Task 1 - Precedent Study & Critical Analysis
Siti Zara Sophia Binti Mohammad Reeza (0359881)
Bachelor of Interactive Spatial Design (Honours)
INSTRUCTIONS
GOOGLE DRIVE LINK
SLIDES
Performative Media - A1 by Group 8
TUTORIAL ACTIVITIES
Week 2:
Week 3:
Week 5:
Week 6:
Week 7:
REFLECTION
Going into this assignment, I mostly thought of interactive media as something driven by obvious interaction — buttons, gestures, or clear cause-and-effect responses. Researching works by fuse* and Studio Roosegaarde changed that perspective quite a bit. Instead of focusing on control, many of these projects prioritise atmosphere, perception, and emotional experience, which made me rethink what interaction actually means.
What stood out to me most in fuse*’s work, especially Onirica and Artificial Botany, was how subtle the interaction is. The audience isn’t always asked to do something specific, yet the experience still feels immersive and engaging. This made me realise that interaction doesn’t have to be loud or obvious — sometimes it happens through observation, interpretation, or simply being present in the space. I found this especially interesting because it challenges the assumption that interactivity always needs constant input.
Looking at Studio Roosegaarde’s projects shifted my thinking in a different way. Works like Waterlicht and Glowing Nature showed how powerful light, scale, and atmosphere can be when combined with simple forms of responsiveness. These installations don’t overwhelm the audience with information or complex controls, but instead create moments that feel emotional, reflective, and human. I found it inspiring how technology is used not for spectacle, but to encourage awareness — whether about climate change or our relationship with nature.
One of the biggest lessons from this assignment was understanding the balance between system autonomy and user agency. Across the projects we studied, the systems are allowed to “do their own thing” while still responding gently to human presence. This balance makes the experience feel more organic and alive, rather than mechanical or forced. It made me think more carefully about how much control a user really needs to feel engaged.
Critically analysing these works also helped me see their limitations more clearly. Some projects risk limiting audience agency, while others can feel overwhelming or opaque if the process isn’t communicated clearly. Recognising these weaknesses was important, because it reminded me that even strong concepts need to be carefully designed for accessibility and clarity.
Overall, this assignment helped me shift my mindset. Instead of asking what technology can show or produce, I started thinking more about how it can shape experience and emotion. This way of thinking became a foundation for later projects, especially in considering how interaction, pacing, and simplicity can work together to create more meaningful performative media.
Comments
Post a Comment