Sensitive Objects by Pierre-Félix So

Dissertation written and formatted by Pierre-Félix So Promotion 2015 DSAA LAAB Rennes Product Design Typography Body text, Avenir Titles, Prisma Pro

SENSITIVE OBJECTS [re]perceive the daily notification

How can the designer offer an other perception of objects which have been modified by the digital technologies and the emergence of the data ?

Dissertation graduation Pierre-FĂŠlix So

SUMMARY

Preface

Introduction

I. Man & object, an evolution of the relation 1. History of the object and its relation to man 2. The notion of interactivity, the rise of a new practice

12 13 14

II. The turn of the digital dimension 1. Our relations with technology 2. The duality between virtual and physic world

15 16 18

III. The data invasion: a daily hidden presence

IV. Towards a sensory world where the immaterial has meaning

Conclusion

PREFACE

Today we live in a digital and connected world. Following this enthusiasm, engineers, citizens, designers and makers started to rush into the digital revolution. So I became interested in the digital technologies, and particularly the open source technologies, like Arduino (IMG_1) or Raspberry Pi (IMG_2). Because those technologies are cheap, open and accessible, I can easily use or reinvest them in my projects. We are surrounded by devices which are constantly talking to the world via the Internet. In this context, one fact stands out : the data. Because they are present everywhere, in every device and every project, we are now invaded by them. I want to change the way we perceive these data everyday. Like the notifications on our smartphones, we experiment the flow of data but we are not really aware of it. This thesis will approach the history of the object, the change brought by the digital revolution, and the problem of the ubiquitous data.

IMG_1 Arduino

Uno, an open-source computer hardware, 2013

IMG_2 Rasberry

Pi, a nano computer, 2012

introduction

On September 9th 2014, Apple presents their Apple Watch to the world. This smartwatch is presented as a revolutionary watch. Loaded with captors, the watch can track your health and is constantly linked to your smartphone. This watch is not the first one in the giant industry market, Samsung and Google already have their own smartwatch. Today we are surrounded by “digitally enhanced” objects, they can now communicate to the world and generate and use data. It upsets our links with objects, because useful objects have now become smart objects. That is what we call : the Internet of things, and smart objects should reach 80 billions by 20201. The huge development of the Internet is responsible for the emergence of this new typology of objects. “ In only twenty years, the biggest part of human activities have moved on the digital worlds, and the development of personal computers, the Internet and the mobile telephony have radically changed our relation to the world.2 ” This quotation by Bernard Darras points out the disruption brought by the digital revolution. Recently, the digital technologies have become accessible to the general public, laser cutting, 3D printing, open hardware and microcontroller have been domesticated by

1 http://www.idate.org/en/News/Internet-of-Things_820.html 2 “ En seulement vingt ans, la plus grande partie des activités humaines s’est déplacée dans les mondes numériques, et le développement des ordinateurs personnels, l’Internet et la téléphonie mobile ont radicalement changé notre relation avec le monde. ” Quotation by Bernard Darras, Aesthetics and Semiotics of Digital Design : The Case of Web Interface Design, Actes du colloque The First INDAF International Conference, Corée, Incheon, 2009, p. 11, quoted from de Stéphane Vial, L’être et l’écran “ Comment le numérique change la perception ”, PUF, 2013, p. 24

This thesis will approach the objects and the data linked to them. We will try to find how the designer can offer an other perception of objects which have been modified by the digital technologies and the emergence of data. Through perception I want to propose a new experience, both sensory (the use of the five human senses) and sensitive (the use of material and the relation we have with our objects).

3 “ Nous sommes tous des makers [du verbe anglais to make, faire, fabriquer]. Nous sommes nés makers (il suffit de voir la fascination des enfants pour le dessin, les jeux de construction, les Lego ou les travaux manuels) et beaucoup d’entre nous en gardent quelque chose dans leurs passe-temps ou leurs passions. Ce n’est pas seulement affaire d’ateliers, de garages et autres lieux masculins. Si vous aimez cuisiner, vous êtes un ou une maker de cuisine et votre fourneau vaut un établi (les plats maison sont meilleurs, n’est-ce pas ?). Si vous aimez planter, vous êtes un maker de jardin. Coudre et tricoter, enfiler des perles, broder, c’est toujours du travail de maker. ” Quotation by Chris Anderson, Makers. La nouvelle révolution industrielle, Montreuil, Pearson, 2012, p. 23

those whom we call the makers3. Designers have seized the opportunity to learn and invest those technologies. However the objects produced today have not fully made use of the digital possibilities. Moreover, the general public do not really take interest in smart objects. The multiplication of smart objects is partly responsible for data proliferation. Today we are facing speaking objects which are constantly communicating through the Internet, creating a huge amount of data. So the user is facing that data daily. Because the data is now coming from their own daily objects and not only their digital devices (computer, smartphone…). This observation and my fascination for the digital technologies have oriented my research on this subject.

