skip to main content
10.1145/3205873.3205893acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesperdisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Welcoming the Orange Collars: Robotic Performance in Everyday City Life

Published:06 June 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper we investigate kinetic displays in the form of robotic installations in the city of Hull, UK. The kinetic installations -- comprising a set of orange robotic arms, light sources, mirrors and soundscapes -- performed spatial and temporal rhythms in four different urban settings across Hull's Old Town. We investigate the installations as an attempt to clarify a) the visual and auditory impact of the robots on the surrounding environments; b) the social impact of the performances on each setting; and c) the temporal impact of the performances on the social behaviours and experiences around the robots. The results of the study suggest that, in the context of outdoor urban settings, people tend to perceive robots as kinetic sculptures more than as urban installations. We contribute to the discussion around pervasive displays by considering kinetic robotic installations as an emergent type of urban displays, with potentially lasting effects on the experience of city environments. We address and chart constraints and challenges for urban environment of the future.

References

  1. Moritz Behrens and Ava Fatah gen. Schieck. 2016. Design space for media architectural interfaces. In What Urban Media Art Can Do: Why, When, Where & How, Susa Pop et al. (eds.). Avedition, Stuttgart, 402--413.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Jason Bruges Studio. 2017. Where do we go from here? Retrieved January 7, 2018 from http://www.jasonbruges.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jason Bruges Studio. 2008. 55 Baker Street. Retrieved January 7, 2018 from http://www.jasonbruges.com/art/#/55-baker-street/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jason Bruges Studio. 2015. The Shard. Retrieved January 7, 2018 from http://www.jasonbruges.com/art/#/the-shard/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Peter Dalsgaard and Kim Halskov. 2010. Designing urban media façades: cases and challenges. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'10), 2277--2286. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Kerstin Dautenhahn. 2007. Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human--robot interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 362(1480), 679--704.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Dezeen. 2017. Jason Bruges Studio installs "cast" of 20 robots across Hull for UK City of Culture celebrations. Retrieved April 13, 2018 from https://www.dezeen.com/2017/12/01/jasonbruges-studio-robot-installation-where-do-we-go-from-here-hull-city-culture-design-uk/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Ava Fatah gen. Schieck, Carolina Briones and Chiron Mottram. 2008. The urban screen as a socialising platform: exploring the role of place within the urban space. In MEDIACITY: Situations, Practices and Encounters, Frank Eckardt et al. (eds.). Frank & Timme GmbH, Berlin, 285--307.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Patrick T. Fischer and Eva Hornecker. 2012. Urban HCI: Spatial Aspects in the Design of Shared Encounters for Media Facades. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'12), 307--316. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Marcus Foth,Martin Tomitsch, Laura Forlano, Hank Haeusler and Christine. Satchell. 2016. Citizens breaking out of filter bubbles: urban screens as civic media. In Proceedings of the ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis'16). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Karmen Franinovic and Stefania Serafin (eds.). 2013. Sonic Interaction Design. MIT Press, Cambridge (UK). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hull2017. 2018. Audience Reaction: Where Do We Go From Here? Video (5 January 2018). Retrieved January 8, 2018 from http://bit.ly/2EITJ5bGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. ISEA. 1990. Retrieved April 10, 2018 from http://www.isea-web.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Henrik Korsgaard and Martin Brynskov. 2014. City bug report: urban prototyping as participatory process and practice. In Proceedings of the Media Architecture Biennale (MAB'14). ACM Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Mass Crane Dance. 2015. Retrieved April 13, 2018 from http://www.masscranedance.org/#homeGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Ivana Petrusevski and Ava Fatah gen. Schieck. 2017. The rods: enhancing interaction within urban setting using light and sound stimuli. In The Virtual and the Real in Planning and Urban Design, Claudia Yamu et al. (eds.). Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Yvonne Rogers. 2011. Interaction design gone wild: striving for wild theory. Interactions, 18(4), 58--62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Andrew Vande Moere and Niels Wouters. 2012. The Role of Context in Media Architecture. In Proceedings of the ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis'12). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Welcoming the Orange Collars: Robotic Performance in Everyday City Life

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      PerDis '18: Proceedings of the 7th ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays
      June 2018
      197 pages

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 6 June 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      PerDis '18 Paper Acceptance Rate22of36submissions,61%Overall Acceptance Rate213of384submissions,55%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader