Comments on: Michael Hohl’s Paper Proposal

By: mhohl

mhohl — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:34:49 +0000

Dmitry I’m not sure what you associate with 19th century industrial design. Arts & Crafts, romanticism, … ?

IMO it is less about aesthetics then about responsibility (maybe even ethics?). Visualising data is essentially the transformation of abstract data (for example figures of casualties) into visual information. BUT as there is no such thing as ‘abstract data’ it is not that simple.

All data has a scope, an owner, an agenda. Essentially all data is political. So visualising data is not neutral. Its about emphasising some aspects while not emphasising others. Designers can only structure and visualise what they have understood themselves. Once the designer understand she has to make a decision, a process of conscious filtering for the purpose of conveying meaning to others for a better understanding. (think bus schedule, when it works well, your don’t even realise it works well. Or a diagram of the cellular structure and function of a micro organism.)

Terry Irwin says: “Information Designers [...] must muster all of the skills and talents of a designer, combine it with the rigor and problem solving ability of a scientist or mathematician and bring the curiosity, research skills and doggedness of a scholar to their work”. Think of Edward Tufte

So the designer has a responsibility. But so does the artist and she has the freedom of a subjective perspective. In recent years the most interesting ‘data visualisation’ projects have been actually made by artists!
My reasoning is that our culture over-emphasises the visual sense. It would make sense to involve other senses too. Information ‘displays’ that use, e.g., wind or vibration, if a clear conceptual connection can be established. And then use this new medium to convey information.

Mmmh, i hope that illustrates my position.

By: galkin

galkin — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 03:58:22 +0000

Thanks for your reply, Michael. I think question of aesthetics for data visualization (21st century) is the same kind of question that pushed the whole idea of industrial design (19th century). Do we need special aesthetics for mass manufacturing? Do we need new aesthetics for digital data processing? The simple answer is pretty obvious in this context…

By: mhohl

mhohl — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:56:21 +0000

Thank you. I have amended it and think its clearer now: “This has worked well for visualising fractal geometry and dynamic systems with their captivating recursive zooms and models of Lorenz attractors”
The text still is full of generalisations and simplifications and needs more work.
Still in the process of finding out what it is that troubles me about the non-transparency within the ‘black box’ of many abstract to actual visualisation processes.
Mandelbrot-sets can be done by hand … it would just take v v long. Strange attractors – if i remember right – exist as physical/analogue models in which a swinging pendulum – deflected by a magnet – draws a line.

By: mhohl

mhohl — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:18:29 +0000

Hello Dmitry Galkin, thanks for your comment. Yes, the aesthetic quality is an important part of my investigation. Then there is the aspect of the purpose of the visualisation. Is it there to entertain or to inform decisions? Is it easy to use? There is not one solution but many, each with distinct advantages or disadvantages.
Finally, what interests me most, is that there are visualisations that don’t appear to be visualisations but appear to be ‘natural’, as if there had been no interference.
Meanwhile i believe that whenever we have to use technical assistance to investigate something there always is a creative element. Data has an agenda.

By: Huylebrouck

Huylebrouck — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:18:36 +0000

I think the use of the words “complexity theory” in “fractals and complexity theory” are not appropriate. What do you mean by this?
Please adapt: mathematicians will not understand what is meant.

By: galkin

galkin — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:42:37 +0000

Mr.Hohl, thanks for focusing on this particular aspect of abstract-actual transition. I have been collaborating with scientists who design math tools for intelligent systems cognitive graphics. And there is a point that these are specific algorithms that help effectively visualize knowledge process. What you are saying I perceive as a claim for aesthetic quality of knowledge visualization and I am with you on that. Even though it is not very much a point for my science colleague… This is exactly where actual-abstract issue (data visualization) meets cross-boundary problems (math-AI-aesthetics)! I dont know if you agree on that…

By: mhohl

mhohl — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:29:35 +0000

Well observed, but IMO there is a crucial difference.
Yes, it is a contrived experience mediated through visual metaphors, but it does never insinuate to be unmediated. It can only accomplish its goal through people’s active suspension of disbelief. Only then there is opportunity for presence, immersion and flow (HCI concepts of psychological states).
The satellite photo-graph makes us believe it is ‘natural’ and unmediated, while in fact it is not. It is not what a person will perceive while looking through an optical telescope. No photon ever wrote itself upon this medium. Thanks for the point. I realise it needs more thought.

I think the point is about the manner in which technology allows us to get from abstract data to a concrete sensual experience. There are various conceptual approaches of how to ‘design’ this experience which depends on the goal of the intended communication.
As it is not a neutral optical lens that directly depicts what is on its other side, but abstract data leaves no choice but to ‘visualise’. Rephrasing Watzlawick: “We cannot not visualise.”

By: cezaic

cezaic — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:55:17 +0000

and the map? and the fluffy orange/grey stain that moves across it? is that any different?

By: mhohl

mhohl — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:38:42 +0000

“Just words” that they are symbolic and not the real thing or experience.
They are merely representations not the real thing. Maybe not as clear when thinking about abstract concepts but clearer when its about something sensual. Reading about food and eating (avoiding, aeh, more frivolous examples here.)
We are juggling with acoustic/written symbols that have shared meanings so we can communicate. Some are abstract such as “Monday” and others more concrete such as “house” or ‘dwelling’.

By: cezaic

cezaic — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:04:49 +0000

what do you mean by ‘just words’ — is that a remark related to the work of Arakawa & Gins?
Regarding the Finnish: I know a little bit, because I studied there for a year – ages ago. So, I knew that maa translates to country/land and checked Pallas in the online dictionary (there is a Finnish – English dictionary which you will be able to find via a search engine).