Experience Analysis- Stop Motion in the Weston Center

Upon entering the Weston Family Innovation Center at the Ontario Science Center, initially I was quite overwhelmed with the plethora of interactive stations. I was excited to have the opportunity to explore and reflect on each individual station and choose a particular experience that I found interesting enough to analyze and document. Although I found the center fun and interesting, the majority of the experiences had quite a playful juvenile, manner to them. Not that any thing was necessarily at fault because of this, the center is very family oriented but I found that initially I was disappointed with the lack of description for why certain activities were implemented in the way that they were as I was having difficulties making connections between the content and the actual interfaces that were selected. As I made my way through the experiences, I was able to uncover how successful a liar I was, how well I could fabricate my own shoe, what type of chemistry I had with a virtual character and how well I could create a soundtrack that was appropriate to my personal life. After spending about two hours or so in the center Leif, Daniella and I came across an experience where the user has the opportunity to create their own stop motion animation sequence. Each station was comprised of a working space, where the user was expected to create their experience, this acted as the stage for the short animation. There were containers filled with trinkets and gadgets and miniatures that were expected to be utilized as props for the animation. There was a spotlight to change or enhance lighting effects. There was a camera that was there to record the action. There was a spinning wheel, which restricted the content for the animation. There was also a touch LCD screen which controlled camera settings and allowed the user to view the frames as they were being captured. Now as I found that there was a lack of description among some of the other stations this station in opposition had no problem setting out certain individual controlled and guided stations for the experience yet there still failed to be a set out pattern in which you were supposed to go about using the station. If the artist really intended for the users to implement a specific approach to create this piece, for example using the supplied props and spinning the wheel, there needed to be some sort of restriction applied where one section would not engage until the section prior to the event was finished, or simply some sort of written instruction needed to be implemented. But because this was not there, the piece became much more open and personalized for the user, intended or not.











Initially the piece did not really interest me, mainly based on the problems that I mentioned above. There were these controlled stations that made the piece seem too structured, but as you really took the time to extend concepts and manipulate the functions of the station it became quite interesting and amusing. The interesting thing about the station was that it had been set up so that the user could maneuver the spotlight and camera into different positions to alter the style and shots of your film. As this was possible, we decided to eliminate the stage all together and alter the working space to the floor of the Weston center. As a cognitive experience, the sensory reflective elements are seen in the fact that if I jumped through each frame and caught a single moment in time where I was suspended in the air I could virtually create the illusion of flight. Certain behavioural patterns would take place when I decide to place myself in different positions in accordance to where the camera was. If I placed something on the stage, my behaviour would be very isolated from the action in the film as my movements would only be significant to the arrangement of elements. If I moved back and had the entire room be the stage my behavioural patterns would be directly translated in the outcome of the film. The visceral level being the most primitive feelings that we would have had would be in relation to the fact that I can see that there are props to be used, but I think that is too simple so In turn I decided to use the human body. There is an LCD screen in where I see the feedback which I can touch to control my mistakes and edit, this I found good as If i was unhappy with the feedback I could go back and change the process of how I got to that point. Now we became the subjects and we were active in the input and creation of the piece, but also active in that we were the subject matter and we were required to move to create something. There was no real passive position that was taking on by any one that decided to take part in the creation of the film, as even the onlookers were helping pose us and suggesting what should take place in the film. As the three of us were no longer in control of the physical mechanical aspects of the project we needed someone to do that for us, so the initial need to conform that was expected no longer took place. In our final movie, 203 photographs later, we were able to create the illusion of flight as we jumped through each frame of the film. The relationship of the body to the piece differs in the way that you choose to carry out the steps in making a film. If you choose to use the props, your body is externalized from the film, as in each frame captured the action is static. Yet if you decide to create the film in the manner that we did the body is the dominant focus, and movement from the user and the body is completely necessary in carrying out the experience successfully.