John Wayne Hill - Masters Thesis Presentation

1,086 views

Published on

Published in: Design, Art & Photos, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,086
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • image: Caroline Walker - http://painternyc.blogspot.com/2008/05/caroline-walker.html on 4/12/2011 (creative commons license) \n
  • \n
  • critique is useful\n what is working, what doesn’t work\n technical aspects\n subjective aspects\n overall vision\n
  • Wants to know if depth of field is too shallow, contrast too high, symmetry is good?\n\nimage: Huw Jenkins - http://www.flickr.com/groups/photographycritique/discuss/72157625512542419/ (creative commons license) \n
  • has typically been done in art schools\n and is usually conducted face–to–face\n creates natural ebbs and flows in conversations\n Critique is just that, a conversation (although sometimes one–sided)\n
  • has typically been done in art schools\n and is usually conducted face–to–face\n creates natural ebbs and flows in conversations\n Critique is just that, a conversation (although sometimes one–sided)\n \nimage: Williams College - http://www.flickr.com/photos/williamscollege/4811570591/ on 4/24/2011 (creative commons license) \n
  • over the last decade, digital photography has exploded\n this is due to technical innovations with cameras, storage, etc\n hundreds of thousands of people have now taken up photography as either a hobby or professionally\n
  • over the last decade, digital photography has exploded\n this is due to technical innovations with cameras, storage, etc\n hundreds of thousands of people have now taken up photography as either a hobby or professionally\n
  • these photographers turned to the internet to share photos\n and to get critique and feedback on their work\n they turned to sites like flickr, facebook, deviant art, smugmug, and others.\n
  • these photographers turned to the internet to share photos\n and to get critique and feedback on their work\n they turned to sites like flickr, facebook, deviant art, smugmug, and others.\n these sites allow photographers to comment on each others photos\n
  • however through research, I’ve found that text based critique doesn’t work\n it lacks context\n lacks technical information\n lacks natural conversation and flow\n mostly turns into praise or cruelty\n
  • so, we can see a problem and opportunity.\n Digital photographers need and seek critique to thrive and produce their best work\n face-to-face critique works best\n and current digital tools fail to allow for serious critique\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • image: Jermoe Decq - http://www.flickr.com/photos/lesphotosdejerome/514328567/ on 4/13/2011 (creative commons license) \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Jana Whittington\n
  • what makes a strong critique\n strong critique gives suggestions on how to make a photograph better\n it talks about technical aspects of a photograph\n focal point, aperture, focus, shutter speed, etc\n it talks about subject aspects of a photograph\n unity, rhythm, balance, vision, etc.\n
  • what makes a weak critique\n only talks about subjective aspects of a photograph\n doesn’t keep in mind the context of a photograph\n is all praise worthy\n is overtly harsh and demeaning\n
  • \n
  • Read up on critical theory\n Looked at formalist theory and structuralism\n Looked at interaction styles\n Looked at experience\n Looked at subjectivity\n Looked at theories on photography critique\n Looked at photo sharing culture studies\n Looked at aesthetics\n Looked at designing for multiple interpretations\n Looked at affective interaction theories\n Looked at creativity theory\n
  • Close reading of Flickr and Deviant Art\nFormal analysis of Facebook, SmugMug, Dribbble, Picassa\n
  • Conducted a focus group of 4 participants to learn about critique in general\n
  • Asked 3 participants to sort formal qualities of photographs \n
  • Talked with photographers about giving and receiving critique\n\nimage: Derek Cutting - http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcutting/3417254090/ on 4/13/2011 (creative commons license) \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Text based comments fail to enable quality critique\nPhotography critique should be situated in context\nArtistic intention is important\nConversational flow and dialog are important for natural critiques\nPhotographic context situates a critique \nSubjectivity should be addressed in critiques\nTechnical information helps critics talk about formal elements of a photograph\nCertain technical elements are more important in critiques\n
  • 12 page CHI formatted paper on critique interfaces\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • HTML, CSS, JavaScript\n flushed out 40% of design while prototyping\n changed things as I was prototyping\n helped me to get the design right\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • user testing\n tested html prototype with 6 photographers, a mix of undergraduate and professionals\n also tested with 2 design experts (yourselves)\n
  • basic usability problems, like the sliders were big enough\n needed clearer text and headings\n feedback problems while giving a crit\n changed video player interface\n basic flow problems\n
  • image: Danielle Kay Riendeau - http://www.flickr.com/photos/daniellekay/3790940920/ on 4/13/2011 (used with permission by author)\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • business\n marketing\n how to get pros on board\n revenue model\n expansion possibilities\n
  • Market to photography students, photo sharing site members (flickr, etc), new photographers\nPhotographers want to help and give back to the community\nMembers pay monthly or yearly subscription fee to view crits, upload photos, and request crits (free trial, critics don’t pay)\n
  • Allow for 2nd and 3rd critic choices\nadd cropping feature\nadd drawing feature (test first)\n
  • basic structure could support other fields (painting, sculpture, interaction design, graphic design)\nnew features would be added appropriately for specific fields\n\n
  • photography is a huge passion\nI love critiquing and helping other students in both UxD and Photography\nservice to fellow photographers and a way to give back to the community\n
  • Critique is important in photography and as digital photography has exploded in the last decade, more and more photographers seek critique in a digitally mediated format. Most sites currently allow for text based critique, but this type of critique fails (lack of context, technical information, and flow). By closely studying exemplars and literature, I was able to create 6 principles for designing for critique. Grounding these principles in user research allowed me to create a meaningful design that allows for ....\n
  • \n
  • All the HCID faculty for their support and encouragement\nFellow students for participating in expert reviews and engaging in dialogue with me\nPhotography Society for amazing participation and lively discussions\nTo my audience tonight for listening and engaging with me\n
  • John Wayne Hill - Masters Thesis Presentation

