Sonic Interaction Design – Week 2


After the feedback we got to our life-performance, we decided to Make some user testings. That we recorded some new different versions of sounds very intuitively. Then we edited them with the vocoder and with the massive synthesizer. Three different collections of sounds came out.


This morning we listened to all the sounds we produced together and made a selection of the sounds we want to take for the user testing.

The sounds were numbered from 1 to 18 and we had three users from different majors to test our sound out. After that, we collected the sounds that had the similar feedbacks and took the pictures of the result. Then we tried to figure out the possible scenarios with these sounds, trying to find out the possible interactions and the information that we can have with our concept. (The pictures of the user testing and its result is below.)


  • Getting attention: sound 6(come_on_1), sound 16(cold_1)
  • Notification of the information: sound 5 (whistle_2)
  • Light: sound 4(whistle_1), sound 17(light_1)
  • Electricity: sound 14(electricity_1)
  • Pushing (demanding) the action from user: sound 18 (light_2)
  • General talking: sound 1 (messaging_1)


  • Lifting: sound 18 (light_2)
  • Tapping: sound 9 (acknowledge_1)


Before the morning, we analyzed the result sounds from the user-testing. While doing that, we could find the similarities in the tone and the characteristics of the collected sounds. We did the analysis in three categories: Information, Interaction, and Other possibilities. the following pictures show the specific demonstration of our sounds which are grouped in common.

For the next step, we are going to compose the language of the cube with our sounds, using our ’sound blocks‘ to create the sentence of the information. Then also with the basic interaction, we will try to make a simple base-sound with different frequencies that can tell users about the proceeding status of the cube.

First ’sound blocks‘ or segments could be composed using the following samples:
talking sound (messaging_1) + notification (whistle_2) + light (light_1) + demanding an action (light_2)


Further tryouts:

Basic Sound with different frequences.
Because it would need more time than we have in this course to work out the following sounds, we decided to go further with the sounds we allready used for the usertesting and edit the choosen ones a bit.


In the morning muchi and Ju recorded the Video in Ju’s flat while Alessa was doing the Poster.
For the Video we decided to include an off voice that documents the interaction with the device.
This methode gave us the opportunity to explain different possible secenario’s in one scene and helped us to keep the video short.

For the Design of the Poster, we decided to work with the cube, in which we explain what the device is (The Motivation behind, the concept aswell as the characteristic and his language). On the bottom we went deepli into our process and writed dow the things that were expected.

In the afternoon we were cutting the video and made the sounds (off-voice) for the video.

Sonic Interaction Design – Week 1


We plan to make the interaction sounds for an intelligent device that steers the energy consumption and makes you be more sustainable. The device has different modes (Temperature, Air quality, electronic devices, Light). Through a specific Interaction (shaking, rubbing, throwing, breathing, holding/squeezing…) you can ask for the actual state, for example, how many lights are on or which electronic device is on and not used right now (the device gives you a acoustic feedback). Afterwards, you have the opportunity to react to this information through another interaction and for example, switch off all the lights that are not used right now.


To get a sense of possible directions we analyzed what type of company people are or could get used to in their home.

Personality of the device may be similar to:

  • Pet
  • Cat (Searching for attention, unberechenbar)
  • Dog (unterwürfig, treu)
  • Bird (chatty)
  • Robot/Machine (Hero, strong)
  • Partner (affectionate, funny, helpful)
  • Grandmother/-father (wise)
  • Child (cute, curious, chatty)
  • Coach (instructive, teacher-like)
  • Friend (Helpful, Always there if you need him)


Possible behaviors or interactions of the cube could be:

