Archive for future

Visual Design in Jupiter Ascending

A visual statement on just how small this story is compared to the scope and scale of the universe…

I’ve talked about the “fragmentation“ problem in cinematic design before on this blog. The fact that, in pursuit of ever more fantastic environments we have begun pushing levels of irrelevant detail in television and film, to the point where the ability of the viewer to follow the action in the scene becomes compromised.

Sumptuous visual design without overwhelming the eye of the audience.

In the above image we have a fantastically detailed costume and an equally fantastically detailed environment with thousands of digital actors providing a sea of visual noise. It would be very easy for Kunis to get lost in a shot like this. However, throughout the scene we can clearly see her resolved against that background. Part of this success is due their use of depth of field; everything beyond Kunis (no matter how pretty) has been blurred out. We get an impression of the presence of that detail without needing to waste time and brain-power on trying to “see” it. The other factor here is that Kunis’ dress is entirely in the “cool red” spectrum of color, even the whites are tinted cool pink, which sets her apart from the “warm” colors used in the rest of the environment (as we know, setting a cool color in a warm background gives a similar, but subtler effect to using colors opposite on the color wheel, blue versus yellow, for example).

Color selection and lighting help hilight Kunis (whose reactions are the most important element in this scene).

In the image above, we again have a sea of texture in the pattern in the floor and the candles that line the walk. Stack on top of that, the complex patterning of the character’s costumes and you have the potential for a visual mess. If you half-close your eyes, you can see it all rather blur together, BUT again we have the forethought of the visual design team to thank. Kunis is the one receiving the revelations of her history here, so her reactions are the single most important thing is this scene. To that end, they have again placed her in “cool reds” against a warmer, yellower background so that she is easy to track. In comparison the yellow dress and the complicated hair detail on Middleton make her almost a part of the scenery, whereas Kunis face and hair are unadorned and the play of light skin and dark hair gives us the greatest point of contrast (thereby directing the eyes right to her face).

Love it, or hate it, Jupiter Ascending is a master class in the art of directing the eye in modern VFX design. The environments are so richly detailed that it would be easy for the cinematographer, director and set designers to go at cross-purposes and end up with, essentially, a hot visual mess. But, through careful application of depth of field and use of light and color, the filmmakers have avoided one of the most common problems in special-effects spectaculars.

In this film, no piece of art is so sacred that it cannot be blurred or otherwise subverted in-service of the greater visual narrative. Even in the busiest scenes with vast cities in the background or thousands of digitally inserted characters in the wedding hall, when combined with the strength of the art direction and visual design, this film is a textbook example of how to “do it right“ in an era when “more” is almost always the order of the day.

Big Data and Bespoke Experiences

“The information is then wiped from our system…” is the promise of Alibaba’s new robot-hotel chain, where guests must provide biometric (in the form of facial recognition) information in order to get access to their rooms. The company promises that the guests information will be wiped from the system, but let’s face it, it never is. This isn’t some high-tech insider information I’m imparting here. This is simple observation of the numerous times that a data breach has revealed that information that was supposed to have been deleted was hoarded on a server somewhere. So why do people engage with digital services that collect this data? Why are people sharing all kinds of personal information and biometrics in the service of “convenience” and “frictionless transactions”.

Line drawing of a service robot
Companies are banking on robots being able to offer a bespoke consumer service.

Part of the attraction of ANY service is that your experience with it as a consumer evolves over time. You go to the same bar after work every Friday night? The bartender is going to learn and know your name and your favorite drink. Stay at the same hotel every time you travel to Schenectady to visit your parents? Guess what, they’re going to remember you too (and that towels keep mysteriously going missing from your room.) In a purely physical form, this has emerged in the form of various reward systems (buy three bagels, get the fourth free, for example).

This familiarity over time is part and parcel of delivering a recurring service to people. It’s okay when humans do it to humans, right? The fact the Jim the Barista recognizes you on sight is a comfort rather than creepy. But when a computer does it, it becomes a conspiracy. It becomes “Big Data”. It becomes, as we are told, yet another form of control rather than a convenience.

