by julia🐨razumovskaia -

6# Transcript of the Elevator pitch – Design & Research II (Katerina)

1.Have you ever followed a map and reached your destination… but don’t remember the way? I want to explore a mobile navigation app that focuses not only on speed, but on experience. We move fast, we arrive quickly — but we don’t really experience the city anymore.

2.Today, navigation is designed for speed. We follow instructions immediately, choose the shortest path, and rarely stop. Cities and interfaces both push us into constant movement — leaving little space to pause, notice, or reflect.

3.What if navigation was not only about getting from A to B, but about experience?
I’m exploring a map system that suggests routes based on mood, time, and curiosity —
encouraging slower, more intentional movement through the city.

4.This approach reframes navigation as an experience, not just a tool. It supports slower, more mindful movement and helps people build a deeper, more personal connection with the city.

5.My curiosity grows from urban studies, movement, maps, and outdoor exploration. I’m interested in how we experience cities — and how design can gently shift the way we move through them.

by muhammad.turk -

Design & Research II – Elevate Pitch

Design & Research 2 | For: Katerina Sedlackova

In our last class of Design and Research II with Katerina Sedlackova, we practiced crafting elevator pitches using a structured framework. Here is the pitch I developed for my concept:

The Pitch

We’re living in an era where everyone is a ‘photographer,’ but nobody actually knows how to use a camera. We’ve traded the craft of photography for a ‘smart’ button that does all the thinking for us.

The problem is that cameras are now so good, they’ve made the person behind the lens irrelevant. The AI chooses the light, the blur, and the mood. It’s a great image, but it isn’t your craft — it’s just a software output.

I’m building Photography Co-Pilot. It’s an AI that stops taking the photo for you and starts teaching you how to do it yourself. It explains the manual settings in plain English, in real-time, so you can take back creative control.

While everyone else uses AI to replace the artist, I’m using it to empower the artist. I’m giving the craft back to the person behind the lens.

I’m a designer and photographer. I believe technology should help us learn a skill, not replace the need for one.

by ylva.larsen -

Elevator Pitch ReIY

In class on 23.04., we worked on elevator pitches following a step-by-step guide on how to build a good pitch. This is what I came up with for my project:

Imagine you have a really beautiful dress that you love and use all the time.
One day, while you are wearing it, you trip and fall, and the bottom of your dress rips and makes a big hole. You are devastated because now you can’t wear it anymore, and since you got it a long time ago, you can’t buy a new one.

BUT! With the help of my website ReIY, it doesn’t have to be as hopeless as it seems! On the website, you can enter what fabric you have and what problem you are facing, and with the help of a big archive of patterns, hacks, and an AI search engine specialized in redesigning and upcycling, it gives you suggestions and tutorials on ways to salvage your dress. For example, you could hem the dress into a shorter version, or turn it into a top by cutting off the bottom ruined part.

What’s special about the website is that you can use both the specialized AI and a large network of filtered online tools and tutorials to find the best solution to your problem. Whether that’s tips on tailoring your clothes correctly, creating personalized patterns, or fixing a stained top that you now want to dye a new color.

The reason I’m making this website is because I believe reuse and promoting longevity are the most sustainable ways to consume clothing. I am already doing it myself, so I want to show people how easy it is and help them do the same.

by muhammad.turk -

Design & Research II – My Product & Business Strategy

Design & Research 2 | For: Katerina Sedlackova

After spending a lot of time mapping out the “system,” I’ve finally landed on a solid plan for what this project actually is and how it works as a business. Here is the breakdown of the Photography Co-Pilot.

The Big Idea

What’s the problem?

Cameras today are too much. You either have a professional DSLR with 100 confusing menus, or a smartphone that does everything for you. This “Automation Gap” means people never actually learn how to take a real photo. They just push a button and hope the AI makes it look good.

Why should we care?

Photography is an art. If the computer does everything, the “human” part of the art dies. Plus, so many young people are buying old cameras because they want that “analog” feel, but they give up because the settings are too hard to learn. We’re losing the craft.

