A Visit to the Museum of the City of New York’s Toy Collection

Last Friday afternoon it was a gloriously sunny and cheerful spring day, and I took the opportunity, on Ethan’s tip, to bike up to the Museum of the City of New York to check out their intriguing toy collection. They had a curious amalgam of toys, giving a selective snapshot of toy history over a period of nearly 200 years of playthings in New York. The collection, I discovered, was largely composed of gifts from the private toy collections of New Yorkers who wished for their well-loved toys to continue to bring joy to people. Here are a few thoughts on what I took away from the exhibit.

This paper doll collection, Surprise Dollies, claims to keep little hands busy. This emphasizes the general need for toys to be interactive, to hold attention, and to serve a social need. Additionally, paper dolls are a simple customization interface.

This little circus really starts to show how toy-makers began to give anthropomorphized roles and humanized personalities to animals.

This photo displays a part of a wooden representation of Noah’s Ark, and stylized animal statues proceeding two-by-two into the ark. This is an excellent example of the some of the most traditional origins of toys. Many ancient and historical toys were in fact religious artifacts used in ceremonies or religious rituals.

Here are a selection of Steiff collectible toys, aligned next to some elaborate babies’ rattles. It shows an interesting juxtaposition of soft and hard, and how toys progressed from being hard, boned, or rigid objects, to being cuddly and malleable.

These dolls are handmade, created from various scraps of fabrics with ceramic or rough-hewn corncob faces. This reflects the rarity of toys before the era of mass-production and the emergence of a solid middle class with more disposable income in the U.S.

These kewpie dolls were intensely popular when introduced in the early half of the 20th century. They represent some of the first toys that might be considered “designer toys,” strongly reflecting the aesthetic concerns of the artist.

Leave a comment »

User Testing – Paper Prototype II

This was essentially the same experiment as before, but I offered users a range of different printed and colored papers, as well as some fabric swatches, to round out the feeling that the process lacked color. The one thing that challenges the fidelity of the prototype is that the online form will likely have color selection toward the end rather than at the beginning, when you skin the paper body before further details are added.

Here are a few images of the results:

Leave a comment »

Physical Prototype I – Chunjay

Here is a photo of my first physical prototype. He is an interpretation of Chris Driscoll’s creation, Chunjay, in dunn cotton fleece. His eyes are polyester. His filling is foam scrap filler from Pacific Trims in garment district.

Leave a comment »

User Testing – Paper Prototype I Results

Here are some photos of user testing of my first paper prototype:

The overall feedback from this round of testing is as follow:

  • Users need more color/texture, more options, more things to get their creation’s personality right.
  • This is fun. It’s like kindergarten art class.
  • Cutting things out is time consuming and annoying.
  • Things need to be easier to try on.

Conclusions for next prototype:

  • Add color and texture: stencils to trace out bodies and moieties on fabric swatches, colored paper, wrapping paper with prints and patterns
  • More options: eyebrows, clothing, ears, nose, other flair (more hats, swords, kink??)
  • Cut all moieties out beforehand
  • Think about how all appendages and add-ons might be presented unclassified, just pooled into a bin of add-ons to allow the user to decide the order of assembly

Leave a comment »

User Testing – Paper Prototype 1

I wanted to start out by getting an idea of what kind of target user I should be creating for, who likes plush toys, who would use such a customization tool… these kinds of things. I developed the following list of questions to accompany my paper prototype, and I asked these questions of everyone tried using my paper system to create a creature. The last section of questions addresses this paper construction process, described below as a preface to the questions around it.

Questions:

Soft Objects
1. Do you have pillows/cushions, plush toys, or stuffed animals?
2. What role do these objects play in your life? Do they have sentimental value to you, or do they act in a role other than as a cushion?
3. How do you feel about these objects? What is your relationship toward them?
4. Is there a story behind the object?
Customization
5. Do you like customized objects?
6. Have you designed or customized your own objects before (e.g., sneakers, t-shirts, mugs, costumes, avatar, Build-A-Bear, whatever)?
7. If yes, what did you like about the process?
8. For what kinds of things do you think it is valuable to have customization?
Plush-Customizing Interface
*** create print-outs of each of the bodies and body parts, give user the bits and some tape, and allow them to walk through the process of building their own creature and give it a name tag ***
9. How do you feel about this process? What did you enjoy?
10. Do you like your creature?
11. What did you dislike about this process?
12. What did you think was missing from this process?

In the prototyping process, each tester was given a sheet such as this one below, with a selection of base body types from which to choose:

Body Types

From there, they were given scissors and glue and asked to go ahead and cut and paste on any facial features or appendages from the following selection:

Leave a comment »

Symposium Mock-up

Here’s an image of what I have in mind for the MFADT Thesis Symposium. It would be stellar to have a small environment for some physical prototypes to live, here visualized as a sort of tree. Alongside it would be a demo of the customization program, up on the site, http://kwyjibos.com.

Leave a comment »

Wireframes of User Interface

The following images represent an initial exploration into what the customization tool might look like for the user:

Comments (1) »

Customization Tools I Didn’t Love As Much

NikeID

Basically, I don’t love any of the base shoes that much, so the overall customization process wasn’t that great, since I’m only allowed to choose colors. The overall form is still one that I’m not much enamored of. Plus, it’s a tad pricey at $135. I think I’d rather pay a bit less for a sports shoe, but I guess I’m also just not the right market for this type of shoe. This would be more worth it to me if it were a fashion statement outside of my exercise regimen, if it were something that I’d wear outside the context of the gym or on my runs.

