Archive for the ‘Research Questions (digital publishing)’ Category

23-04-2014 -  Jim Jansen
My and Jeroen’s research focusses on applications. We started with the following research questions:
# FIVE QUESTIONS & METHODS

## 1
_question_
1. How have applications created for print design changed to include digital functionality?
_method_
1. Look at earlier versions of the program, updates and new functionalities and patch updates.
_visual outcome_
1. Timeline.
## 2
_question_
2. When looking at applications updated in a similar timeframe, taking into account customer and industry demand, how do the changes made to the applications compare to each other and why?
_method_
2. Comparing the different applications and their updates through patch notes and analysing their user interface.
_visual outcome_
2. Infographic (graphs etc.).
## 3
_question_
3. Are there applications which changed drastically when their focus shifted from print to digital and in what way did they change?
_method_
3. Find 2 programs which changed in noticeably different ways. Compare patch notes and analyse user interface.
_visual outcome_
3. Infographic (graphs etc.).
## 4
_question_
4. Are there any applications created purely for digital publishing and how are they different from those created for print?
_method_
4. Research the essence of these programs and compare several of these programs to each other by testing them in hands-on capacity. Specifically by trying to come to the same outcome with several applications.
_visual outcome_
4. The outcomes of the hands-on testing.
## 5
_question_
5. How did the interfaces from applications change overtime and how did this affect the skeuomorphic qualities of the interface?
_method_
5. Go in depth on one or two applications. Take/gather screenshots from the different versions and compare them in a timeline.
_visual outcome_
5. Timeline with images/text.
In the end, we went with answering questions 1 and 5, as they’re closely related to each other and we felt they’re the most relevant questions. We were struggling a bit with what kind of visual outcome our research would have. We considered a timeline, but thought this wouldn’t yet make our idea clear enough. Or at least, maybe it would be clear enough, but not too original or inventive for research.
-
We also tried some other experiments, like a gif animation showcasing the skeuomorphic qualities in Photoshop. But we felt it moved to fast to show it all nicely, and doesn’t really allow any room for observation.
-
After all that, we were still having trouble wrapping our heads around what we were actually going to produce. We tried a physical research to see where that got us. It focussed on the splash screens of different programs throughout the years. This was a complete mess to look up and finding all images would’ve taken ages, if we hadn’t found a very nice Graphical User Interface Database, which featured extensive documentation of several important programs. Most prominently, Photoshop.
-

-

Near the very end, the idea came up to create an actual application out of it, showcasing changes in the application. We went for Photoshop only, since it’s a program that accommodates both digital and print, and has gradually evolved to become more suited for digital design. Or at least, that’s our idea. We came to create an interactive pdf, showcasing changes in the program, skeuomorphic qualities and notes.


02-04-2014 -  Niermala B. Timmers

Main Topic: Covers

A book’s cover is the first thing a potential reader sees and it can make a lasting impression. But how do we approach this in the e-publishing landscape? When covers are not as important anymore. Can we reinvent the digital book cover?

Research:
- In what way do covers of digital publications differ from printed publication?

- What is the influence of digital publications on the use and function of the cover of a book?

- What could the future of the cover be?

- What is the new use of digital covers?


02-04-2014 -  Rianne Kosterman

Main research question:
- What are the physical consequences of using digital media?

Subquestions:
- Are these consequences temporary or permanent?
- Are these consequences only physical or can they also change/affect our mental and/or emotional state?


01-04-2014 -  Yentl Kivits

First main topic:
Future view from the next generation(s) 2000-2010.

My own research questions within this topic are based on the digital education programs, with the focus on applications.

- What kind of children education applications are there on the market that are specially designed for use in school?
- Are there any differences between the design of educational applications for junior primary school and upper primary school?
- Which devices do you have at schools that show these educative applications?
- Are there also education applications for children with special needs?
- How are digital tests designed for the web? For example the CITO test.


29-03-2014 -  Jamie Groenestein

We are going to experiment with different ways of trying to destroy the information on digital storage devices and paper in order to find out; what is more perishable? We are documenting the outcomes, the strengths and weaknesses of the different digital storage devices and the paper. The amount of information that is still intact after the attempt to destruct it will be an indication of the reliability of the information carrier. The paper and digital storage devices will have the same information content.

Next steps…
We have been using physical methods of destruction so far and the paper seems to be the most robust. The next step will be to look at digital methods of destruction. We destroyed the physical digital data carriers but not the digital data itself. How does  immaterial digital data perish and how does this relate to paper? There are websites archiving ‘dead’ websites, a digital graveyard you could say. But a graveyard filled with zombies, the information is still there and readable.