Man and objects, an evolution of the relation

1. History of the object and its relation to man What is the object ?

The object has been thought through different approaches. Firstly the tool-object, a utilitarian object whose goal is to complete a given task. Deforge alludes to the prosthesis-objects, as “ tools that extend the human gesture ”3. The tool is approached here as an extension of the human body. Then the sign value, Roland Barthes pointed out that objects “ convey meanings ”. The meaning of the object, what it conveys through its shape, its building, is what we call the sign-object or the communication-object. The functionalist approach limited the object to its function. This historic trend focused on a somewhat technical approach. The symbolic objects call on the intellect, knowledge and culture. They try to go beyond the simple use of the object to evoke more, to convey a message for example. Close to these objects, the emotional objects call 1 “Si l’on s’en tient aux acceptions courantes, telles qu’elles ressortent d’enquêtes : est objet pour un public de consommateurs ce qui peut être saisi et manipulé, qu’il s’agisse d’objets décoratifs ou utilitaires.” Quotation by Yves Deforge, Technologie et génétique de l’objet industriel, Paris, Maloine S.A Editeur, 1985 2 “ En bref, qu’est-ce qu’un objet ? C’est un élément du monde extérieur fabriqué par l’homme et que celui-ci peut prendre ou manipuler. “ Quotation by Abraham A. Moles, “ Objet et communication ”, Communications, n°13: “ Les objets ”, 1969, p. 5 3 “ outils qui prolongent le geste de l'homme ” Quotation by Yves Deforge, op. cit., p. 19

Defining the object is a hard task, there are a lot of definitions and each designer has his own. According to Yves Deforge, the object is a consumer product (for the consumer), and he sees in the object “ a thing that can be handled ”1. Deforge joins Abraham A. Moles who defines the object as “ an element from the outside world made by Man that can be taken or manipulated ”2. So the object appears as a material that is handled, manipulated and tested by Man.

on the feelings, trying to generate sensations among the users. These objects are often linked to the senses.

2. The notion of interactivity, the rise of a new practice

The last notion is the interactivity, which was first linked to the digital devices, especially because of the interfaces. Touch screens lead us to interact with the object, and most of our senses are focused on the screen. Interactive objects can immerse us easily, they catch our attention. Those objects introduce the connected objects which have the particularity to be connected wirelessly to the Internet. This web connection augments the usage of the object, whether it be in the function, interaction or the information. The market of connected objects is constantly growing, from watches to fridges, including glasses, thermometers and even kettles. I have two observations on these new objects. Firstly the shape which is obsolete, indeed most of them are just “ usual objects ” to which a function has been plugged without reconsidering the whole object. And secondly, their relation which is exclusively visual, as a result of using screen with a graphic interface. By bringing a lot of new technologies which strongly modify the objects, digital technologies have disrupted the relation between man and objects

The turn of the digital dimension

1. Our relations with technology The 21st century Man is constantly exposed to technology whether it be in his personal life, his hobbies or his professional life.1 We now have natural relations with technology, maintaining our relation through the screens. Those screens may be held responsible for this addiction to technology, they are constantly catching our attention. Facing this confrontation, we have developed new attitudes and behaviors. We are torn between suspicion, habit and fascination. The smartphones for example keep catching our eyes, surrounding the space around us.