The Solution: An AI Co-Pilot

Think of it as a bridge. Instead of the AI fixing the photo for you, it talks to you. It looks at what you’re trying to shoot and gives you a simple 1-2-3 checklist (on your phone or in the viewfinder). It says: “To get this look, turn this physical dial to f/2.8.” You still do the work; the AI just points the way.

Who is this for?

The main users are students and hobbyists (like the Gen Z “analog” crowd). The people who will actually pay for this are the big camera brands like Nikon or Sony who want to make their gear easier for new people to use.

The Impact

We move from being “Passive Button-Pushers” to “Active Pilots.” It turns frustration into that “Aha!” moment when you finally get a manual shot right.

How does it make money?

We license the “Logic” to camera brands so they can put a “Learning Mode” in their cameras. We also have a pro version of our app for people who want even more advanced guides.

Customer Profiles

To make sure this actually works, I looked at two types of people who really need this help.

Sarah: The Student

Lukas: The Nostalgic Hobbyist

Business Model Canvas

This is the “behind-the-scenes” look at how the project stays sustainable. To make this a real-world product, I’ve mapped out a strategy that involves partnering with the big players in the industry while keeping the focus on the student community.

by muhammad.turk -

Design & Research II – System, Impact, and Inclusion

Design & Research 2 | For: Katerina Sedlackova

Following my prototypes, I am now looking at how my project fits into the bigger world. I have broken this down into three parts: the system, the change it creates, and who can actually use it.

1/3: System Map

This diagram illustrates the broader ecosystem surrounding my camera-AI guidance system. I have mapped it from the core outwards to show how the project connects to the world.

The Core: The interaction between the Photographer and the Manual Camera.
Direct User Context: Students, hobbyists, and “Nostalgic Gen Z” looking for a creative rhythm.
External Ecology: The heavy hitters—Nikon/Sony (Hardware), Adobe/Midjourney (AI), and Instagram (Social). I also included E-waste, as the sustainability of our gear is part of the system.

2/3: Change and Impact (Before vs. After)

This comparison highlights the shift from automation-first snapping to learning-aware photography.

The Goal: The goal is to move the user from being a passive passenger of an automated process to an active “Pilot” who understands their tools.

3/3: Inclusion and Accessibility

Accessibility in photography is not just about “talent”; it is a systemic issue. Using the floating barrier map, I identified the physical and cognitive hurdles that stop people from mastering manual photography.

by muhammad.turk -

Design & Research II – Lo-Fi Prototypes 1/6

Design & Research 2 | For: Birgit Bachler

Following my research on “Automation in Photography,” I have spent this week diving deeper into my project by creating three different prototype scenarios. Even though I haven’t tested these with real users yet, the act of making them helped me see points I was missing and gave me a better direction for my Master’s thesis.

Prototype 1: The Mode Toggle

In this one, when the user opens the camera, they have to choose between two options. One is a Raw Mode where the user has all the control, and the other is an AI Automation mode.

The Goal: To see if forcing the user to pick a mode at the start makes them more intentional about how they want to take the photo.

Prototype 2: The AI Assistant

This is a digital assistant that pops up on the screen while you are shooting. It explains what is happening based on the scene. For example, it might say “increase shutter speed because you are shooting action” or “reduce ISO because there is too much light.”

The Goal: To see if giving the user a “why” helps them stay in control instead of the camera just fixing the settings automatically.

Prototype 3: The External Guidance Tool

This is for professional cameras. A separate device (like a phone) is attached to the camera to guide the user. It shows suggestions on which physical dials to turn to get the right settings.

The Goal: To see if the AI can act as a teacher that helps the user learn how to use the manual settings on their professional camera.

Personal Reflection: Why Prototype Now?

Creating these scenarios helped me see which directions I might follow, but it also left me with a big question about the design process. I understand that if you have a clear vision, prototyping early can save a lot of time. But when you are still in the early stages of defining and understanding the problem, I found it extremely difficult.

