this week is an attempt to move away from the literal transformation of the interior space to the exterior. here i am trying to create a form-z model of the spatial qualities of the interior with an animation of formation. i’d like to create the growth|scaling of the model from the ground to the space. as this is occuring, i want to have the camera angle of the animation to tumble to capture the interior of the model while there is a fade of the exterior video out and a blend of the interior video in.
My initial idea is to have the fabric canopies move through the crosswalks of the street. These would provide covering for pedestrians while they cross the street, and a threshold for cars as they pass through the intersection. I am trying to use a Form-Z animation to show how these canopies move through the intersection. However, the color scheme I have now seems to be easy to read in the daytime, but I need to rethink the colors to be more legible at night. Also, the canopy in the daytime is different because there is no pedestrian traffic. The canopy will be moving through the night to accomodate people and cars, but will remain just for cars in the daytime clip. Other ideas I have are that the fabric undulates as it moves, it gets larger in scale as it moves, or the daytime canopy follows the truck. I will explore these ideas further and see if they have any value.
I attempted to make the idea of the movement of a pendulum into a spacial experience through the concept of a bridge. Instead of the abstract spacial implication of the cars movement in our group video, I though about how that could be highlighted in an actual traveling context. I am not completely satisfied with the idea yet so I would like feedback on where to go next. Basically, The bridge has pendulum like structures that begin movement upon a car entering the bridge. The pendulum follows the car at the exact speed, hence slower in traffic. A series of theses structures would exist, engaging a viewer of the bridge structure itself by actually witnessing the activity they would not otherwise be able to see. I want to push it in a more abstract direction than the literal approach I currently have.
the image above graphically represents the campaign trail of both major canidates for the 2008 presidential election. obama is represented by the blue pattern and mccain is represented by the red pattern. by using resources such as the washington post, i compiled the number of events held in each state of the continental united states. the set of conditions illustrated show the overlapping and interweaving of how many times each canidate visited the state contextually showing where a majority of their campaigning attention was given. this also represents where both canidates overlapped and/or divided their focus. the extremes of the conditions range from 178 events/visits to 0.
This set of conditions represents the percentage popularity of Obama vs. McCain in the states on the East Coast. The percentages range from 30 percent to 60 percent. These conditions are mapped over the time period of January to November 2008. The east coast states are shown as connected in this graphic to reveal the change in popularity of the two candidates as one travels down the east coast. I achieved this by creating a lofted shape of the popularity of Obama and the popularity of McCain. These shapes are connected to show one whole image of each candidate’s popularity. The intersection of the two images signifies a change in preference of one candidate over the other.
I started with the map of polls for this years elections and with a map that showed the concentration of multiracial populations throughout the territory of the United States of America. With both of the maps in hand, I decided to create a nurb representing the information applied to their geographical location and have them overlap showing the influence they have over each other. McCain is represented by the red, Obama by the blue and the concentration of multiracial population is gray.
The pick of different views gives the opportunity of seeing different interactions of the data.
This map displays the changing polls within the swing states for the democratic and republican candidates for the 2008 election. The map begins in January and runs through November demonstrated on the x axis. The y axis graphs the polled percentage within the state. The z-axis displays how many electoral votes that state has and the location of the state. Florida, the widest, is the south most state with 27 electoral votes while Montana and North Dakota are the thinest and north most states, only having 3 electoral votes each. The wire frame nodes demonstrate when each candidate had an event in that state. The dotted vs solid line wire frame demonstrates the outcome of the 2004 election. Additionally the once solid ribbon becomes wire frame to demonstrate the known vs. what can be estimated.