  • Searching for attention
    • „Can I help you?“: When a person comes back home, greeting & asking
    • „Play with me, let’s do something!“: When a person is doing/ not doing something for a long time
    • „Hello / Goodbye“
  • Indication (Informing, Warning):
    • „You are using too much energy, you know.“: Nagging/complaining
    • „Status is OK / relax / snooze”
    • „Alert! There is a thief in the house!“ : Emergency Situation alarming
    • „The mail/message/package arrived.“ : Joyful notice
    • „Help me / I have a problem!“
  • In-hand interaction:
    • Picking up: „Oh, yeah I’m ready“ (Ready for an action)
    • Holding: „I’ll tell you about the problem“ (Load information)
    • Shaking: „Solve the problem? no problem!“ (Do some smart thing)
    • Rubbing: „Some other info about your home…“ (Change the info)
    • Spinning: „Haha! Let’s have fun!“ (Showing something a person can do at home)
    • Hugging: „Ohhh… I love you, too.“ (Making relaxing atmosphere)
    • Pressing: „Hello / Bye Bye“
    • Tapping: „Okay, I’ll shut up.“ (short tap)/ „Hey, don’t hit me.“ (strong hit)
  • Feedback after interaction/Self-noise making:
    • Putting down: „Okay, I think you are done“. (Mumbling sound going down)


At the end of the day, we analyzed each of the mentioned personality and checked with what behavior they might fit most.
For our concept, we think that a robot like R2D2 could suit our interests very well. He communicates only by sounds and easily conveys emotions, needs or problems. He does it in a way that the person is not annoyed, but rather thankful for the information and feedback that the droid gives. This is exactly the aesthetic we would like to achieve. For rather annoying sounds, we could use cat sounds, which on the other hand are often intuitively understood by humans.


After we collected our first sounds and got the inspiration for our Wizard-Of-Oz prototype, we started to modulate our samples. We used a tiny part of our angry cat sounds and edited the pitch and multiple effects. This helped us to generate a few first messages which we defined using our storyboard:

We tried to define our sounds based on the flow of sentences. Short sounds may be associated with „Hello“, or „Ok“, whereas longer sounds can be questions depending on the pitch at the end of the sentence.

We then realized that these sounds only work to a certain extent. The course of the sound was not specific enough.
Inspired by techniques of R2D2, where some sounds were spoken and then edited with an effect, we tried the same procedure to create a second set of sounds. To our disadvantage, we found out, that editing spoken words until they are unrecognizable is harder than we thought at first. Especially if the outcome should suit our imagination.


After our second mentoring, and Simons tip to get more inspired by the human voice, we recorded some vocal sounds. We just talked some sentences, imagining the device could talk:

„Hey“ / „Hello“ = Searching for attention
„The light in the kitchen is still on“ = giving an information
„Could you switch off the light in the kitchen?“ = request to do something
„Shall I switch off the light?“ = offering help
„Ok“ / „Done“ = mission fulfilled

After that, we edited the sounds with different effects to give it a more digital and robotic character. Because we didn’t have too much time till our presentation, we couldn’t find the effects, that suit our ideas we had.

Even for us, it was quite hard to interpret the sounds we created during the presentation and for the other listeners who heard the sounds for the first time, it was even harder.

From the feedback, we took that we should even more focus on the affordance of the sounds.
We decided to create a collection of sounds and then make some user-testing with them to find out what sounds are associated with which interaction.

22.05.2017 – Teaching skills


  • “Learning to Code: What is it? What’s In It For The Kids?— A Tribute to Seymour Papert“, Ackermann, Edith K. 2016. Trans. version from publication in Tecnologie didattiche (TD 27-2002).
  • “Lessons from the scrapyard: creative uses of found materials within a workshop setting”, Moriwaki, Katherine & Brucker-Cohen, J. 2006. In AI & Society. 20:4. 506-525.

Today’s lesson was all about teaching. Joëlle first talked about how and why to convey knowledge. The following things should be considered while teaching:

  • respectful teaching
  • pushing your students
  • inspire
  • have an open communication

The more expertized you are, the harder it gets to teach your skill. If you are really expertized in a topic, you may be recessed too much, and don’t teach the basics

Each one of us had to prepare a certain skill, which he could teach to about 4 people in 5 minutes. In the upper image, we see Toby (the guy in the gray shirt), teaching his group the newest freestyle dance moves.
We built teams, I was with Andrin and Ismael. Andrin showed us how to roll a cigarette and Ismael how to correctly throw an American football.

The method I chose is learning by doing. I folded an origami bird and gave instructions at the same time. For the skill I chose to teach, I realized how important visual guiding is. Describing folding steps only with words is almost impossible.

16.05.2017 – Evaluation and Re-Evaluation


  • “Interaction criticism: three readings of an interaction design, and what they get us”, Bardzell, J., Bolter, J., & Löwgren, J. 2010. In Interactions. 17:2. 32–37.
  • “Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of the time)”, Greenberg, S., & Buxton, B. 2008. In Proceedings of CHI ’08.
  • “What do usability evaluators do in practice?: an explorative study of think aloud testing”, Nørgaard, M., & Hornbæk, K. 2006. In Proceedings of DIS ‘06.
  • “Introducing Evaluation”, Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H. 2002. In Interaction Design. Wiley.
  • “Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation”, Sengers, P., & Gaver, B. 2006. In Proceedings of DIS ‘06.

Exercise in class

We started this lesson with an exercise. The day before, we received the following task from Joëlle: prepare the criteria you think could be used to evaluate the objectives of your group project for the IAD process class.

We asked ourselves:

  • How much can other designers benefit from our work?
  • What have we personally learned?
    • Have we learned new things in terms of relationships?
    • Does this project have a good impact on our becoming of designers?
  • Have our participants benefited?
  • Do our video, concept and blog really convey our thoughts and ideas? 

After we shared these questions, we evaluated and answered the questions of another group. In our case, it was group room. We then answered the following three questions, they asked themselves:

  • Have we provoked people in their lives?
    Shaën, Vinz and I thought that we agreed with the first part of this question. They have provoked! The only thing we noticed, was that they did not really convey their scenarios as real life situations. The viewer had rather the impression of people in some sort of parallel universe.
  • Was our installation biased?
    Pro: We liked that the installation was forcefully „guided“ by technology. Only one of four objects was visible at a time, and after a time loop this post changed.
    Neg: The viewer did not have the possibility to interact. This was sad in some cases. Only one prototype had an interaction within.
  • How leveled was the installation?
    The installation was in our opinion negatively weighted. Since their goal was to make an almost even, yet a little negative installation, I think they achieved their goal.

Joëlle’s input on the evaluation

First, she taught us the scientific paradigm.

  • hypothesis
  • test/study double-blind
  • evaluation (measuring tool, objective metrics, stats)
  • publication  (peer-reviewed)
  • „reproducibility“

And then suggested, to „mix and match“ with the following.

  • anthropology
  • history
  • geography
  • psychology
  • sociology
  • engineering
  • literature
  • philosophy
  • physics

Joëlle advised us, to use one of the following and „mix and match“ it with the methodology of engineering, which is very similar to interaction design. We should try to invent our own methods, and not stick too much to the ones we learned in class. Always be creative about our own evaluation and experiment!

We then categorized different methodology terms in before, during and after.

  • before is always about setting objectives!
    • Personal experience, goals, related work. evaluating ideas, intuitions, hypothesis, field research, interviews, desk-based research(sources, data, precedents, related work), discussing with peers and advisors, co-design, participatory design.
  • during means setting controlled experiments: criteria and rules!
    • User testing, or generally testing the idea, iteration. prototyping, documenting, technical aspects. time checking/retro planning! (plan backward) going back to the field, enacting, storytelling, discussing with peers and advisors.
  • after, we ask ourselves, have we achieved our goals?
    • Reflection, goals achieved? (evaluating reaching objectives, missing objectives, contributions) study analysis, stats, typology of users, quotes, report/publication/exhibition/dissemination, methods, lessons learned, guidelines/toolkit.

15.05.2017 – Innovation for all


  • “A Material History of Bits”, Blanchette, Jean-François. 2011. In Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62:6. 1042-1057.
  • “RepRap – The Replicating Rapid Prototyper”, Jones Rhys, Haufe P., Sells E., Iravani P., Olliver V., Palmer C. and Bowyer, A. 2011. In Robotica, 29.
  • „The Art Of Innovation: Lessons In Creativity From IDEO, America’s Leading Design Firm“, Kelley, T. (2001). Crown Business. 23-52.
  • “Cilllia – 3D Printed Micro-Pillar Structures for Surface Texture, Actuation and Sensing”, Ou, Jifei, Dublon, G., Cheng, C., Heibeck, F., Willis, K.D.D. & Ishii, H. 2016. In Proceedings of CHI ‘16.
  • „New Methodologies in Art and Design Research: The Object as Discourse“, Seago, Alex & Dunne, Anthony. 1999. In Design Issues. 15:2. Summer 1999.

Adrienne Bodor – Innovation for all

innovation is a word that is overused! – Summary

to innovate means:
to make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas or products.

Adri told us, that an innovation begins with an open eye. First, we must know our subject before we can look for solutions. If we observe people with any gender, age, religion, skin color etc. in their everyday life struggles we might find what we need to build something innovative.

If we take google, for example, we know that they only hire people who excel in their area of expertise. That way, they always have mentors or professors who can teach others, that way they stay innovative.

At Disney, animators and technical employees work together to share knowledge. They know a little bit about the possibilities and difficulties of the work of the other. This ensures a mutual understanding of each other.

To finish Adri told us one last advice:
Innovation is a social process. It does not come from one person, but from a team!


  • Great English, but many ah’s
  • Few slides makes it hard to follow

Tobias Dupuch – Innovation for all part II

an innovative presentation – Summary

Adrien Bowyer started a project in 2004 called the RepRap. The idea of it was to build a machine, which is able to reproduce itself. How? It consists of a 3D printer, which can create almost all parts, to build a second, identical part of the printer.

This idea, of course, comes from nature. Every organisms primal goal is to reproduce itself. The only issue with the RepRap is, that he can not produce all of the parts, needed to rebuild one. Just like the red clover and the bumblebee. Just like the RepRap, the red clover is depending on another species in order to reproduce.general public license, so everyone can improve it

The first RepRap was built in 2008, and two and a half years later, 4500 pieces were built.

We may know open source software such as android. This means that the company releases the full code of their software so that everybody can help to improve it.

Open design uses the same technique. The only difference here is that the company delivers the whole three-dimensional plans for the projects.


  • very great and interesting example

8.05.2017 – Data, data and some data


  • „Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design“, Buxton, B. 2007, Morgan Kaufmann. 76-81.
  • “Data as the new currency. Government’s role in facilitating the exchange”, Eggers William. D., Hamill R., Ali A. 2013. In Deloitte Review. 13. 18-31.
  • „Interactions with big data analytics“, Fisher, D., DeLine, R., Czerwinski, M., & Drucker, S. 2012, In Interactions. 19(3). 50-59.
  • „Designing Great Visualizations“, Mackinlay, J. D. & Winslow, K. Study for Tableau Software. (undated, retrieved November 2013).
  • „Data-Informed Product Design“, Pavliscak, Pamela. 2015. O’Reilly

Alessa Gassmann – Data as a new currency

how much is data worth – Summary

Data nowadays is considered as an economic value, it can be bought, sold and traded. This has become even more current with the upcoming of new technologies and the enlargement of the internet. Companies earn a lot of money from selling user data.

The government is one of the biggest if not the biggest producer of data. They already regulate part of the personal data that companies use. The difference is to find out how much data these companies actually collect and share. Who collects more, google, apple, or microsoft?

