Feasibility Tests Part 2

Test 1 : different projectors

We used two different projectors side by side one one large wall to see which one (or both) produced the desired effect. Both projectors produced high quality images, but one produced a much larger image. With the program Touch Designer, we mapped out the space and tested the larger projector. We also practiced using moving projections with a sound visualization.

Test 2: materials & shapes

1. canvas

   1. We stuck several small canvases onto the wall with command stips, and attempted to map our project onto it. We experimented with breaking up our projection into different shapes / sizes.

2. Cardboard box

   1. Next we propped up a cardboard box on a table to attempt projecting onto a flat-textured 3-d shape

   2. Unfortunately, cardboard seemed to dark -- dulling the sharpness of the projection

   3. We stuck white canvases onto each side of the box to get a clearer sense of the 3d projection

3. Fog/Mist machine

   1. Using a fog machine to produce dense wisps of mist

   2. Projecting onto the general area of the mist, we were able to produce very interesting looking clouds of light, intensifying the beams of light that came from the projector.

   3. This may prove to be an interesting concept in the future, revealing the light beams in a projection mapped room.

Materials goals: bright, matte, opaque!

Test 3: Human Experience/ User Design

mind maps in miro

Ideas that came up:

How can we really impress viewers with projection mapping?

1. Intricate and interaction between small parts and pieces

2. Scale and sharpness of the image

3. Interaction with the user / live projection mapping