Technophobes are an example of the fear induced by the expansion of technology. They sometimes seem to escape our control.2 In addition the digital has brought about a new feature, the concept of invisibility (IMG_3), noticeable through the waves (WiFi, electromagnetic field…) or data passing through the Internet. And those two features can not be physically grasped. Besides the technological objects are very complex and go beyond the user’s knowledge. But we do not really need to understand how these devices work because we use them through interfaces. The user is not interested in what is beneath the screen but rather by the many possibilities of the tactile. And through time, the newly acquired gestures have appeared completely

1 “ Certes, les dispositifs existent depuis que l’homo sapiens est apparu, mais il semble qu’aujourd’hui il n’y ait plus un seul instant de la vie des individus qui ne soit modelé, contaminé, ou contrôlé par un dispositif. ” Quotation by Giorgio Agamben, Qu’est-ce qu'un dispositif ?, Paris, Éditions Payot et Rivages, coll. “ Petite bibliothèque ”, 2006, p. 34 2 “ à New York, Tokyo ou Londres, on est en moyenne cent cinquante fois par jour en présence de systèmes embarqués. ” Quotation by John Thackara, In the bubble, Saint-Étienne, Cité du Design éditions, 2008, p. 155

IMG_3 Timo

Arnall, Jorn Knutsen & Einar Sneve Martinussen, Light Painting Wifi, WiFi signal strength capture device, 400 cm bar with 80 LEDs, 2011

IMG_4 Oculus

VR, Oculus Rift, virtual reality helmet, 379 g, 2012

natural to us. Unconsciously, we have developed a new form of perception. Virtual and real lives are not opposed but complementary. And the digital devices — tablets, computers, smartphones, etc. — have become the new devices through which we perceive the world. We are now facing new beings, virtual beings but also concepts, everything appears to us through screens. We have to project ourselves in a new perceptive world.

2. The duality between the virtual and physical worlds

We are in front of a new experience of the matter. Indeed the virtual elements are not fixed because of their volatile characteristics. They are duplicable, erasable, transferable… Our actual perception of the matter, tangible and concrete, has completely changed. Unlike this concrete matter, we cannot bring back a virtual element which has disappeared. So once forgotten, a virtual element is totally erased from the real world. And that is what seems to be missing in our relation to virtual reality: the lack of materiality. The interfaces are the only elements linking our body to the machine. They appear as the first search of materiality. However they are limited in their dimension — 2D only — and their medium, they only appear on screens. Can the object manage to give a materiality to the virtual ? To detect the perceptive changes, we will see three sensorial experiences which disrupt our sensations and perceptions. In the first place, augmented reality, a concept which allows to transpose the virtual into the real

We have noticed that even if our senses and perceptions are shaken, matter is never experienced, because of the omnipresence of immateriality in these three concepts.

world. For example it is possible today to project yourself in real situations as in vehicle simulators. Then the concept of virtual reality, which is an evolution spawning from the first concept. For example Occulus Rift (IMG_4) is a device which allows the user to be immersed in a video game. This concept attempts to apply the phenomenon and behavior of the real world into a virtual environment. Lastly the hologram can project the virtual into reality. It responds to the attempt of “ taking out the virtual from the screen ”. However, the hologram cannot allow to perceive the matter since the volumetric picture which appears to us is just a projection, so we are passing through it.

The data invasion: a daily hidden presence

How to define data ?

Today data is shared through our devices, some data concern our lives, for example the personal data of our Facebook profiles or the information Google tracks on our Internet research. The internet user does not really realize how those data transit and where they are. Moreover, a lot of connected devices are coming to the market every year and we will soon be surrounded by objects which will constantly be exchanging data. This observation has led me to work with the notifications. Because they are present on the devices we use everyday: smartphones, tablets, computers, and now watches, glassesâ&#x20AC;Ś it has become a daily event, and sometimes, it can be very intrusive. Notifications always appear to us in the same way: visual or factual content (IMG_5). They have naturally appeared in a context of permanent connection to the external world. They have then taken a considerable place in our everyday life. They are supposed to be a helping tool making data assimilation easier. It is hard

According to the dictionary, data is a conventional representation of information. It is visible through two forms, analogue or digital, that being physical or virtual. Then data can be treated to obtain information which can be analysed, interpreted, reinjectedâ&#x20AC;Ś into various devices or systems. So every element from the world which can be measured, tested or classified is an element of data. If data is so important today, it is because of the advent of the computer. This device can treat a colossal amount of data. And since we all have connected devices it is primordial to question ourselves on the place these data take up.

IMG_5 Different

types of notifications on various digital devices

to ignore them, because they are deeply integrated in our way of life ; mails, sms and applications send us daily messages which are notifications. Since we are notified too much there is a banalization of the data, it is all treated in the same way and at the same level. There is no distinction between two very different types of information, it all appears to us with a text message. So the purpose is to make objects capable of communicating data effectively, to notify the user through sense stimulation. That is why I use digital technologies, because they can link objects, data and senses.