Another question is what do they do with the data? The government’s intention is to have an ecosystem that leverages data to improve health. For facebook etc. we can’t really say. According to rumors, it uses its data mainly for their own benefit.


  • minimal yet beautiful design of the slides

Manuel Leuthold – Data visualizations

the importance of data visualization– Summary

The video above shows a very pleasant visualization from Interactive Things (which was founded by former Interaction Design students!) for the Ville Vivante in Geneva. 

Manuel explained to us how important it is how interesting we visualize data. A study can be as interesting as it wants. Without an attractive design, the users won’t be interested in looking at your data.

Another thing is to include a story in how you convey your data. A data visualization without a story will bore your users.

In this example, we see a visualization about Napoleon’s march. It shows the strength, size and tells the user the story of Napoleon.


  • great examples of data visualizations
  • Nice question to start the discussion:
    • In what way do you think data visualization will change in the near future?

The presentations were followed by a short exercise. Matching our current ideas, struggles or inspirations we were asked to draw a visualization.

In my case, I tried to visualize the process of the idea development. The hatched square should symbolize the initial thought or idea. Then a process of concepts starts. Some of the squares evolve and grow, some are changed in the progress, and some are simply not followed up.

IAD Process Week 6 – Production 2


On Monday morning we tried to create a code for the feather, which we would use in the video to display the emotions matching the dialog in the audio channel.

We realized that it would become a lot easier to film if we created the colors on the video in the post production (after effects). That way we would not have to find a place to hide the cables and the electronics. And we would also be able to change the lights after we recorded the videos.

We then started to set up our film set. We went to the studio and placed our couch and the softboxes, to get a nice and simple visual style. Installing the lights turned out to be more complicated than we thought, but was worth the extra work, after we edited the photos.


Back from the reading week we first we presented our developments to Joëlle and Nicole. Our initial plan was to have one shot, and digitally add a variety by choosing different frames throughout the video. Joelle and Nicole both animated us to try to make more moving pictures. They suggested that we would do some sort of stop-motion. That way we would create a more interesting image.

We decided to pursue that advice and optimized the storyboard by adding motions to the bracelet. Sadly the only empty spot in the foto studio was this Tuesday after 6 pm. A little night shift was expedient.



Wednesday morning we had another mentoring with Joëlle. We showed our images and our ideas for the subtitles. Since the audio files were in swiss-german, we were obliged to include subtitles. By adding subtitles we could include other visual objects on the screen, the question was, if we would destroy this simple style, and distract too much from the colors of the bracelets. We decided that we had to try both!

Arranging the images to a stop-motion was harder than we thought. Mapping the images to the voices was extremely time-consuming. But created a better outcome than inserting images with the exact same length. Another night shift!


The last day of the module wasn’t easy, as expected. We spent a lot of time key-framing the lights of the bracelets. Each frame had to be adjusted individually. While Michael focused on this animated effect, Vinzenz and Shaën started with the documentation and the presentation.

When we finally finished the light effect of the bracelets, we started to work on the sound for the video. To stick to the simple and abstract design of the video, we only inserted minimalistic sound effects, which were only noticeable for people who have seen the movie multiple times.


The last day of our module! Presentations first, beers second!

Password: Emotion

Key lessons of the week and our module in general

Take your time to find the project subject!

Don’t think of a title in the last minutes. Take your time to find a suitable title for your project.

Always remember to turn off the room lamps in a photo studio! This sounds very basic, but being so fixed on softboxes, light intensity and white balance make it hard to remember the basic stuff!

Interaction Design – Additional Documentation

Final Concept

Target Group

Love couples.
We decided to focus on love relationships because sharing your emotions is very intimate and at the same time you have you have many misunderstandings and bad communication. There are also couples which are doing similar stuff like sharing the current location through mobile phones.


