A
2000-2500 word research report detailing your chosen mobile concepts, the research
you have done and your critical analysis of recent and current attempts to meet
need or demand in this area. Include a summary of the requirements that you
have identified, plus a description of your proposed system to meet them,
methods of implementation and reasons for your choice of media and technology.
‘If
one accepts the proposition that the meanings of utterances, actions and events
are affected by their ‘local position’, by the situation of which they are a
part, then a work of art, too, will be defined in relation to its place and
position.’ (Nick Kaye, site-specific art: Performance, Place and Documentation)
(Kaye, 2000, p.1)
By
this Nick Kaye means that the meanings of the actions and words amongst other
mediums in a space is defined by its position: its place.
What will this report talk about?
This
research report will be split into two sections, the first half will talk about
my findings from primary research and secondary readings on the topic of how do
people like to give a space meaning and why? The second part will talk about other
applications and how my app idea will fulfil human’s innate desires to embody
space and imbue meaning.
Why do humans have
a need to embody space?
Our primitive territorial emotions make us eager to inhabit
an area. We have an innate desire to embody a space and we do this just as we
have always done: through marking it. In the caveman times this might be by
drawing in chalk on the wall of a cave or creating a fire, for dogs it is
urinating on a tree. We have yet to shake off this animalistic craving to mark
a space. How we go about it in today’s society however is through posting
pictures of us in that place and perhaps even geo-tagging the pictures with a
specific location.
How is space made
into place?
By interacting with physical space using our mobile
interfaces we are creating areas that De Souza calls ‘Hybrid Spaces’: spaces
that can be changed and defined from an electronic platform. Marking a space is
not only fulfilling our want to embody a space it is imbuing it with meaning. A
space ‘exists as we interact with it’ (De Souza. 2006. P.264) and this is what
gives a space its character.
‘Space needs to be considered as something that can be
produced through use’ (Farman. 2012. P18).
By marking a space with a statue or a plaque we are giving
it meaning. It is also important to remember that the geographical location of
this space: its place, can emphasise or alter this intended meaning that the
mark has attempted to produce. Edward Welph defines that place ‘is not just the
‘where’ of something; it is the location plus everything that occupies that
location seen as an integrated and meaningful phenomenon’ (Goggin. 2016. P5).
My app is called PlaceMaker, its concept taps into our
personal desires to embody a space through enabling a user to put their marking
on it.
How does
PlaceMaker work?
‘PlaceMaker’ markings are on a digital layer, so to access
them you need to be connected to the network through the app on your mobile
device. These markings could be a poem, a photo, a video, a voice note or even
an augmented statue. It is much like using Facebook or Blogging, but there is
one big difference: you can only access the marking if you are in that space. To
view the markings that people have put in that space you need to physically
travel to that location in the real world. To put down your own markings in
that space you also need to be inside that place. This would all work through
the use of your phones GPS. A user would put down a ‘space’, this being a
digital fence around the area. Once other user’s mobiles track that they are
inside this area they would be able to put down ‘Marks’ or view other peoples
‘Marks’ that they have placed in the area.
How does
PlaceMaker tap into ‘Implacement’ and meet need or demand in this area?
In Farman’s book ‘The mobile interface of everyday life’ he
talks about the transformation of space into place, this transformation is what
Edward Casey calls ‘implacement’ (Farman. 2012. P.40). This ‘implacement’
occurs after we imbue a space with meaning and this is what ‘PlaceMaker’ allows
the user to do. The etymology of my name for the app is from the apps digital
enactment of this ‘implacement’. A user puts down an area enclosed by a digital
fence displayed and named with ‘Space’ on a map on his screen. Once he has put
a ‘Mark’ down the ‘Space’ will change colour and become ‘Place’ giving the user
a sense of embodied ‘implacement’.
‘Embodied implacement gives us the sense of direction in a
particular place — direction not only in movement, but also in purpose.’
