Ladies and gentlemen, I present for your consideration an example of our signature rapid prototyping process. The handyman’s secret weapon gets a lot of use around here, and I even had a roll of Gorilla Tape on my wrist in case of emergencies.  Fortunately, it didn’t come to that.

The angles necessary for good face detection and recognition (up to about 15 degrees from straight-on) require careful consideration of camera placement.  The necessary process of checking angles and lighting isn’t always pretty, but I, for one, find the above image beautiful.

Friday we continued our perfect technology quest, this time focusing on audio. While we actually want the cameras to capture the video in an overlapping manner, so that we can track visitors from one spot to another and be able to see their faces no matter what angle they face, it turns out that the audio is a different matter. Due to the acoustics in the Center, if we’re not careful, a mic at the front desk will pick up voices 25 feet away at the wave tank, not only muddling the audio we want to hear from the front desk, but also perhaps turning on extra cameras and recording unrelated video.

In order to localize the audio to particular people and in order to understand speech clearly, we’ll use so-called near field recording (up-close to the speaker rather than capturing a whole room). We’ll also need to input multiple mics into certain cameras in order to have audio coverage with minimal wiring in the way of exhibits. Beyond that, though, was the question of what kind of pickup pattern we need – whether the mic records audio straight in front of it, in front and behind, or all around, for example.

With help from audio technicians from the main campus who were out to work the retirement of one NOAA research vessel and the welcoming of another, we discussed the ins-and-outs of particular shapes of recording areas. Probably our best bet in most cases will be a carotid, or heart-shaped, mic, which gets mostly what’s in front of the mic, but not in a straight line, and some of what’s behind the mic. The exact sizes of the patterns can often be tuned, which in our case again will be crucial as we begin to determine how visitors use particular exhibits, where they stand when they talk to one another, and especially how they might move up and down as they interact with people of different ages and heights.

As usual, one of our biggest challenges is trying to retrofit this recording equipment into an already built space, and a space built with weird angles, less-than-optimal acoustics, somewhat unpredictable speaker locations, and often loud but inconsistent ambient noise such as the 65-decibel running water in the touch pools. But hey, that’s why we’re trying it, to see if it’s even possible and beyond possible, helpful to our research.

With Mark’s guidance over the phone, I spent a few hours today testing camera placement with a small Axis camera and its built-in microphone. One of my favorite security features of this camera is its built-in speaker, which can be used to make the camera shout “intruder,” whisper “pssst,” or bark like a dog.  None of these have any conceivable utility whatsoever for what we’re doing, but it’s always nice to know we have options.

So, I put it in the entryway.  I put it over and next to the octopus tank.  I put it over the front desk. I put it by the touch pool, which triggered a barrage of eyeball-seeking dust particles that had been guarding the overhead ethernet ports for untold eons.

Each vantage point tested presented a decent view and adequate lighting.  The model I used will not be installed in all positions, but it provides a great baseline.  We also received a new Axis dome camera with a microphone, which we can use up-close at individual exhibits.

To record a few audio tests, I directed the system output of one of our Macbooks into Audacity using Soundflower. Having recently spent several late nights playing with open-source audio software, I improvised this solution a bit more easily than I had anticipated. I never expected that my private dubstep habit would prove to be a reservoir of generalizable workplace skills, but it goes to show that free-choice learning happens all the time.

Alan Alda and the Center for Communicating Science have a challenge for scientists: explain a flame to an 11-year-old.  Brilliant.  You can read more about this (and submit your entry) here.

“As a curious 11-year-old, Alan Alda asked his teacher, “What is a flame?” She replied: “It’s oxidation.” Alda went on to win fame as an actor and writer, became an advocate for clear communication of science, and helped found the Center for Communicating Science at Stony Brook University. He never stopped being curious, and he never forgot how disappointing that non-answer answer was.”

Alda’s guest editorial for Science, wherein he issued his challenge, is also well worth reading.  This can also be found at the Flame Challenge site.

Do it for yourself.  Do it for the kids.  Do it for Hawkeye.

 

We are half way through the severe storms scientists’ residency at the Exploratorium and all is going well. We are testing many new ideas during this residency, some of them changes based on the evaluation from the last year. The scientists and explainers are working together at exhibits in the main thoroughfare of the museum. In the space is the storm chasing vehicle, a van de Graaff generator, the tornado exhibit, and the outdoor cart (a bike designed for explainers to ride around the Palace of Fine Arts, stop anywhere, and do an activity). Visitors of all ages are engaged within the space with some of them staying for an extended time (upwards of 20-30 minutes).

One thing the explainers are working on for this project is a floor walk. A floor walk allows explainers to lead visitors around the floor and give them a more in-depth experience with exhibits around a central topic. At the end of last week, the two lead explainers (those working with the severe storms scientists) practiced their floor walk with their fellow explainers, the scientists, and me. One exhibit that we explored more deeply was the tornado. We used tinsel to see how the air is flowing and therefore forming a tornado. We also explored how bubbles would act within the exhibit (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hmscvisitorcenter/6989941183/). I learned that the Exploratorium has a room devoted to bubbles. Yes, a closet that is filled with everything bubble related. Hmmm….

Mark and I did some scale-model wave tank testing this afternoon.  An initial test presented some hurdles (waves splashing over the far end of the tank, waves rebounding and creating mid-tank chaos, etc.).  Mark introduced a novel scale-model component (a scouring pad at the end of the tank) to disperse the wave energy and prevent the waves from bouncing back.

With this humble addition, the model tank performed admirably, providing practical reassurance that the proposed measurements for the final design will demonstrate the relevant concepts without soaking the floors.  Any handle, button, lever, knob or switch in an exhibit space must be built to accommodate a range of perceivable affordances.  If pulling the lever triggers an interesting result, pulling it ever harder and faster might produce even more interesting results.

This can sometimes put wear and tear on exhibit components, but it’s part of what makes hands-on exhibits fun for learners (and learning researchers, too).