We decided to start by picking a parameter from the seven that were introduced in the paper where we found that explicit motivation was the area of interest as it entails that the input would be understandable and it wouldn’t take much to figure out the intentions of the interaction.
The first idea was to implement sound as an output through different body part movement to control a drum as an example the movement of the hips relating to open hi-hats.
We then thought of what kind of movements/outputs which include visual, audio and physical:
Constraints of movements:
- Height restrictions
- When you hit a point it shocks you
- Minesweeper with a glove to control it and a shock when the landmine is used
- Car game going from hand to feet control of a car game
- The closer you get to an are the warmer the further the colder
- Time constraint
- Holding a pose for 5 sec in order to do something.
- A hole in the wall
I believe if it becomes “A hole in the wall” kind of experience it becomes more of game than something nuance since it would use the camera as a way for the user to be guided on what the intended movement is. Another thought was if there was a way to know if the desired movement is the correct one and if there would be a “confirm” to a move which was inline with the idea of Minesweeper. We thought about that there is some sort of initiation time where the output only comes if a specified distance is reached for 3 seconds. We thought of movability as well but chose to go with explicit motivation as movability was too broad.
Jumping motion to confirm movements
Bigger movement — bigger motion
We decided it lands more on the explicit motivation than the movability as it is too broad.
If the value of distance is 300 for 5 seconds then
60 and under -> play sound
Computer kept crashing which makes this code demanding, hopefully we figure out a way for the computers to handle it. The cause could possibly be loops but there is a lot of demand on the computer even when removed.
Abdulrahman's Blog 