(Farman. 2012. P.40)
Castell coins two terms; the ‘space of places’ and the
‘space of flows’ the former is space rooted in historical meaning and the
latter is the space that contains the flow of information, capital, symbols and
sounds. He expresses his concerns with modern day society in how ‘Localities
become disembodied from their cultural, historical, geographic meaning, and
reintegrated into functional networks… inducing a space of flows that
substitutes for the space of places.’ (Goggin. 2016. P.8) ‘PlaceMaker’ would
construct a ‘hybrid space’ (De Souza. 2006. P.264) as De Souza would put it
that is both a ‘space of place’ and ‘space of flows’.
How does
PlaceMaker tap ideas on memories and identity and meet need or demand in this
area?
‘PlaceMaker’ has a heavy stress on it having a social
networking site element to it. If a user were to put a ‘Mark’ down that was
personal, perhaps a photo of their grandfather as the local butcher outside the
building where he worked, then they would be practicing their personal proprioception
with that place. Another ‘Placemaker’ could come along into that ‘Place’, view
the photo and the original ‘PlaceMaker’ profile and communicate with them
through private chat about their Grandmothers former relationship with that
butchers. Memories would be a large part of ‘Placemaker’, whether the ‘Marks’
put down at the site are poems or paintings expressing a ‘PlaceMaker’ nostalgia
with the space, or whether they put down photographs that act as physical
snapshots of a moment frozen in time. The key to making my app as successful as
possible would be in deciphering what would be the most common use for it.
Is PlaceMaker to be used for either: marketing;
games and other creations; personal additions; or historical information, or all
of these?
In my survey 48% of people chose “a secluded place personal to them” in answer to question 1, which asked where they would put an area. When informed of its function and asked what they would upload in question 2 49% answered “something creative such as a drawing relating to the area”. When asked in question 3 if they would change their answer to question 1 now that they know its function 60% said that they would keep their answer the same.
From
this I can gather that the app’s main use would be of personal and creative
benefit. However it is clear that each type of ‘Mark’ whether it be a
personally historical addition a nationally historical addition, a marketing
scheme or even a game, has its place depending on the location as the results
are not overly one sided.
PlaceMarker v our apps
Generically
historical ‘Marks’ such as photos would play into our national collective
memories. Photos that ‘PlaceMaker’ obtain from archives could be used alongside
the capabilities to link ‘Places’ together to create tours. In these tours when
a users mobile device passes into a new ‘Place’ a new audio clip or photo would
be triggered allowing ‘PlaceMaker’ to create their own audio tours discussing
the in depth history of a city.
This
would be much like the service ‘StreetMuseum’, in this application a phone can
be pointed at a building and a photo of that building in the past would come
up. This necessity to physically travel to the geographical location of that building
or statue makes learning history an active pursuit and situates the learner
within the actual area rather than just allowing them to sit at home at their
laptop. The ‘StreetMuseum’ app practices the same implacement that I was
discussing earlier, however, with ‘PlaceMaker’, the user creates the content
rather than the app creators, so the content can be more tailored to a specific
community of users if need me.
Where
my app differs the most from ‘StreetMuseum’ is within the way over time the
users would become the administrators, ‘Places’ and ‘Marks’ would be rated by a
database of users. It would also allow for more tailored historical tours such
as guides that take users around the location of 1970’s rock stars’ houses.
The
administrator element of the app would work like this: if a user wanted to put
down a ‘Mark’ in another users ‘Place’ then they would have to ask for the
original ‘PlaceMaker’ permission and that ‘PlaceMaker’ would have the power to
deny the users ‘Mark’ requests. However at the beginning of the apps career,
the users possession of that ‘place’ would only last for a certain amount of
time before it becomes a ‘space’ again, for anyone to make it theirs. This
could change later on when the app grows into a potentially more marketing
based app.
Facebook
has grown into a platform for people and companies to advertise and sell as
well as keeping its initial function as a solely social networking app. I think
‘PlaceMaker’ should take a leaf out of its book and first gain a cult following
of users by first focussing on the novel uses of the app such as making
personal and creative ‘Marks’. The historical and creative side of the ‘PlaceMaker’
would be the side of the app that would build a loyal community of users who
are keen to keep the app free of spam. Once the amount of users have grown, the
community has been solidified and the app has enough traction then we could go
more down the commercial route.