Each partner has a bracelet on the wrist sharing the emotion of their partner whenever they want to know it. They are connected to their mobile phones through Bluetooth LE and so connected to each other through the internet. By raising the wrist and turning it that the color LED faces the face of the wearer, the emotion of the partner will be displayed in two colors chosen by the partners themselves. Choosing the colors enables them to encrypt their emotions from an outside audience.

The closer the partners are to each other, the faster the immediate the color will change on the bracelet. In contrary, far distance to each other gives them a more like a summary of the last minutes or hours to prevent confusion if it’s not caused by partner i.e. at work.


The device should never replace something but emphasize the emotions.

Encourage conversation and prevent misunderstandings

  • Encourage couples to talk about their feelings. If they don’t like the current situation or not.
  • Emphasize the emotion of people while they are speaking

Build togetherness

  • Share emotions together
  • Have something that connects them together throughout the day.
  • Show the partner that you are comfortable and enjoy


EDA Sensor:
Is probably the most accurate sensor to measure some kind of emotions after awkward brainwave sensors.
When we are stressed, When we are stressed, we sweat more – increasing our skin’s electrical conductivity.

PGG Sensor (Heart rate):
Is a good combination to the EDA sensor. We all know, when you are stressed or in discomfort, your heart rate rises.

Shift of concepts

What was special in this module was that we shifted our concepts for many times until we finally established the idea the bracelet. But beside that it was a hard way to our idea, we learned a lot and we think that it matured our concept. We changed our mind quite often after long discussion and new insights we gathered.

Skatepark mapping

We started to do our field research at the skatepark and so we also had our first ideas for the skatepark. To be honest the ideas weren’t very concrete. But we focused on the unwritten rules and the nonverbal communication.

We encountered the problem that many different people are on the skatepark and so there were many arguments. We thought about many ways how we can decrease the fights such as visualizing the unwritten rules in many ways. But it all went into the direction of manifesting rules and from our observations, in the interviews we’ve made skate people appreciate the freedom they have. Also, the impact in the world is quite restricted to the skatepark which was not the idea of the module.

Feedback forcing device & commute collision prevention

Our next ideas had a big impact of the skatepark.

We noticed that the communication between different parties like the parents of the kids and the teenager skaters was broken. They did not really say what they wanted to say and often they just communicated when it already was too late.

So we made a quick concept of a device which exposes if you are uncomfortable while you were talking. We imagined to be used at team meetings and or in family dinner. The aim of this would be that people make it normal to show critique and to communicate before it’s too late.

The second device focused on what we thought about in the beginning of the module. We all experienced situations in public spaces where people share limited space. We thought about several AR possibilities to i.e. prevent pumps that people are more caring and aware of each other.


Again after great feedback, we decided to focus on displaying emotions. Funny enough, we initially focused on a bracelet just to make a quick prototype. The bracelet should show as many emotions as possible. But after the feedback, we recognized that it’s so hard to track, distinguish, interpret and display all emotions. We also wanted to leave the concept open to all people.

We noticed that we need to focus a bit more on our user group. We decided to define which people should use the bracelet. Because it’s something such intimate we settled to love couples very fast. Also, we shrunk the range of emotions to comfort and discomfort which is doable with technology nowadays.

We had many ideas of a medium to display emotions such as glowing tattoos, holograms and implants. We wrote down properties which the bracelet should have:

  • Independent from seasons and fashion
  • Easy to hide or remove
  • Not distracting

It excluded most of our ideas but the main reason was the sensor. We really wanted to use the EDA sensor for our concept. Besides the brainwave sensor it’s the most accurate yet and at the same time it’s not as embarrassing as connected cables on your head. But the sensor could only be applied at the finger or at the wrist.


Usually, the better you are prepared for an interview, the better the results will be. We first defined what we wanted to find out with the interview, with whom we want to talk and finally the questions we want to ask. Before the interview we did a very short introduction what is happening the next few minutes and what the basic concept of the bracelet is.

