Findings
What inspired this concept was a shared interest in Nature, a topic that is free-form and poses a flexible outcome. Instead of just a project that screams save the earth, the relationship between Nature and Urban prompted a more contextually rich data study. The general context develops: Amidst the bustling urban landscape, the natural and urban spaces coexist, but we perpetually integrate urban lifestyles into the natural world.
One very prominent example would be the constant development of our land through the construction of new spaces which lead to the destruction of the nature we inhabit (e.g read this article on Clementi Forest).
Ironically, despite the destruction caused by urban development, these construction sites mimic nature by using deceptive depictions of nature on their barricades, in efforts to conceal the harm it has on the ecosphere, ironically mimicking the environment they disrupt (refer to images below).
A common denominator of these construction sites, are parks. To bring it into the present day context, there are many nature parks, that are affected by the building of the cross island line. Once again, highlighting how ironic that we are developing economically, but we are shortening the life spans of the land that we need for survival to live on.
To relate it closer to the audience, through a survey we did, it is also clear that 42.1% of people go to these parks for stress relief. The noise pollution from this urban disturbance will also disrupt not only the natural environment but people who seek it.
Therefore this leads us to our objective, where the whole idea begins: Unlike humans, nature can't verbalise its feelings through words, therefore we aim to visualize their unheard cries, and raise an awareness by focusing on balancing urban and natural spaces for a sustainable future to coexist harmoniously.
Insights we gained
The first step in visualizing nature’s cries, to determine the relationship between the construction site, and the park (nature), is through sound recordings.
We went to record sound in the parks (Bishan Ang Mo Kio Park (Teck Ghee and Bright Hill), Ang Mo Kio Town Garden, Pasir Ris Town Park which are parks that are largely affected by the construction of the cross-island line). Data is recorded every 50m to get a range of data from the construction sites. We also used the concept of Point-To-Clouds, by scanning each area at the 50m mark, totaling to 8 scans so that we can get more data and visuals on the possible effects of construction on the park.
Initially, we expected a very direct relationship that shows the closer you are to the construction, the higher the peak or noise. But we realized that is not the case as many of these parks are completely surrounded by these constructions, and there is no peace even in these recreation built to relieve us. We noticed that in areas that are affected by the construction noise more, the more distorted and messier our scans come out similar to how disruptive the recordings get.
This data collection was used to highlight the impacts of urban on nature and on us, prompting to the audience that peace to nature is peace to us due to the identification of noise pollution that even pollutes visually, captured by the point to cloud data.
Design decisions
Tying the data collected together into an experience that incorporates the concept of simulation and generative visuals to create an unconventional experience that pushes typical environmental campaigns. The simulation will be based on a more dystopian look, and using the point-to-cloud scans, we will put them into Blender, to create distortions that will be ultimately reactive to the sound recorded.
In an attempt to overwhelm the audience, these visuals will use a chrome aesthetic (representing urban) while using organic shapes in a typical model that reacts more aggressively rather than smoothly to sound. This is to create a realm that visualizes nature's cries through them acting back using these reactive distorted visuals. To evoke overwhelming emotions that leave an impression to prompt environmental awareness and action. This is not just a campaign but an artistic experience as well.
Challenges
The weather was a huge challenge for us. As our data collection was similar to the urban fieldwork workshop we had, where we went down and did physical collection whether is it sound or point-to-cloud scans. There were many times when we had to postpone the data collection which pushed our progress further behind due to the weather, we cannot scan in the rain as it will pose an anomaly that does not contribute much to the data collection and also affects the consistency of our data.
Another challenge was the sound recording, we did attempt to create our own traditional sound recording device, the phone cup, but it only muffled the sounds rather than amplifying it. Lastly, the software used was limited as well. Scaniverse was an option that was coincidentally stumbled upon as a friend from another course was using it. The phone constraints as some use Android which Scaniverse is not available on.
We combat these challenges by going out of the way to get a phone that is compatible with Scaniverse. Learning to scan was also not an easy task, we expected it to be easy but some of us ended up scanning for a long time to actually get the details. Exploring the application as well as needed to know how to convert these physical areas, and points into digital clouds on our laptops.
To combat the sound recording issue, we had to resort to using software to amplify sound, but this also led to an interesting concept of using an installation to amplify the sound which will be further explained in processes.
Feedback & Achievements
The feedback initially, regarding context (proposal phase) from Gideon and Vikas – They liked the idea of "Nature's Cries" but they are afraid it might not correlate with the artefact. This was another challenge we had which was context, thankfully further research on contemporary context in Singapore has helped link the context with the concept and project (the cross-island line construction findings that relate with parks).
Regarding the concept behind the artefact, there was a lot of friction in terms of artefact and Andreas tried to bridge that for us by suggesting different ways to do it. It all boiled down to the misunderstanding of the concept and context by members. A lot of time was spent to solidify the concept.
From Jo regarding the outcomes, she recommended an extra step to bridge the gap and increase understanding of the artefact and the proposal. Thankfully, the visuals, were well received by lecturers.
