Tag: feed

Posted on

Final Project: Split Chef (Trial)

Intro on what we are doing

Our team (Brendan, Bryan, Dion, Joel) came up with a cook-off game that uses the third space as a form of communication. There will be 2 players, one will be drawing while the other will be buying the ingredients and cooking.

The two players are connected to each other through Instagram Live, which works similarly to Facebook live. The two can communicate through this third space. The facilitators will be the ones filming for the players so they can do their thing while still be communicating.

Firstly, the drawer will be given 7 seconds to draw the ingredient given. The second player will have a minute to find the item and add it into the basket. After buying all the ingredients, the buyer will go to the kitchen and the drawer will have 15 seconds to draw each step of the cooking process. The second player now will cook the food and the end results will be judged by the facilitators.

Trial Part 1 – The Groceries

So in this trial, Brendan and Dion are the facilitators while Joel and I are the players. I am the one drawing and Dion facilitates me while Joel is the buyer and Brendan facilitates him.

When BBQ sauce becomes Tabasco sauce (like c’mon guys that’s clearly a BBQ pit and spatula)

 

Lime! The droplets gave it away very easily
Taco wrap that looks like burger bun and Joel got it!!
Seashell pasta that became dumplings but it’s okay because this is a decoy ingredient
Onions!
Tomato x 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here are some screenshots of what happened. Here’re some pointers I got from this experience:

  • we initially gave the drawer 10 seconds but it was too long. We lowered it to 7 seconds so that it is still a lot of time but not too much.
  • There are some instances where the drawer need to be creative. Example (not captured in screenshots unfortunately) will be the Shiitake Mushroom. I literally drew a pile of shit and a mushroom and Joel instantly got it. It was a funny experience.
  • Joel understands a lot of the ingredients I drew which was very surprising for me! For instance, I drew the taco wrap (pic 2) and it looked like a burger bun to me. But he got that it was taco wrap for some reason. I’m guessing he guessed it based on the other ingredients that he had to buy, since he have experience in cooking. His cooking instinct made us wonder if there are other ways to team people up. (initially we wanted friend vs non-friends, but now we can consider cooks vs non cooks or something like that)
  • Joel sometimes took a long time to find the ingredient which dragged the game. We need to set a time limit for the buyer to figure out what they need to buy and find the item. This can make the outcome more interesting as, if the buyer is unable to obtain the item, the final dish will be off (and more glitched).
  • The connectivity is alright but sometimes it gets a bit pixellated

Overall, being the drawer is a very fun experience. The 7 seconds time limit and the rush to draw something meaningful to the buyer is exciting. Watching the buyer buy the food, is also fun. If the buyer gets something wrong, I laugh. If the buyer gets something right from a bad drawing, I am impressed. I think watching the buyer buy the things is also part of the fun experience as a drawer so it’s fine and not so boring.

Trial Part 2 – The Cooking

I wasn’t around during this part as I had to rush off to somewhere. Zhen Qi is very kind to help take over me so we can continue the game.

 

Unfortunately I can’t say much as I wasn’t around, but I can tell that connectivity is a big issue. The pantry isn’t well connected by wifi or data, so the live feed keeps getting cut off. I also feel that there is a lot of waiting time for the drawer while the cooker is cooking.

I feel that the drawings are okay, that the time frame given to draw is enough for the drawers to express the instructions properly.

The outcome is delicious (according to the rest of the group members). The Tabasco sauce created an interesting taste, so the glitch wasn’t that unpleasant. It actually enhanced the dish.

Videos of the cooking process:

 

Posted on

Research Critique II: Third Space is Participation

I find an age old philosophical question relevant to our attempt at trying to understand the third space. “If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?” Similarly, if a device that can connect people across a distance is active but no one participates, is there a third space?

I would say that the answer to that question is: no. I believe a third space is a non-physical space that forms once people interact with each other between space and time, and its very essence is that its inhabitants are its participants, deliberate actors within the space that keeps it alive.

As what Randall Packer described,

“The laws of the known world have been all but abandoned in the third space: it is a space of invention and possibility, like lucid dreaming, where participants might assume their avatar identities, engage in post-human, cyborgian manifestations, or perhaps reinvent the world in the image of their own making.”

Posted by Bryan Leow on Wednesday, 31 January 2018

In our telematic performance, Samantha and I reached out to each other using our Cup Noodle Telephone. Our telephones are not connected physically, which will be necessary for it to work physically. In this third space, we are not just able to talk to each other in spite of our disconnection from the physical space, but also play our roles to ensure maximum realism in this alternate world, despite being stripped away from realism. In this case, we try to talk into the cup, and listen out from the cup even though we could just talk to each other directly. Our engrossment with this performance detached us from the physical space, and therefore created a sense of intimacy and connection between us. The very act of participating in the third space creates the third space.

Role playing to fit our own reality

 

 

 

We can see our performance as a reflection of Telematic Dreaming by Paul Sermon (1993), where the act of pretending to interact with one another as though the other person is physically there creates an alternate and intimate world that exists only between the two person.

Maria Chatzichristodoulou made a comment about Telematic Dreaming, “The ability to exist outside of the users own space and time is created by an alarmingly real sense of touch that is enhanced by the context of the bed and caused by an acute shift of senses in the telematic space.”

Interrupted space

The intimacy-enhancing bed is an example that physical reality will still affect us and the third space. Unlike what happened in Telematic Dreaming where the physical world enhanced the telematic experience, we were interrupted by a passerby towards the end of our performance which broke our third space. Despite the detachment from reality, our physical reality still shapes our third space. Perhaps the reason for such a phenomenon is due to the physical world altering the way we participate, and therefore altering the third space.