A challenge we will come up against is getting everything at the right scale. How large should the world map be relative to the size of each photo? Should photos that are more important be larger? How will we get an accurate scale relation between different models (for example, the La Perouse area model and landmark models such as the Museum and Tower)?
If one tends to stay put while wearing an Autograher, the resulting 3D spatial representation of the images gets much harder to view and interpret. If we’re going to make some kind of narrative, it will either have to be continuously moving or we will have to find a way to expand the close together data
We were split up into two groups for the project so that we could focus on different approaches to the Project. I am to be more focused on the technical aspects of the project which is a relief because I’m terrible at all this critical analysis kind of stuff.
While discussing how we might come up with a narrative arc, Hannah made the important point that presenting a photo trail narrative is too simplistic. We should be thinking about the interaction viewers can have with the work and the way they can explore the concepts of memory loss whilst taking part in the experience. Maybe we can allow users to explore the landscape, coming across fragments and unclear snapshots and attempting to salvage the rest of the memory.
Some notes I took during the class (Amanda Barnier was there):