The piezo element showed the most potential but can the interaction be more nuanced from the input side? I’m curious to investigate if using both the input from the LDR and piezo will result in more dynamic interaction. I found that the sensor placement has to make sense, but using both hands at the same time will be necessary to interact with the sensors. The last video however shows a way to use one hand to make the motion of generating the vibration as well as limiting the light to the LDR.
I had to become a bit creative as I need to do one action that could fulfill to trigger both of the sensors. Now the way that the code is running is that the sensor that picks up first on the trigger will run its code. So the interaction is a bit misleading as the user never really fully know which sensor is triggered.
As far as the nuance goes I’m not really convinced that the LDR in combination with piezo gives a heightened experience than just using the piezo alone. Making sense of the code and when every trigger is being hit is the hard part. Maybe using the LDR to set the recovery time after the LED can provide a more interactive experience? But then again it’s highly dependable of when the user removes the hand from it which feels like a unnatural motion as longer sustain of shadow over LDR equals to a longer recovery time. The following days we’ll finalize the personality and try to test the interaction with colleagues the get some feedback. It’s so easy to miss something trivial when diving deep into theme.
Just like in previous module the quality of the sensors plays a role in this interaction. These are the cheapest sensors there is but it’s the only ones I could think of using in this module, even though it could always be discussed on how intrinsic performance of the sensors affect the whole system of interaction.
Micro blogg 