This is the big disconnect that those who sound alarm bells bout data collection and aggregation are missing. Almost daily I encounter rants and discussions about the ethical collection of information, about how we’ve allowed our homes to essentially be wiretapped through our screens and devices. And generally, they all end with something like “wake up sheeple”. But what they all miss is that these devices and services are, ultimately, tapping into a long-ingrained comfort system. It’s not that people are not aware that their information is being collected, it’s that the information is being used to provide them with a more personal experience and thusly, the collection is acceptable. It’s like the old Cheers tagline “where everybody knows your name”. These online services and devices are simply a continuation of that understanding of how hospitality works best.

 In order to provide the best possible service to a customer/client, data must be collected. This goes the same for the guy tending bar at Cheers and the web-service you buy your bespoke knitted socks from. The big difference to you as a consumer is that the guy at the bar is a dead-end, the information may go out in gossip and casual conversation, but it’s not going anywhere else. In the case of the little web-service, that’s a different story. That information may (depending on who they are using to provide their services to you) be polished, anonymized and added to a much larger pool of data out there. Or it may be stored online so they know just who you are and how many pairs of pink-cherry alpaca socks you bought from them. In either case, you get a warm fuzzy whenever you reconnect with that bar or service.

So what you are fighting against, if you truly want to change the minds of all those “sheeple” who are willingly sharing their personal information willy-nilly all over the internet, is THAT feeling. You’re not fighting an idea, or a sense of security or even a lack of digital education. When you can marshal a way to counter that feeling of bespoke, the warm fuzzies that come with feeling like a service *knows you* the way your favorite supermarket checker does, then and only then will you have a way to bring data sharing back under control on the consumer side of things.

Autonomous cars and personal space

Image result for self driving car map

The vision that keeps getting served up, when self-driving cars finally become ubiquitous, is that of a fleet of vehicles capable of computationally precise pathfinding. By talking to one another, they will be able to tool down the freeway, bumpers within inches, rearranging their groupings so as to allow for maximum aerodynamics and most efficient travel times. It’s well within the bounds of these vehicle designs, computers can react thousands of times faster than we do and if we give them the ability to communicate with one another, cross-platform, they can do a brilliant of of staying out of one another’s travel path.

But as we know, or many suspect, the best, most efficient solution is not always the “best” (for human-comfort orders of “best” at any rate).  The auto-pilot on an airplane can land it in a storm with little problem, but the decision making keeps the plane intact, with little regard for the comfort or even safety of the passengers. The world is riddled with examples of human “best” taking the lead over efficiency.  Everybody wants a window or an aisle seat, people will take the time to wait for the next elevator if the one arriving seems too full (even if it is still well within its weight capacity). What is “best” for a computer is simply not always “best” for a person.

This got me thinking about customization, user preferences for these kinds of vehicles. I mean obviously you *can* drive with your bumpers within 5 inches of each other, but anyone who’s had their hands on the wheel is going to be more comfortable and familiar with the “two second rule”, where a driver maintains a two-second gap between your car and the one ahead of you. Granted there are a few there who seem to have no concept of personal space while maneuvering a 2000 pound pile of carbon fiber and steel, but by and large, most drivers leave a comfortable distance between the cars around them.

And as you sit, safely ensconced in your self-driving box (assuming you’re not distracted by a film or some quality “personal time”), you may not at all enjoy your vehicle tailgating someone else or someone else’s vehicle tailgating yours. The most efficient mode of travel may simply be nerve-wracking to anyone who hasn’t grown up with it.

I imagine that the initial solution is going to be the allowance of “user preferences”.  You can choose wake times and ringtones on your phone, so it follows that car manufacturers might allow a user to set things like minimum distance to the car in front of them, or maximum tailgate distance (in fact, aggressive human drivers may be able to take advantage of gaps in traffic left by two cars whose owners requested a large buffer around them). Cars would communicate these preferences between each other and roll that into their driving calculations as they go.