Creative uses
The
creative users of the app would take pride in their work, and thus they would
make sure the app was used in a relatively professional manner. In the sphere
of creative ‘Marks’ there are immense possibilities with the application. The
city-scape could be transformed into a videogame, a race or an art
installation. Locative art works such as Jeremy Woods ‘The Oxfordshire’ show
how GPS can be used to map out beautiful digital representations of a
landscape. Locative literatures are stories that you make your way through as
you travel to different locations, such as Eli Horowitz ‘The Clock Without a
Face’ and ‘The Silent History’. The latter was developed with an iOS app that
played characters segments when the reader lands at specific airports. ‘PlaceMaker’
would be the perfect platform to create works such as these and a huge database
of users could share, read and rate each others works as well as meet up in
real life within the lore of the specific literature. Races could be held as
‘Places’ could act as starting or finishing lines and checkpoints, competitors
could be made to complete mini-games as they enter each ‘Place’ to progress
through the race.
‘Places’
could be international, such as a man in England wanting to talk to his wife in
China he could set up a ‘Place’ in a nearby café and the wife could do the same
in China, when both of them are in this ‘Place’ they could bring their phone up
in front of them and on the screen would be the view from their phones camera overlaid
with their partner in the seat opposite. This concept could extend to
international business meetings and the act of travelling to that ‘Place’ would
perhaps make the meeting feel more purposeful and professional. ‘Places’ in
museum’s across the world could be linked so that if you stand in a ‘Place’ in
the Natural History Museum you could see the mirror ‘Place’ displayed like on
Facebooks ‘360 view’ or perhaps the same on a busy high street in two cities
across the world. This would be even more exciting in real-time, the places
would act as portals that you could see through.
Marketing
In the survey, 31% of people answered that an advert in
their ‘place’ would result in financial gain, and this is a high enough
percentage to pursue this avenue for ‘PlaceMaker’. Companies could own
‘places’, where automatic surveys track when user enters it through using the personal
details, adverts would then pop up as notifications on the users screen. This
is much like Apples ‘iBeacons’ and Googles ‘Eddystone’ beacons, these are
small devices that can ‘trigger
specific messages or actions as they walk by a particular micro-location in the
store’ (Bhalla. 2017). The difference is with my app not just large
corporations would be using this software; anyone could own a ‘Place’ and use
it to market their product. In ‘PlaceMaker’ these notifications could
be disabled alongside foreign access of personal information. However there
would be advantages to the user, and therefore motives to leaving these
functions and information enabled, such as discount codes to catch in the form
of Pokemon Go-like minigames in the form of augmented reality content: ‘It is
estimated that the AR market will be worth £70bn by 2020.’ (digi-capital. 2016).
Dating invitations from people could be sent to users of a
certain age range. Once the commercial side of the app starts to take off and
the value of the ‘Places’ ownership increases the ‘Places’ could be valued with
real money. Companies would have to buy these digital plots of land off the app
and unlike previously were you only own the ‘Place’ for a certain amount of time,
now when you buy the ‘Place’ you own it until you sell it on, but only back through
the app which would take a cut.
Summary
PlaceMaker meets the demands that our primordial instincts
engrain within us, needs to mark territory, embody space and imbue space with
meaning. It is also a platform where this act can be broadcast and this adds to
our personal and national ideas on identity and memories. It pushes users to
communicate in cityscapes that are becoming increasingly lonely to live in. Unlike
other services such as StreetMuseum, Ibeacon and Pokemon Go that focus solely
on different areas of gaming and creation, history and marketing, ‘PlaceMaker’
focuses on all three of these areas at once.
My aim is to create an app that fuses the act of ‘place marking’
with socialising within a community driven service that anyone can access
through their mobile. PlaceMaker moves administration and content design into
the hands of the user meaning that the app is effectively run by a group of
users who would be keen to keep the app un-tainted by anyone being inappropriate.
Mobile phones are the best platform to host ‘PlaceMaker’ on, as mobile phones
are devices that we have been socially enforced to have on us at all times. This
pressure will only increase so from a business perspective this presents app
creators with the perfect time to design locative apps.
Bibliography
Kaye. N. 2000. P1. Site-Specific Art: Performance, Place and Documentation. [Online. P.1]. [Accessed 20th December 2016] Available from https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8iW8X7FWJgoC&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1
Brunnenburg. L. 2012. Pages 113-125. Placemaking in the 21st-century city: introducing the funfair metaphor for mobile media in the future urban space [Accessed 20th December 2016] Available from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14626268.2012.709943
De Souza. A. 2006. Mobile Technologies as Interfaces of
Hybrid Spaces. [Online]. 9, p264 [Accessed 20th December 2016] Available from http://sac.sagepub.com/content/9/3/261.full.pdf+html
Farman. J. 2012. The Mobile Interface of Everyday Life.
[Online]. Pp.1-94. [Accessed 20th December 2016] Available from https://www.dawsonera.com/readonline/9780203847664/startPage/14
Goggin Gerard. 2016. Mobile Technology and Place. [online]. Pp.5-7. [Accessed 20th December 2016] Available from https://www.dawsonera.com/readonline/9780203127551/startPage/68
Bhalla. M. 2017. Everything You Should Know About Location-based Marketing Technologies [Online]. [Accessed 25th December 2016] http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/location-based-marketing-technology/
Digi-capital. 2016. Augmented/Virtual Reality revenue forecast revised to hit $120 billion by 2020 [Accessed 25th December 2016] Available from http://www.digi-capital.com/news/2016/01/augmentedvirtual-reality-revenue-forecast-revised-to-hit-120-billion-by-2020/#.WG2TQWSLQy4
Specification
Report
Introduction
Make a space a place!
PlaceMaker is a location-based mobile phone application that
allows the user, or ‘PlaceMaker’ to attach multimedia content to a specific
area or ‘space’. Each ‘Space’ is one 5 by 5 metre area within a grid that spans
the world (although the app will begin only in the UK to find its feet). To own
a ‘space’ you must first travel to an area that is not owned by anyone for you
to inhabit it. Once you’ve ‘inhabited’ a ‘space’ other users will be able to
see. Once you post your content or ‘mark’ in the ‘space’ it will be called a
‘place’.
If other users want to access these ‘marks’ or submit their
own to this area they first need to travel to that exact 5 by 5 metre
geographical location within the real world. If you ‘inhabit’ that ‘space’ then
you are the ‘administrator’. As administrator you can accept or reject other
users content.
Communicate with a
large community of ‘PlaceMaker’ your personal knowledge and memories with
photos, videos or poems. Rate other users ‘marks’ and give feedback, converse
and meet up with them. Get creative - make audio tours that take users from one
‘place’ to another, submit challenges, races and even pose questions within a
‘place’ that other users can answer.
Similar apps -
StreetMuseum
StreetMuseum is a free location-based app that works only in
London, it is available on the App Store and contains a database of photos from
the past. To view the photos and coinciding information you must travel to the
building, statue or street corner and hold you phone up to it. Once the app
recognises that you are in the correct position it will overlay the photo from
the past on top. Much like ‘PlaceMaker’ you cannot view ‘StreetMuseums’
pictures and information unless you go to that area which I think is good
because it promotes a less-reclusive learning process.
Figure 1, A screen capture from the iPhone application
Streetmuseum, 2012 Oneidig Noord- Holland
‘PlaceMaker’ differs from ‘StreetMuseum’ in the way that it
can be any multimedia not just photo’s. What I do want to take from
‘StreetMuseum’ is the function where a photo of a building from the past can be
overlaid on top of the current building. ‘PlaceMaker’ content is also created
by the users not the app creator. This way the content can be more tailored to
a specific niche of user and more specific communities of ‘PlaceMaker’ will
arise. The function of the user owning a ‘place’ is exclusive to ‘PlaceMaker’
and will allow for them to be the administrator of their own ‘place’.
Similar apps – Pokemon
Go
Users of ‘PlaceMaker’ will be able to drop ‘marks’ in the
form of pieces of augmented reality for other users to view. This is much like
how Pokemon Go works, Pokemons are dropped in areas and can be caught by users.
I would like to implement within the marketing side of the app a function where
retail companies such as say H and M can put down Pokemon Go style mini-games
in ‘Places’ that they own where the objects of augmented reality can be caught
and used as vouchers in stores.
Figure 2, a screenshot from Pokemon Go, 2016, The
Independent
Similar services –
Ibeacons
Ibeacons are Apples hardware transmitters that send out
signals to smartphones and tablets enabling them to perform certain functions.
