October 4, 2009
This is a phenomenon described some time ago by Japanese robotics expert Masahiro Mori. The valley is a deep dip in a graph between unreal and real, the dip is very close to real when you might expect it to be at the other end on the scale. It suggests that the closer robots (or for that matter animatronics) come in appearance to being human the scarier they become, until of course they become indistinguishable.
Something like the family robot from Lost in Space / the Swiss Family Robinson one can empathise with but things that don’t quite make it such as the characters in the animated film The Polar Express are downright creepy. Not everyone agrees with this theory but we have all had that feeling that something is not quite right when we have met someone who (to us) is a bit odd. It is probably this difficult area that has caused most disagreement. David Hanson of Hanson Robotics suggests people’s reactions to anthropomorphic robots or animations do not depend on the level of realism but whether or not the characters themselves are creepy. I think if you watch this video you will agree that it’s all in the eyes.
Someone else who is on the other side of the uncanny valley is the artist Nathaniel Mellors. He is an exhibitor at the Tate Britain Altermodern Triennial (and also a member of the band Skill 7 Stamina 12). His installation Giantbum 2008 uses robotic talking heads to great effect – you can see this on YouTube. He has not tried to disguise the mechanical workings of the heads which makes them more interesting. I spent as much time looking at the exposed backs of the heads as the fronts, which just shows how convincing I found them that I had to check that they were not real. I have written a short review of the show that I shall publish shortly. You can find out more about Nathaniel here. 
30 September, 2009
Television is a blessing; if you are in the mood then nothing can beat an evening on the sofa watching your favourite programme. It has also been hailed as a great educator. The dream was that with one television in every village, however remote, around the global it would educate and enlighten the whole human race.
While we are waiting for that it has often struck me that television can hold your attention and draw you into itself. It is the same with a good book that you can’t put down or an old pop song that you just have to hear all the way through but there is a big difference. The latter examples are your choice because you enjoy them; with television you can wander into a room where it is playing and find that you become glued to some trivia in which you have no real interest. It can even stop people in mid conversation. Its pull is so strong.
I understand a little more about this after reading an article in Scientific American by Robert Kubey and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi Television Addiction. So it was true and what interested me as a creative consultant was ‘orienting response’ first described by Pavlov in 1927. Instinctively light, sound and movement catch our attention and cause us to investigate its source. I find that a leaf falling or bird’s flight will catch my eye and I respond by searching it out.
This mental effort switches internal resources from the body to the brain, in effect calming the heart rate which then picks up again when the stimulus has been identified. This feels good and using commonplace techniques such as fast edits, sudden noise, light and dark repeatedly keeps us interested. So, to an extent, watching television does make us feel good.
It is not my purpose here to be scientific but constant ups and downs will effect attention span and leave the viewer wanting more. I personally find that unless I have chosen my viewing carefully, at the end of the evening I have a subtle but detectable ‘unsatisfied’ feeling.
My purpose is to ask if more interaction with the television really such a good thing? What is channel hopping really doing? Is this a reaction against being caught in the television’s glare or is it a search for more stimuli?
The question is interesting for those promoting interactive television but also for those communicators wanting to have an interactive communication with consumers.
Using the web invariably leaves one feeling unsatisfied at the end of a session, the majority of the experience is due to the content and continuity but some of the feeling must result from the struggle between stimulus and control.
All sorts of devices are set to get a lot more interactive, the mobile phone in particular. It would be easy to see high usage as a clear signal of good returns in the future. I suspect the television effect may well come into play.
October 4, 2009
The most important thing I have learnt as a practitioner is that the creative process can be much more effective and productive if it is well managed. I asked myself if this experience could be put to use to help others, and the answer has been most emphatically yes.
My experience tells me that in the right environment, managed sensitively, creatives can achieve amazing things but managed poorly they can be a disaster.
Those commissioning work also need help to interact in the right way with their creative partners.
January 8, 2009
Behind these short articles in the library there exists in-depth research. The articles have been written over a period of time and some have been updated off-line. The following selection serves to show the breadth of subjects I have enjoyed researching.
November 28, 2006
Improving the return on creative resource investment.
Click on the title to find out more or on ‘Presentation’ to see a short slide show.
November 28, 2006
Providing synesthetic solutions to new challenges.
Click on the title to find out more or on ‘Presentation’ to see a short slide show..
November 28, 2006
Getting better results through better communication.
Click on the title to find out more or on ‘Presentation’ to see a short slide show.
November 28, 2006
Improving the return on creative resource investment.
Click on the title to find out more or on ‘Presentation’ to see a short slide show.