Report:
In order to find out what it more perishable; digital or analog storage, we collected various digital storage devices such as usb sticks, floppy disks and CD’s. We put the same information (the first chapter of Post Digital Print) on every storage device and also printed it out on paper.

Then we decided on methods of destruction. We tried applying the exact same methods on all the storage devices to make a somewhat accurate measurement of the ‘readability’ (digital; can it be ‘read’ by the computer / print; is the typography still ‘readable’). Basically; to what extend is the data corrupted?

We set out to make these experiments happen, both working by ourselves on our own experiments and documented them through text and images.

The methods of destruction;
- the hammer;
- a fall from the second floor;
- local heat for we used a lighter;
- even heat for we used the oven;
- pouring cold water over the objects;
- pouring boiling water over the objects;
- the freezer;
- dipping into glue
- spraying ink over the objects

Information storage devices;
- paper;
- USB sticks;
- floppy disks;
- CD;
Results:

Hammer (10 blows)
Paper: readable with major data corruption
USB: unreadable.
CD: unreadable.
Floppy: readable but not easy to get in/out of the floppy drive

Remarks: when we tried reading the CD, the laptop started making really weird noises. Not something we want to try again.

Fall
Paper: minor data corruption
USB: readable
CD: readable
Floppy: readable

Remarks: the paper did get slightly scratched but it really does not affect the readability.

Local Heat (lighter for 5 minutes)
Paper: unreadable
USB: unreadable
CD: unreadable
Floppy: unreadable

Remarks: no surprises here.

Even Heat (100 degrees celcius for 5 minutes)
Paper: readable
USB: readable
CD: readable
Floppy: readable

Remarks: we really did expect something to happen!

Cold Water
Paper: readable
USB: readable
CD: readable
Floppy: readable

Remarks: this method did not really seem to affect anything, the paper did get wrinkly after it had dried which made it slightly less accessible.

Boiling Water
Paper: readable
USB: readable
CD: readable
Floppy: readable

Remarks: we expected some form of data corruption on the digital devices.

Freezer
Paper: readable
USB: readable
CD: readable
Floppy: readable

Remarks: here too we expected at least some form of data corruption.

Glue
Paper: unreadable
USB: unreadable

Remarks: USB not readable at all becuase it is clogged with glue. The paper is nearly unreadable because the pages stick together, you still can recover some of the information but only in parts.

Ink
Paper: readable with minor data corruption
USB: readable
CD: unknown

Remarks: Spraying ink over the USB did not cause any data corruption, whereas the paper suffered some minor data corruption. We do not dare to put another damaged CD in our laptops.

Conclusion
After presenting these results, we got the suggestion of looking into digital destruction methods. In our experiments we have been using physical methods of destruction on both digital and paper information carriers. It would be really interesting to find digital ways of destruction and relating these methods to the analog world of paper. Next to this, we still have the task to find a way to present the research as a whole.


26-03-2014 -  wuasa

26-03-2014 -  Jasper Laven

‘Do you remember written text better or do you remember digital text better?’

Subquestions;
- How exactly does the technology we use to read change the way we read?
- How do our brains respond differently to onscreen text than to words on paper?
- Do specific typefaces help you to remember texts more easily?

‘Reading Paper Screens’
- How exactly does the technology we use to read change the way we read?
- Before 1992 most studies concluded that people read slower, less accurately and less comprehensively on screens than on paper, however studies publishes winces then have produced more inconsistent results.

- The brain essentially regards letters as physical objects because it does not really have another way of understanding them.
- We learn to recognise each letter by its particular arrangement of lines, curves and hollow spaces.
- The brain literally goes through the motions of writing when reading, even if the hands are empty.
- The human brain may also perceive text in its entreaty as a kind of physical language. When we read, we construct a mental representation of the text in which meaning is anchored to structure.

- In most cases, paper books have more obvious topography than onscreen text. You can feel the thickness of the pages, there is a rhythm to it and a visible record of how far one has traveled.
- People consistently say that when they really want to dive into a text, they read it on paper.

Tests
First test: reading a text on paper and answering questions relating to that text vs reading the same text on screen and answering questions
Small test with less than 10 people
Outcome: Both test groups had equal answers right (52,6%)

Second test: Same as above but with longer text and more questions
Bigger test with 30 people
Outcome: On text 51,5% right vs 46% right onscreen
Text: https://decorrespondent.nl/393/deel-je-kliekjes-kweek-je-vlees-manipuleer-je-broccoli/35254065-518d5989

Third test: Reading in a ’spritz’ way vs. reading on screen
Outcome: not yet done

http://blog.dictionary.com/comic-sans-font/
http://healthland.time.com/2012/03/14/do-e-books-impair-memory/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/