Questions to be answered

  • See if there are problems in communication where the bracelet can help
  • Find out where the current concept can led them to problem and what we would need to fix.
  • Find out how much people are willing to share and what is to much so they feel controlled.

Interview Questions

It’s one thing to ask the right questions. But it’s also important how you ask them. By asking a question and also when we ask it can influence the outcome a lot. That’s why we put some extra effort formulate a few good questions and reduce it so our interview partners won’t be bored. As you can see in the following questions they are often very open and also encourage a conversation between the participants.

  • Where could it help you to communicate?
  • Where do you think it would bring you into trouble?
  • When would you feel observed/controlled?
    • How can you compare it to other methods like location sharing with smartphone apps?
  • How could it strengthen your togetherness?
  • What would you change about the bracelet to make it more usable (general question in the end)
  • Would you be willing to wear a bracelet, if you knew your partner could see your emotions at any time? (at the end, very implicit)

Selection of interview partners

We wanted to have a range of different couples in a matter of the time they are together. So we looked for couples which are together for less than two years, around ten years and more than twenty years. We expected it to be hard but it was even harder to find participants.

Learnings of Interviews

We learned that many couples indeed have communication problems and it’s normal. Often times they would love to know more what their partner is thinking but at the same time, there are thoughts and feelings they don’t want to share.

Although it could bring them into arguments four of five couples said that it could help them in their relationship.

Half of our couples would rather share their emotions instead of their location, the other the total opposite. But all of them, of course, were a bit concerned and would probably not share the emotions all the time throughout the day. Maybe only for a short period of time and as one couple suggested, for people who participate a couple therapy.

I case of strengthening the togetherness only two couples thought it could help.

Especially the appearance of the bracelet was always a reason to criticize. It probably could be too big, disturb while wearing a watch or needs to look fancier to be worn at any occasion. Every couple told us that they’re afraid that people from outside could see their emotions. It’s such an intimate thing. So they suggested it should be only visible when they look at their wrist and one couple suggested to encrypt the output by the selection of custom colors.

Prototype Production

For the prototype, we 3D printed a wrist strap with flexible filament and a transparent lamp in the middle. The IAD lab gave us an RGB NeoPixel, an Adafruit Feather which compatible to Arduino and a matching battery. Michael quickly made a working code to demonstrate how the bracelet could work.

Video Production

As we finally decided to make a bit more abstract video we first started to listen to our interviews again and create a storyboard for the two interviews we selected. This was extremely helpful in the following steps of the production.

We wanted to have a bit more abstract video which displays the experience of our concept. Instead of filming, we were shooting pictures of the movie because then the shooting was way simpler and we were able to make animations in post production. With this, we did not have to hide cables of the prototype.

IAD Process Week 5 – Production 1


Vinzenz and Shaën each did one more interview on Monday with more interesting results. This time we were surprised that the couples had very similar problems.


After sharing the interviews we individually made, we tried to find identical statements from the couples. The most popular sentence was probably that the bracelet would have to be hidden most of the time. It should be very discrete and not visible all the time.

This lead us to the conclusion, to build a new prototype we could then use in our concept video or demonstration. To make the prototype less striking, we decided to minimize the transparent material. The bracelet would now be black and have a tiny box or dot, which is enlightened by a color LED according to the color. After our struggles with the Ninja Flex, we reconciled with flexible 3D printer material and decided to try another black flex material.


We arrived Wednesday morning and went straight to the Industrial lab to check on our new prototype. Luckily the print turned out to be decent, and we experimented with the lights inside of it. Our previously used LED stripes worked but were extremely hard to hide in videos or photos because of the big power supply and the remote control.

We went to the physical computing lab and asked Clemens and Moritz for some technical parts and advice on the selection of the electronics. Moritz suggested to use an Adafruit Feather (similar to an Arduino), and a Neopixels Led. The feather is a small microcontroller that works with a tiny 3.7V battery and the Neopixels have some sort of bus system, which reduces the wires required to control the colors of the LED. It also enabled us to make the prototype portable and not connected to the socket or huge batteries.


We presented our idea for the concept video to Nicole. Initially, we wanted to shoot scenarios with actors or even with ourselves. These scenarios would then show how our bracelet could influence people in a dispute or in everyday life situations.

Nicole warned us of the disadvantages of filming emotions with “actors”. Since we did not have the resources to find interested and talented actors in such a short time, it would be hard to convey the emotions and feelings of the characters in our video. Due to this realization, we decided to make our movie with a more abstract set.

A simple background, some sort of objects that could indicate a room, and the two bracelets which play a scenario. Reduced to the max. Instead of creating new scenarios which show the usage, we decided to use the disputes, we recorded in the interviews. These would be more authentic and random, then our ideas.

That way we would have the audio file of a couple arguing in the background, and in the image of the bracelets with the emotions of the narrators would be visual.


After a failed 3D print of a couch for our set. We started a new print on another printer.

While we waited for our couch, we cut the interviews and defined the audio files for our videos. We came across two disputes, which were suitable for our project.

To visualize our ideas for the video we created a detailed storyboard.  

Key lessons of the week

Don’t spend too much time on prototyping. It’s fun but you have to keep focused on your project. But prototyping, after all, makes clearly makes sense.

We have to work with the resources we have and we are no good actors. So there might be a more creative way of conveying the experience of the product.

Never use a 0.4mm nozzle for a 20cm print model (takes 20 hours and destroys your object 1h before the end)!

IAD Process Week 4 – Stories and Users


To start the week, each group presented a short play of a scenario demonstrating the idea of our project. Vinzenz and Michael acted as if they were roommates, who had few misunderstandings. We created a scenario where one roommate was a lazy who never did the dishes but party a lot. By not talking honestly we demonstrated how it should not work in a healthy relationship between two friends. Then we included the bracelet and played a similar scenario where one of us was scared of a horror movie but too afraid to say so. The bracelet forced them to show their real feelings and helped to encourage a conversation.


We started to look for a suitable material to build our prototype. We thought of a flexible plastic, which we could use in the 3D printer. That way, our prototype would be unisex, and not to fashion related. After checking the Material Library and the Industrial Lab, we found a material called Ninjaflex. It is a transparent, yet flexible filament! Full of enthusiasm we then created a basic prototype to print. After multiple tries, with and without the help of workshop employees, we had to dissociate the Ninjaflex, and print our prototype with a regular transparent PLA.

After the Mentoring with Joëlle, we decided to body storm couples with the bracelet and do a reflective interview subsequently, to validate our ideas, get new inputs and what the advantages and disadvantages could be for them.


We reached out to friends of us and asked for their help with our project. We knew finding people would be hard. But to be honest, it turned out to be even harder than expected. Most of them were not too happy once we told them we would record them, to be able to evaluate the interview.

The questions for the interview had to be chosen in advance. We sat together and discussed, which insecurities we would need to clarify. The usage and the improvement of our bracelet interested us most. So we decided to let them play a short scenario, where they had to lead a short dispute and react to the influence of the bracelet during the dispute.


Friday morning started with a short presentation about our achievements in week 4.


In the weekend Vinzenz visited two couples and did the brainstorming and the following interview. Both of them first were a bit nervous but after a few minutes, they found their role. The interview validated a few of our ideas but also generated new inputs. Surprisingly, they didn’t really decline the concept, they actually liked it.

Key lessons of the week

We really realized how hard it was to define interview questions but also how crucial it is for the results of the interview. The question alone can manipulate the answers and that’s what we want to prevent. But not only that even the order of questions can change the outcome. We could list even more but to conclude it: Interviewing Questions are a very sensible thing.

One more lesson: the body storming really helped a lot! It wasn’t only helping us by better results and impressions of the usage but also the couples so they can imagine and reflect with more confidence.