    1. 1. Give-a-Crit quality video critiques from professionals John Wayne Hill
    2. 2. Critique
    3. 3. Critiqueis important
    4. 4. Important to artists Caroline Walker
    5. 5. Critiquehelps artists thrive
    6. 6. Important inphotography
    7. 7. Huw Jenkins
    8. 8. Traditional critique
    9. 9. Face to face
    10. 10. Digital photography
    11. 11. Digital photography has exploded
    12. 12. Digital critique
    13. 13. Flickr, Facebook,SmugMug, Deviant Art, etc
    14. 14. text based critique fails
    15. 15. Opportunity space
    16. 16. Give-a-Crit
    17. 17. Video critiques with on-the-fly edits enable naturalprofessional critiques
    18. 18. How did I get there?
    19. 19. Define
    20. 20. Critique
    21. 21. Critique is acritical evaluation
    22. 22. Whittington, J. 2004.The process of effective critiques
    23. 23. Strong critique
    24. 24. Weak critique
    25. 25. Discovery
    26. 26. Literature review
    27. 27. Exemplar review
    28. 28. Focus group
    29. 29. Card sorting
    30. 30. Photography Society
    31. 31. Critique sessions
    32. 32. Synthesis & Analysis
    33. 33. Insights
    34. 34. Critiqueinteraction designs
    35. 35. 6 Principlesof critique
    36. 36. Principle 1Allow for multiple interpretations and ambiguity
    37. 37. Principle 2 Provide upfrontinformation for critics
    38. 38. Principle 3Allow for state of flowfor emergent critiques
    39. 39. Principle 4Allow for categorization and grouping
    40. 40. Principle 5 Allow for titlesand descriptions
    41. 41. Principle 6Create a dialogue between critics and artist
    42. 42. Concepting
    43. 43. Where I started
    44. 44. Sketches
    45. 45. Sketches
    46. 46. Sketches
    47. 47. Prototyping
    48. 48. 6 Keynoteprototypes
    49. 49. prototype 1
    50. 50. prototype 2
    51. 51. prototype 3
    52. 52. prototype 4
    53. 53. prototype 5
    54. 54. prototype 6
    55. 55. Functional prototype
    56. 56. functional prototype
    57. 57. Refinement
    58. 58. 6 Photographers
    59. 59. Uncoverings
    60. 60. “I want togive a crit”
    61. 61. Final Design
    62. 62. Final design
    63. 63. Strategy
    64. 64. Business strategy
    65. 65. Future-ing
    66. 66. Expansion
    67. 67. Reflection
    68. 68. Summary
    69. 69. Video critiques with on-the-fly edits enable naturalprofessional critiques
    70. 70. Thank You

    ×