For instance an Ibeacon could be placed in a store on a certain clothes isle
and programmed so that when a customer with a Bluetooth enabled device walks
past a certain item of clothing they could be alerted of a 20% off deal on say
a pair of shoes. Ibeacons ‘deliver
hyper-contextual content to users based on location.’(ibeacon insider. 2015) This
idea could be applied to ‘PlaceMaker’ in the form of adverts placed in ‘places’
near stores by companies that alert a user when they step inside the grid space
of certain deals, It could even be extended to the Pokemon Go style mini-games.
Figure 3, Ibeacons in a store, 2015, ibeacon insider
Design
Overview
We carry our mobile device around
with us at all times and app designers have begun picking up on how public
spaces can be interacted with on a digital layer. With developments in smart
phone technology users who were once limited to specific features in certain
spaces can now experience connectivity to network interaction at all times.
This level of interaction where uses are always engulfed in the digital realm
may on paper seem overwhelming but if it is implemented in the right way the
constant transitions between interacting with the real world and the digital
realm could be an organic process.
An app with such ambition can be
hard to design in a user friendly way. This is why in this design overview I
try to limit the number of buttons by taking design cues from other apps such
as decreased numbers of menu screens. I will start by discussing the home page
that uses this straight into the action dynamic.
Home page
I’d like to contrast my apps dynamic with other apps by
using the analogy of video games. Most video games load up a home screen menu
with a long list of options and I feel this gets in the way of the playful nature
that they are trying to achieve. ‘Grand Theft Auto’ however drops the gamer
straight into the action by eliminating any precursor to spawning into a world.
This is an element that I have taken from ‘Grand Theft Auto’ that I will use in
‘PlaceMaker’. The loading screen is emblematic with the large ‘PlaceMaker’
trademark symbol nestled into a grid system. This symbol is a sort of open box
and as the app loads symbols for video and image files are thrown into it. I
would even like to consider a loading screen where the user physically has to
flick the objects into the box.
Once the app has finished loading, the transition between
the loading screen and the home page is made seamless by the grid system
staying put and the perspective changing so that now the viewer is seeing it
from a top down perspective. This shift mirrors the view changing function of
the app that I will discuss later. A map of the user’s current area is now in
display alongside the user’s location.
Upon first opening the app the user will be asked if he
would like to be sent push notification, the answer to which he can change at
any time in the options screen. From the home page the user can explore the map
of the area he is in and spot ‘places’ that are under other users control. From
here he can select them and opt to create route so that he may travel to this
‘place’ to discover other ‘PlaceMaker’ content.
There is consistently a bar at the top of the screen with
options on to help the user navigate the app. On the home screen there are
three options on the top bar: friends, view and my profile. The user can also
synchronise with the grid space that he is in through pressing and holding down
on the screen where his marker is.
Friends
When user clicks on friends they are presented with a list
of their friends. In the top bar are the options to go back to home page, find
friends, filter or go to my profile.
The friends will be listed with the number of ‘places’ that
they own as a number on the right of their name. They will also have an active
or inactive symbol to the right of this that will indicate if their online. The
filter option will allow the user to change what friends will be at the top of
the list: closest friends, friends with the most ‘places’ or recently
connected. The find friend’s bar at the top will allow the user to type in any
username and befriend them if they want.
After the user clicks on a friends a page will come up with
their profile. Initially displayed will be all the ‘places’ that they own with
the number of marks in each of them displayed on the side. At the bottom of
this page will be friend, un-friend and message options. If the user was to
click on any of their friends places it would take them to the location of this
‘place’ on the map, from there they can set a route via public transport, car
or walking so that they may travel to this place to see the content.
View
On the home page there is the option to change to
street-view. This would enable the user to look at the world through camera on
the back of the phone and see through the screen the grids on the ground
denoting different spaces. The user would also be able to see all the augmented
reality objects in nearby spaces and access them if he wanted by walking into
them.
My profile
From the My Profile section you would be able to access and
edit your information: this being your bio, name and age. You would also be
able to see your ‘places’ and marks that you and that other users have put in
them as well as editing your own. You would also have an options section where
you could log out, from the options section you could also configure whether or
not you have aspects such as Bluetooth enabled. There would also be a message
section to the ‘My Profile’ screen you could view message and mark requests
from other users.