To be honest, it doesn’t make total sense to me to build a solution when I haven’t even fully decided what the actual problem is yet. While I know it is supposed to be beneficial, I personally didn’t find it that helpful at this stage. It felt a bit like guessing. However, the exercise did at least show me which side of the camera-AI idea has the most potential, even if the final direction is still a bit blurry.

by julia🐨razumovskaia -

PROTOTYPING – Design & Research II (Birgit) – 1/6

Continuing my research on the topic of “Slowness”from last semester, I will be doing further work on this topic as part of the Design & Research II course with Birgit Bachler PhD.

For the final assignment, I will need to record a 2-minute video of the final prototype — in my case, I plan to use prototyping in Figma, which each of you will be able to test. The research will again focus more on contextual analysis, as well as user testing, bibliography, and heuristic evaluation.

In this first blog post, I want to show you three quick lo-fi prototypes for a future app. The task was to create 3 scenarios, and I’ll be presenting each of them today. All of them were put together and thought through quickly, in no more than 20–30 minutes.

*Also, during the second session with Birgit, we did a speed dating exercise, and at the end I’ll go over some notes and discuss the issues my classmates encountered.

Prototype 1: Mood-based navigation 😁

In this scenario, the user first selects their mood or intention (calm, curious, social, fast), and then receives a route that matches that mood.
The route includes different types of spaces — parks, cafes, quiet street, depending on the user’s chosen mood.
The goal is to demonstrate how navigation can adapt to the person, rather than just to the geographical task.

Prototype 2: Fast vs. Slow Route 🏃‍♀️

This scenario compares two approaches to navigation: “fast” and “slow”.
It shows the user that a longer route can be a better experience—it passes through green spaces, quiet streets, and places to stop (such as cafes or shops).
The goal is to shift the focus from efficiency to the experience of the route and a conscious choice.

Prototype 3: Explore unknown areas 🤷‍♀️

Here, the navigation system encourages users to explore unfamiliar parts of the city.
The map is divided into “known” and “unknown” zones, and users can choose a route that takes them through new places.
The goal is to encourage exploration, step outside of familiar routes, and foster a personal connection with the city.

🗨️ Speed Dating notes:

During testing, additional scenarios emerged that are not covered by the current logic:

  1. First, a safe route is important, especially at night — taking into account street lighting, the presence of people, and the overall sense of safety.
  2. Second, the issue of data collection arose: to implement such routes, we need to understand where to source information, for example, regarding lighting, traffic, locations, and user behavior.
  3. There was also a request for budget-friendly routes, paths that take cost into account (like avoiding expensive locations or suggesting affordable spots), which adds another layer of personalization.

by julia🐨razumovskaia -

5# Product & Business Idea – Design & Research II (Katerina)

✍️ What problem are you solving?

Most navigation systems are designed solely for speed and efficiency. They guide people from point A to point B as quickly as possible, but ignore their mood, context, and the quality of the journey. This creates a sense of passivity, stress, and detachment from the city itself, especially when it comes to large cities or complex journeys.

✍️ Why should we care about it?

Because the way we move around cities affects our attention, stress levels, and attitude toward urban spaces. When navigation focuses solely on speed, people miss out on the city’s opportunities and the chance to explore it. In large cities, this often means we stick to our usual routines and never get to know the city beyond what is strictly necessary.

✍️ What is the solution you are offering? How does it work?

The solution is an adaptive map navigation system that suggests routes based not only on the destination but also on the user’s mood, time of day, and preferences—in other words, on the right kind of onboarding. Instead of always suggesting the fastest route, it can offer alternatives such as peaceful, curious, social, or exploratory paths—for example, through parks, cafes, quiet streets, or unfamiliar neighborhoods. Safety and lighting can also be taken into account.

✍️ Who is the target audience? Who is the customer?

The target audience includes city residents, travelers, immigrants!, researchers, and people seeking more meaningful ways to navigate urban spaces. This is particularly relevant for users who are tired of navigation focused solely on efficiency (such as myself). Clients may include individual users as well as city tourism organizations, municipalities, or mobility-related services interested in promoting a more measured and people-centered urban experience.

✍️ What is going to happen? (Change & Impact)

My product prioritizes mindful navigation over mere ease of use. Instead of simply speeding up movement, users get more information, more choices, and a deeper connection to the city. This can reduce stress, encourage exploration, and help people discover new neighborhoods, rhythms, and everyday experiences in places they already know—or think they know.

Thanks! 🙏

by julia🐨razumovskaia -

4# Customer Profile & Value Proposition Map – Design & Research II (Katerina)

💼 Persona I – Busy Commuter

This is a time-conscious person who needs to move efficiently between locations, often under stressful conditions. They rely on navigation to save time, but in doing so experience stress, overload, and reduced alertness. They need routes that remain efficient, reduce mental strain, and allow for brief moments of calm.

🗺️ Persona II – Curious Explorer

A user who explores the city with an open mind and curiosity, rather than in a hurry. They are interested in discovering new places, atmospheres, and experiences. They need a navigation system that supports exploration, suggests meaningful routes, and helps them engage more deeply with the city.

by julia🐨razumovskaia -

NIME Article Review – Sonic City: The Urban Environment as a Musical Interface

I’d been looking for a topic that interested me for a while—and the title itself caught my eye because I was searching by keywords. Of course, I’m not usually interested in much of the technical information related to “music.” But this really caught my attention.

Sonic City is a powerful and innovative project precisely because it presents the city not as some kind of “backdrop” for interaction, but as the interface itself. This certainly resonates with me as someone with a background in architecture. There, we always thought of the city in terms of movement, rhythm, route, atmosphere, and—not least—the physical perception of space. In Sonic City, all these qualities are not just characteristics of the environment, but also part of the interaction. The authors of the article literally propose “playing the city,” transforming everyday movement into a form of musical and spatial experience. This idea is explicitly stated in the project’s main text: the city is viewed as an interface, and mobility as an interaction model.

From an interaction design perspective, I find it particularly significant that the project moves away from the conventional screen-based UX. There is no traditional screen, buttons, or graphical interface here. Instead, everything is built around body movements and environmental data—rotations, movement, light, even pollution levels and the presence of metal—as well as pauses and combinations of context and behavior. The authors describe a two-level mapping system, where some parameters influence short musical events and timbre, while others affect the more structural composition of the sound. This makes the interaction less abstract and more situational; the music arises precisely from the connection between a person and a specific place and moment.

The first text “In Duet with Everyday Urban Settings: A User Study of Sonic City“ [1] struck me as a stronger conceptual and design-oriented exploration of the questions ”Why can the city be an interface?“ or ”How does this project differ from a musical performance?”. It was also very interesting to see how they included not only engineers and designers in their team, but also architects and sociologists. The project isn’t just about technology; it’s also about the body, the city, behavior, everyday life, and its aesthetics.

The second text “Sonic City: The Urban Environment as a Musical Interface” [2] is a bit more important to me, since it tests whether the idea works in real-world user experiences. The study was smaller and more qualitative than quantitative. It included people of different ages and lifestyles, and, by the way, none of them considered themselves musicians. This is an important point, since the project was tested on ordinary people. The authors, by the way, asked the right UX question: “Do people perceive Sonic City as a research tool or as a musical one?”

Overall, I consider Sonic City a very important example of how to think at the intersection of architecture, urban experience, and interaction design. For me, the project’s value lies precisely in the fact that it translates spatial perception into an interactive experience, and interactivity back into urban and bodily reality. The papers showcase not just interesting technology, but a different way of thinking about UX: not merely as interaction with a screen, but as interaction with space, the body, the route, and the atmosphere of the city. And that is precisely why this project still seems relevant to me today.

Sources 🛈

[1] In Duet with Everyday Urban Settings: A User Study of Sonic City. Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME 2004). Authors: Lalya Gaye, Lars Erik Holmquist. Available at: https://www.nime.org/proceedings/2004/nime2004_161.pdf

[2] Sonic City: The Urban Environment as a Musical Interface. Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME 2003). Authors: Lars Erik Holmquist, Lalya Gaye. Available at: https://www.nime.org/proceedings/2003/nime2003_109.pdf