Mi Adidas

First of all, I don’t necessarily want to go to the store to get these. Beyond that, however, I  think the issues with this system are almost the same that I expressed with NikeID: I just don’t love the styles, so I don’t care about the color. I never really wear my running shoes around town, unless I happen to be out and about after a run or something. If  I’m “close to home,” it doesn’t really matter how scrubby I look, and I’m not paying up for a pair of shoes that aren’t really appropriate for any of my non-gym clothes.

Design Your Own Keds

Here’s an example of how a company created a design tool that started to go where I wanted it to with an object that you actually need or could definitely use. I felt it was a little clunky, though, and everything took ages to load. I really liked the option of putting images and prints on in various panels. The colors offered for the midsole were gross. Given that, unlike Nike and Adidas shoes, the performance value of the shoe is less important, I think the materials used in the construction give a bit more flexibility to the designer.  For example, I doubt that the fabrics used in the Nike and Adidas shoes would really allow for prints and images. One serious caveat with all of these nice options, though, is the fact that this product is actually going to be made and shipped to you. This is a little bit frightening. What if it doesn’t look a bit like I imagined? I feel like I can’t recover either my ego or monetary outlay for having produced a heinous pair of shoes. They’ll haunt my closet until I have the oomph to toss them. They’ll remind me why I don’t design stuff for people to wear.

Leave a comment »

Precedents – Customization tools

I wanted to start my research process by digging around for customization tools online and looking at what it is that makes some more appealing than others. What makes the customization process fun or interesting or compelling? The following are a few customization tools I discovered that I really liked.

Create Dunkin’s Next Donut

One of the first customization tools I found that I really liked was this application that allowed you to design your own donut. I loved this. The day I tried this out for the first time, it was a gross, dismal March day in New York. Nothing is grosser and sadder than a scummy day when you’re secretly hoping for a harbinger of Spring. So I was dreaming of the beach, and my  mind wandered to the legendary beaches that you see portrayed in Bond movies: gorgeous blonde expanses of pristine South-Pacific beach. Thus, I designed my donut to suit. I selected the bar-shaped donut base, filled it with Chai cream (there’s something tropical and exotic about Chai spice, no?), and topped it with coconut shavings, as a homage to its tropical inspiration. I called it “Chai Another Day,” as a super-cheesy reference the Bond Film, Die Another Day. I know, it’s awful, but just wait until it wins $12,000. But, you might ask, who cares? What’s so great about that? I dunno, but it was really fun to make. It was a pleasant and light-hearted decision-making. Nothing I chose could really be Thaaaaat wrong, which is key. The worst thing that happens is that I make a donut that conceptually turns the stomachs of donut fiends who happen to encounter it… and of course, I don’t win the contest…

Spore Creature Creator

The Spore Creature Creator is a stellarly rich customization tool that allows users to make crazy, fantasy creatures. Perhaps one of the best things about the process of designing your creature is that it’s so easy to try things on and experiment. The creature registers every add-on during the process, blinking gratuitously when you add eyes, craning its head to have a look at its new legs, stretching its new arms. You feel like you’re giving life to this creature. It’s also really easy and intuitive to remove things that you decide you don’t like, reposition or move bits that could use a little tweaking. It’s beautiful. When you’re done, you can test run your creation, running him around in a pen, hatch some babies to witness their interaction with young and how they might exist in their native environment when left to their own devices. It’s quite well conceived.

Marvel Create Your Own Superhero

I loved this. I made a bunch of superheroes. I loved that you could imbue your superhero with a little bit of your personality, project a bit of yourself onto it, but that it didn’t have to look or act like you, really. I like the suspension of disbelief of customizing a superhero. Certain elements tell stories about what kind of a life your creation lives. Body type might say something about native diet. Maybe he only eats spinach, maybe only plankton. It’s your call, really. The superheroes’ base body types are, I admit, a little limited. I would venture that not all superheroes are really all so very muscular. In my mind, I think that some superheroes must have gangly bodies. Maybe some of them are even self-conscious about their body type. Not that I am, but it would be nice to have other body types, in case you don’t want your superhero to be a rock-hard Amazon. I wished, however, that you could do more than just print or send this superhero to a friend. I wanted to order the costume right away for my next Halloween party.


Leave a comment »

Introducing Kwyjibos

An effective customization tool must empower the user to make something they personally connect with, or in some way incorporates the user’s feelings or persona, in order for the user to have a sense of ownership over their creation. How can the customization experience be designed in which the user feels empowered to infuse something they make with personality and life?

Kwyjibos are the fanciful plush creatures inspired by an online customization tool that allows users to  design and order their own plush forms. Starting with a base body type, users will be able to add set components and pre-determined parts within the web interface.

In the future  will then be able to order their creation and have it made for them. Kwyjibos created with this interface will live or exist together in an interactive environment on the website. The best and brightest designs will be crowdsourced and made available to site visitors for purchase.

Leave a comment »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.