Syncing
The synching function that you access of the home page
allows the user to synchronise with the grid space he is in, control it if it’s
empty or see the other users ‘marks’ that they have put down. If the user was
to synchronise with an occupied 'place’ off the map view of the home page then
they would be shown a page with the users ‘marks’, profile and they would be
given the option of uploading their own ‘mark’. If the ‘space’ wasn’t occupied
then the user would be given the option to own it. Users can also synch from
the street view of the home page and the augmented objects within that grid
space would be highlighted.
Uploading
From the uploading page the user can choose between photo,
video, document, audio clip or survey. Once clicking on any of these they would
be given the option to either take or upload photo. From the survey selection
you would be given the option to make the survey automated, this being a survey
that is automatically filled in by the information on other user’s phones when
they enter that space. They also have the option with all uploads to make them
augmented visual objects to be viewed in street view. Other forms of uploads
would be added to the app at a later date such as mini-games and races.
Budget
Breakdown:
·
2000 – 3000 pounds spent on design, direction,
much of the design can be done on Photoshop
·
GPS locators – 2000 pounds
·
Social media interrogation, share capabilities -
2000 - 3000 pound
·
The app is designed only for IOS meaning limited
costs for only one platform however $99 charge from Apple per year and %30 cuts
from each sale
·
Web services – 1000 – 2000 pounds
·
SDK’s such as Applovin – 100 – 200 pound
= roughly 8000 pounds excluding Apple charges for Applestore
use
Risk assessment
Research and design
|
Survey shows that the
area of family history would not be as popular as the other uses
|
medium
|
low
|
Incorporate companies
such as the national history museum and give them free use
|
Demands will change
as cityscapes become too crowded
|
low
|
medium
|
Promote app use out
in rural areas
|
|
Keeping the audience
interested
|
low
|
high
|
Constant feature
updates as well as seasonal Easter eggs – much like snapchats seasonal
filters
|
|
Miss- communication
with the design team
|
low
|
high
|
Work with the
designer don’t just send him designs, gather a team to cover different areas.
e.g. team 1 - augmented reality, team 2 - map design
|
Design stage
|
If the designs are
implemented in the wrong way then the app could look shabby, cheap and may
not run smoothly
|
low
|
Very high
|
Run a strict team,
appoint team leaders who have aurous of authority so no-one slacks, work
closely with these people
|
The main purpose of
the app may not be clear with so many uses
|
low
|
High
|
Design tutorials for
each part of content upload, advertise interesting examples to tantalise the
user
|
|
Not enough users
|
High
|
High
|
With an app of such
magnitude and one that is meant to be effectively run by the user it is
crucial to gain a large audience, focus on the social networking and game
side of the app to get users hooked, advertise heavily
|
|
Deadlines may not be
met
|
high
|
low
|
Split the project
production into sections allowing different teams to simultaneously work on
different parts to achieve maximum time efficiency
|
|
Development stage
|
The amount of
features might be over ambitious meaning that they may have to be left out the
final app
|
High
|
medium
|
Conduct regular
surveys and focus groups to establish the main functions used by the user
allowing the design team to make educated decision on what to leave out
|
Some of the
technology may not be available or may be too costly
|
High
|
High
|
The precision of
some GPS systems may be ideal but too expensive meaning that the app may have
to settle for larger grid spaces that first anticipated
|
|
The user run aspect
of the app may fall through if the use doesn’t know how to do so
|
Medium
|
Medium
|
More tutorials for
beginner users. If this fails adopt a company run approach or perhaps run the
app 50% user 50% company
|
Post production
|
Bugs, slow running due to the sheer amount of information
|
medium
|
medium
|
Data compression algorithms and frequent check ups
|
Spam users and people being silly
|
High
|
Low
|
Maintain a database of loyal users who will report bad
users and prevent them from submitting content
|
|
Explicit material
|
High
|
Low
|
Have a report feature below the comment section of content
that allows a concerned user to contact us directly if they would like to see
something removed, also add algorithms that prevent certain material from
being posted
|
