Image Swirl is an interesting variant of a graph layout information visualisation from Google Labs. So far I like using it to explore clusters of related images, though I wonder whether the clustering reduces the range of images I see. Do I get exposed to more images that are strongly related to each other and see less images that are unrelated to each other (but may still be strongly relevant to the search term)?

If you like Image Swirl you’ll enjoy playing with Wonder Wheel, also from Google Labs. Wonder Wheel displays a graph layout of text search results. Enjoy.

The Future of Reading Conference could be interesting – especially for the views of authors such as Margaret Atwood. How much do they think the medium matters? Why? Marshall McLuhan has more than a few thoughts in that direction. The conference is in Rochester Institute of Technology and is starting tomorrow.

Very neat – home fabricating “real devices” with Lego. See a video demo of a printer made out of Lego. Yup made from Lego – I especially like how the little Lego people help out! The future of making & user designing is creeping up on us.

Bosch have enhanced the night vision system system in cars, so that it provides smartly enhanced high contrast images of the road ahead at night. Clever but would you trust it to properly identify which parts of the road are critical for highlighting?

For the last few years I’ve been using and really liked Sony’s eBook Reader, the PRS500. Yup, I was an early adopter and altogether unsure whether I wanted to give up paper books! Recently there’s been an explosion of electronic readers, lead by Amazon’s Kindle. Within the next few years we’re going to see bendable, foldable and colourful electronic paper. For those of you who are design minded and interested in using E-Paper to invent new kinds of interactive visual displays and devices, here’s a handy guide for learning more about E-Paper technology.

Fascinating The Secret History of Silicon Valley – just over an hour long but well worth watching.

How can we help people easily create and explore the design space around physical / virtual objects? I’ve touched upon this before when I wrote about physical objects that are designed to be easy to re-shape by physical manipulation, e.g. Snap Cups and Shape A Seat, aka Don’t Forget Me, etc.

With that question in mind have a look at this video showing off Magic Paper. Ain’t it cool! The researchers behind Magic Paper created a tool that tries to simplify the process of creating an interactive physical “thing”. With Magic Paper you create a virtual mechanical system by simply sketching it. You don’t have to spend ages creating 3d CAD drawings of a car, you don’t have to program complex models of gravity and other forces, etc. You could imagine an extended version of Magic Paper where when you’re happy with how your sketch behaves it is automatically built as a real-world object.

What excites me about Magic Paper is that anyone can (reasonably) easily create a very complicated physical mechanical system. You can create it by drawing, which we can all do – some better than others. You don’t have to worry about complex programming or physical modeling because Magic Paper has a lot of in-built smarts. The complexity of building a physical object / system is hidden, with the trade off that there are limits to what you can create.

Magic Paper is freely available for download, enjoy.

James Landay’s DENIM is a great example of another sketching tool. Over the years Dr. Landay has contributed a lot to sketch research, for example early in his research career Brad Myers and himself published Interactive Sketching for the Early Stages of User Interface Design. With DENIM (download) you sketch out websites. Your sketches are interactive – for example you can draw links between web pages, sketch a website button that really works, etc. Try out this example of a DENIM created website. The website sketch is crude but its a good way of creating a sense of what the website would be like to navigate.

Magic Paper and DENIM are powerful examples of enabling people to build by building on what they can already do, i.e. draw. Sketching to create prototype designs potentially enables a tight feedback loop, i.e. draw, test, tweak, understand, repeat. Sketching also ties into an attempt to make designing, interacting and building “natural”. I’ll come back to natural / reality-based / haptic interaction in the next few weeks.

One potential issue with sketching interactive “things” is the fidelity of the sketch. How realistic is the interactive sketch? If its a low-fidelity sketch then the sketch (no matter how interactive) won’t be very like the end product, though it should still help you think about the end artifact in the early stages of designing and creating. There are also medium and high-fidelity prototyping approaches, where high-fidelity prototyping often involves building versions that are much closer to the finished design.

How does this tie into Snap Cups & How To Make (almost) Anything? With sketching we potentially have a way of enabling people to shape interactive objects to their needs without requiring considerable technical know how. For example sketch out how your clothes transform shape over time, how your door opens, what trails the “Follow Me” robot ant overlords take, etc.

Three final examples: Teddy and Smooth Teddy are brilliant examples of research into tools and approaches for simply drawing and creating 3d models. Line Rider is a dangerously addictive game that involves fun sketching to control a little you in a virtual physical world.

In the above photo you can see an example where a streak of lightening can be seen on a model’s t-shirt when the t-shirt is viewed via a mobile phone camera. The lightening is printed on her t-shirt but the “colours” (wavelengths of light) used for printing aren’t perceivable by the human eye but are picked up by digital cameras. There’s more details about the technology here.

There’s a number of usage suggestions for the techology on the kameraflage website. You could imagine extending their idea but without digital cameras. Imagine multiple people sitting around using a shared surface computer (such as a DiamondTouch). Each person is wearing glasses with slightly different colour tints, so each person would be able to view a “personal” image on the surface that the other users won’t see. Or you’re going to the cinema and depending on which glasses you wear the film has a different age rating because different parts of the film are “cleaned up” for younger age groups. Alternatively wear these glasses during the film and get in for cheaper because you’ll see inserted advertisements on-screen?

I haven’t played with Ning (yet) but based on the video and from reading around it sounds like the commoditization of software infrastructures for social software.

The implications of Ning and cohorts are that we can expect to see lots of small social networks. Are there certain thresholds for small social networks? Will there be too much choice in a small social network? If you have a bunch of friends, say around 20 connected people, will they drown in too many options?

By giving people so many avenues of communication and interaction you could reduce the amount of shared virtual space between a group of friends. For example I often come across quiet web forums with lots and lots of different sub-forums. Each of those sub-forums commonly only has a few threads consisting of a scattering of posts made by different users, and often the posts are widely spread out in time. If you count the total number of posts on the forums there is activity but because the posts are so spread out between different sub-forums and threads the forum feels empty and devoid of participation. Will the same thing happen with small social networks? Do too many ways of contributing and interacting encourage small social networks to die?

Related to that I wonder will people become overloaded with update choice? Should they update their blogs, their photos, their videos, their profiles, leave comments on members blogs, or respond to comments on forums, etc, etc? All that content creation via so many paths sounds like time consuming work.

Mind you automatically pulling together and mashing together (via Ning, RSS, etc) people’s online contributions might help create a community and sense of focus – a village square.