Miguel Carvalhais
Universidade do Porto, Design, Faculty Member
Digital technologies have become our privileged method of interacting with information. With their ubiquity, and focus on personalisation, optimisation and functionality, chance and accidental interactions in the Digital Medium are being... more
Digital technologies have become our privileged method of interacting with information. With their ubiquity, and focus on personalisation, optimisation and functionality, chance and accidental interactions in the Digital Medium are being replaced with filtered, predictable and known ones, limiting the scope of possible user experiences. In order to promote the design of richer experiences that go beyond the functionally-driven paradigm, we propose that digital systems be designed in order to favour serendipity. Through a literature-based analysis of serendipity, we explore the distinct meanings of value that are possible with serendipitous systems, offering examples of the current state of the art, observing the methods used to do so, and proposing a possible typology, while highlighting unexplored fields, experiences and interactions.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Procedural media allows for unprecedented modes of authorship and for the development of new aesthetic experiences. As artists and communicators, but also as readers and users of these systems, we should be aware that their aesthetic... more
Procedural media allows for unprecedented modes of authorship and for the development of new aesthetic experiences. As artists and communicators, but also as readers and users of these systems, we should be aware that their aesthetic potential is not simply defined by direct interaction. Although direct interaction is one of the most perceivable components in the relationship between ergodic media or artefacts and their readers, one should not forget that the reader’s interpretation and capacity to apprehend and simulate the processes developed within these artefacts is continuous, ever present and significant. In this context, this paper argues that not only ergodicity does not necessarily imply direct interaction, but also that non-interactive procedural artefacts are able to allow the development of ergodic experiences, not through direct interactions but rather through simulated interactions, by understanding procedural activities and developing mental analogues of those processes. We aim at raising this awareness, setting up the grounds for designing for what we call virtuosic interpretation, an activity that can be described as the ergodic experience developed by means of mental simulations.
Research Interests:
This paper proposes an analytical model for computational aesthetic artifacts based on Espen Aarseth's work. It reflects procedural affinities that may not be found when focusing on surface structures and aesthetic... more
This paper proposes an analytical model for computational aesthetic artifacts based on Espen Aarseth's work. It reflects procedural affinities that may not be found when focusing on surface structures and aesthetic analyses developed from them. The model attests to the importance of computational characteristics and of procedurality, both as conceptual groundings and as aesthetic focuses, as aesthetics pleasures in themselves.
Research Interests:
Digital technologies are capable of simulating traditional media and to give rise to new media forms that often closely resemble the experience of somatic technologies. Their interactive capabilities are partially responsible for this,... more
Digital technologies are capable of simulating traditional media and to give rise to new media forms that often closely resemble the experience of somatic technologies. Their interactive capabilities are partially responsible for this, but procedural authorship and poïesis are supported by process intensity and generative potential.
Designers, the systems and their human operators have very different and maybe irreconcilable points of view, which profoundly affect their experiences during the dialogical construction of the works and of their effusions. From its particular point of view during the traversal, the operator develops a hermeneutic experience during which models and simulations of the system are built. The operator’s actions within the system greatly contribute to this development, but it is their capacity to create theories of the system that is paramount to the success of this effort.
The analysis and critique of these digital artifacts, indeed the procedural pleasures attainable through these systems, are indissociable from their procedural understanding. Although traditional aesthetic studies of surface structures or outputs are still possible, once we regard behaviors and computational processes as an integral part of the system’s content, it becomes essential to understand how the operator relates to these beyond a strictly mechanical relation.
This paper discusses how models and simulations allow the operator to anticipate the behaviors, reactions and configurations of the systems. How they are continuously revised, confirmed or falsified throughout the traversal, and how this process results in a dialectical tension that is the basis for the development of narratives and of dramatic experiences with these, otherwise highly abstract, systems.
Designers, the systems and their human operators have very different and maybe irreconcilable points of view, which profoundly affect their experiences during the dialogical construction of the works and of their effusions. From its particular point of view during the traversal, the operator develops a hermeneutic experience during which models and simulations of the system are built. The operator’s actions within the system greatly contribute to this development, but it is their capacity to create theories of the system that is paramount to the success of this effort.
The analysis and critique of these digital artifacts, indeed the procedural pleasures attainable through these systems, are indissociable from their procedural understanding. Although traditional aesthetic studies of surface structures or outputs are still possible, once we regard behaviors and computational processes as an integral part of the system’s content, it becomes essential to understand how the operator relates to these beyond a strictly mechanical relation.
This paper discusses how models and simulations allow the operator to anticipate the behaviors, reactions and configurations of the systems. How they are continuously revised, confirmed or falsified throughout the traversal, and how this process results in a dialectical tension that is the basis for the development of narratives and of dramatic experiences with these, otherwise highly abstract, systems.
