remover the screws.The surface could then be pushed back. 

The book was sourced from my parents who got it in a second-hand shop many years ago. It is "The complete works of William Shakespeare" from 1900. This book was ideal as it looked old and also had very flat pages which to project onto. Of coarse other more relevant book are proposed to be used that relate to the Heritage Site. But for the purpose of demonstration this book is ideal. 

The book is propped up on a cardboard box in oder to reach the visitors viewing level. 
               

An issue arose with the projector. Although we made the case as deep as we could, the projects was still too close and the projection image too small. A solution would be to get a short through projector. We could not find one to use so for the purpose of demonstration we used a mirror to reflect the projection.

Cardboard was used to put around the table, this was to enclose the book and projector in darkness. A problem that arose was the projection was not bright enough. This was resolved by brighting the projection and using a black cloth draped over the table.

The projector was secured to the back. It had to be elevated so two shelf brackets were used. These were nailed to the board and the projector fit perfectly. 
                                 

The mirror was secured to the other side. The mirror needed to be tilted at a certain angle to ensure the projector was on the book below. A piece of wood was nailed for the mirror to rest on. To make the mirror tilt, string was used. The string was attached to two picture hooks at the top and on the wood below the mirror. This meant that the mirror would rest at an angle, using string also means the angle can be easily adjusted if needs be. 
                                 
Lanterns
Eadaoin also sourced another lantern. Now we had two lantern but one appear dirty and they didn't seem to belong together. To solve this we decided to paint them the same colour. Black spray paint was bought and used. This made the lanterns look more polished and unified. 
                         
Overall we are very pleased with the work we completed in the workshops. We are close to completion of the physical elements that we wish to display at the end. To be completed over the next couple of weeks is to add final touches to the book case, making the piece more visually pleasing. We must implement the remain technology(which is very little) and we must test what we have created.