ToWARDS a sensory world where the immaterial has meaning

However, there are some ways to make the immaterial concrete. The idea is to create devices allowing us to experience and feel the immaterial by the association of data and senses. Aérobie (IMG_6) is a lamp designed by Pierre Charrié which goes exactly in that way. Composed of small wood strips it can detect the changes in the air quality — an element difficult to feel —, when this quality become critical, the lamp starts to shake. These objects communicate within their environment by working as independent organisms. By communicating like this, they allow the user to become aware of the invisible elements. This awareness is made through the object and not through interfaces. Senses are solicited and the perception of these data is less abrupt. Today’s omnipresent notifications are identical, repetitive, unpredictable, it is thus essential to classify them, why not by using a sensory approach ? We must be very careful when we link data and senses, indeed the use of the sense has to be carefully chosen

The digital has brought a new component into our sensory experience : the immaterial. We are confronted daily with WiFi, Bluetooth, electromagnetic fields… And those are often the reasons of our worry, because of their invisibility. Moreover, through the tactile screens, we can now observe the inhibition of the touch sense. Tactile has completely changed the relation we could have with physical objects because they are now replaced by virtual objects in the interfaces. When we interact with immaterial objects such as tactile interfaces, our senses are inhibited because we are approaching these objects without sensory distinction. It seems that only the imagery is guiding us and suggests the changes in the objects.

IMG_6 Pierre

Charrié, Aérobie, lamp reacting to the air quality, wood, 2013

I chose to work on three intentions which try to answer to the issue. The first one aims to communicate a quantity instead of a content. This intention focuses on the notification from the social networks, especially on the way we interact on these networks, like the tweets for Twitter or the likes for Facebook. So it tries to use those interactions to give us the “ state ” of our social status, but instead of communicating the information itself, it stresses on the amount. The second intention is to intensify the emotion felt when we receive notifications. Because we receive a lot of notifications from very different sources, they all appear with the same aspect. So with this intention, the purpose is to highlight these notifications which make us happy, like a girlfriend, a good friend, etc. And the last intention tries to notify exclusively through the objects without reading a digital device like your smartphone (this intention would be reading the weather on your lamp for example). The aim is to take us away from our digital device, because we already read those devices a lot during the day to keep up-to-date on everything (news, weather, etc.).

depending on the data. By using senses stimulation, the relation with the information is a lot more direct, and the understanding is stronger. The acceptance of the information is also much less constraining than a visual or sound notification. The essence of the work is to find a balance between informing the user and not invading his sensory space too brutally. Also, because the connected objects seems to be the first responsible for the increasing amount of data. The purpose will be to offer a tangible and understandable relation between the object and what it will communicate. Therefore the object broadcasts data intrinsically, they are now a part of the object.

Offering an other perception of objects which have been modified by the digital technologies and the emergence of data, that is the questioning that has tackled to answer in this dissertation. It was about questioning the object, which has become digital, connected and smart. In the first part, we broached the question of the relation between Man and object, the different values of the object, and the new interactivity value which has led us to connected objects. Then we explored the digital dimension, the changes in our behavior and the tension between virtual and physical worlds. In the second part, we focused on the data, what it is and my decision to work with notifications. Then we defined the notion of immaterial and how we can materialize it in an object. And finally the precision on how I will work with the notifications, with my first intentions. By building objects that call on our senses, the designer can catch the user’s attention and offer an effective notification. The aim is to get away from the supremacy of the screen and the visual obsolescence, but also to question our daily relation with notifications by the use of senses. In order to touch the user more easily. By this use of the senses, the material qualities of the objects not only increase, but they are also reassessed. The thought broached in this dissertation suggests a new designer, a designer of the “digital era”. This one should take into account the context and the actual

CONCLUSION

concerns of the digital revolution. Whether it be the open source, which allows to cut loose of a legal arduousness, or the crowdfunding, this designer can find autonomy regarding the industry. Freeing himself from a lot of constraints, he can fully embrace understandable and open technologies to think the objects of tomorrow. If the data proliferation could be an issue, it is also a huge source of research. The “digital era designer” should consider the objects incorporating data in their conception.

If research is currently in the prospective field, it could eventually apply to big areas like health or urban design. Because if the screens are still present in these fields, the increasing amount of data to process could rapidly become a real problem. Communicating those data efficiently inside informative objects is maybe one of the future concerns of the “digital era designer”.