Author: Vitoria Ikeda

In order to improve and work off of my last project I decided to program my lights to play twinkle twinkle little star (as LED interpretations). I got the idea from a show called ‘Switched at Birth’ where many deaf characters are protagonists. It is shown how deaf people typically experience interpretations of sound: through flashes of light. Therefore, I created something in the hopes to tailor to deaf babies. I used green and yellow LED’s as they are more calming and soothing for sleep.

I wrote down letter notes for how twinkle twinkle would be played on a piano, then translated each note to a PIN number. 

Originally I was going to play Brahm’s lullaby but decided against it as the RedBoard didn’t seem to be able to support all of the lights needed to create the system. 

So the idea was to create a seat pad for parents to sit on and when they got up to leave their child’s bedroom the light sequence would play. The video below shows it working: listen to it on mute!

I would like to start by saying that I intensely disliked this piece. I acknowledge that this chapter was part of a 270+ page book, needless to say it was lengthy. But what I disliked about it was not the length, rather the buildup to a condensed conclusion. I personally did not like history class growing up nor do I like this type of ‘academic’ writing. I’d rather read about greenies than how numbers evolved. Reading this piece felt like a 35 page drumroll with a 7 page ‘badumtiss’. Though the theme of universality is important, I wonder whether it was important to tease the reader with the  idea of this person or that one ‘almost’ making ‘the jump’.

Perhaps I am being too judgmental due to personal factors like frustration or lack of patience. But I feel as though I could have read the last two pages and the summary at the end and had a discussion that was more fruitful than the other 40 pages.

Though the author states that he believes in the fluidity of the importance of definitions, his entire piece is talking about his own definition of interactivity. Therefore, my first impression is that the argument was going to be ‘wishy-washy’, not really adhering to his supposed definition of interactivity and thus making the whole argument weak. I was pleasantly surprised to not be extremely affected by his detachment from the term ‘definition’. What Chris Crawford describes seems to be more a classification and identification system rather than a concrete definition which in turn makes it more useful and in my opinion more easily understood. Especially when he concludes that this system was open to change as time progresses.

The piece itself was enjoyable as it seemed to be half scholarly argument and half extremely relatable to everyday situations. Most of his analogies made me chuckle and say “haha, yeah, true true”. Though I do not agree with the one about how the musicians do not interact with the dancing audience, what about when musician is asked for an encore or when they are able to change a set list in accordance to how the audience is reacting to the songs? Nevertheless, this relation to the everyday made his system easily understandable.

In the rather lengthy piece by Ken Amdahl, the concepts of electronics are explained in an interesting and engaging manner. As a novice, I know close to nothing about charges, voltage and resistance. Also, as a more arts driven person the jargon that is presented in textbooks often bore me. Therefore, Amdahl’s work has great value. As the ‘About This Book’ section of the text states, “their minds were alert and engaged by all the fun… therefore receptive to learning anything”. Although long and often ‘dragged’ on, the piece is able to engage its audience and encourages the understanding of concepts rather than memorization. By being able to understand the concepts I believe that one would be able to more effectively work with electronics, no matter the theory one uses to explain it. Thus, the piece is evidently extremely valuable, as well as fun to read.

Upon receiving the instructions to make this project I knew that I wanted to make a game. My general idea was to make a game which would signal when a ball hit the assigned space. The assigned surface would be a kind of sandwich containing 2-3 layers. The first layer (bottom) would be cardboard to contrast from the rest of the ‘game board’, the second aluminum for conductivity and the third a flexible conductive fabric that a ball would hit. The circuit for the LED would be complete when the aluminium and upper layer connect. I began by making a few sketches: There were a couple of designs that I thought of. One of the ideas consisted of circles but I decided against it because it would logistically be a hassle. Using a square or rectangle would work just as well and without the trouble.

The box itself is cardboard as it is inexpensive and easy to use. I began to make the box by designing it using Adobe Illustrator. After making the design, I used the laser cutter to make the box parts.

Next I spray painted all the parts to make it more aesthetically pleasing. Silver was the only paint available to me.

After doing this, I tested some fabrics for the upper layer of the sandwich. Upon testing some, I decided on chicken wire as it was both flexible and the most conductive. After choosing chicken wire, I also lined the bottom of the assigned space square with aluminium. After making sure the LED turns on, I cut and taped some wire to both the aluminum and chicken wire. I put all of the parts together using hot glue.

It is aesthetically displeasing but I could not use electrical tape as it would not hold the chicken wire.

Upon finishing the construction, I wired all of the parts together. This is a picture of the final product: