Dahoon Lee

What Breath Might Look Like

Date

09 MAY 2025 15 MAY 2025

Week

Week 3

Unit

Micro UX

Team

Group JJED — Dahoon Lee, I-lin Chang (Ellen), Jiayi Zheng, Jin Wang

Brief

Design a way to make brain activity responding to aesthetic experiences visible, tangible, or interactive.

In short

We created cup-based devices to visualise breath through auditory, tactile, and visual feedback.
The Elephant’s Trunk offered a more immersive, memorable experience than the new prototypes.
Sensory design needs a clear user context—without it, even poetic forms may lack emotional impact.

Visualising Breath

We conducted an experiment focused on listening to breath. After allowing participants to listen to their own breath, we aimed to uncover insights related to emotional changes and subjective experience. Since breath is typically invisible, we began to explore whether it might be translated into sound, touch, or visual forms.

Idea sketches for the next round of testing. Image Credit: Author

Test: Cups

We created a set of simple sensory devices to make breath perceptible. Using everyday materials such as aluminium foil, tinsel, plastic, and fabric, we attached textures to paper cups to develop low-fi prototypes. Our goal was to quickly test how breath might be translated into auditory, tactile, or visual feedback.

Cups were crafted as tools for translating the sensation of breath. Photo Credit: Author

Aluminium foil had limitations in creating movement through breath. Photo Credit: Jin Wang

Cup made from tinsel. Photo Credit: Jin Wang

Testing of the tinsel cup. Video Credit: I-lin Chang (Ellen) and Jiayi Zheng

Cup made from plastic bag. Photo Credit: Jin Wang

Testing of the plastic bag cup. Video Credit: I-lin Chang (Ellen) and Jiayi Zheng

Cup made from a table cover. Photo Credit: Jin Wang

Testing of the table cover cup. Video Credit: I-lin Chang (Ellen) and Jiayi Zheng

Surprisingly, the aluminium foil, which we expected to be the most reactive, produced little sound or movement. On the other hand, materials like tinsel, plastic, and fabric performed better. We conducted user tests using these devices. Although some participants used them in unexpected ways that didn’t elicit strong reactions, the materials still prompted interesting conversations about associative imagery (e.g., birthday parties, balloons) and sensory impressions.

Interview notes from the cups test. Image Credit: Group JJED

We also tested the previously created “Elephant’s Trunk” device, and all four participants reported finding it more memorable and engaging than the new cup devices. The next most preferred was the cup made with table cover material, which participants described as pleasant due to its soft, curtain-like texture.

Alternative Approaches

As the ideation process evolved, we also experimented with visualising vibration and pupil response tracking. We attempted to convert the rhythm of breath or heartbeat into visible waves using smartphone vibration, Bluetooth speakers, and underwater sound. However, these setups didn’t produce notable reactions. The only clearly observable vibration occurred when hitting a table with a fist—highlighting the need to better match material characteristics with vibration strength.

Sound visualisation using a water tank – vibration and frequency (failed). Photo Credit: Author

Sound visualisation using a water tank – music playback (failed). Video Credit: Author

Sound visualisation using a water tank – music played underwater (failed). Video Credit: Author

Sound visualisation using a water tank – fist on table (successful). Video Credit: Author

We also explored the use of smartphone cameras to observe pupil reactions, but the lens was insufficient for clearly detecting pupil changes. Moreover, the act of recording seemed to disrupt participant focus. In future iterations, we realised the need to design non-intrusive setups, such as with a telephoto lens.

It was difficult to observe the pupil using a smartphone. Photo Credit: Jiayi Zheng

It was difficult to observe the pupil using a smartphone. Photo Credit: Author

Feedback & Reflection

Why didn’t the new cup devices surpass the "Elephant’s Trunk"? One key reason is that the Trunk offers an intimate encounter with one’s inner signals, allowing the user to adjust breath intensity and rhythm while hearing their own breath in real time—creating a more immersive experience.

The new cups, while interesting in their attempt to translate subtle breath into sensory output, did not make these changes perceptible enough due to the lightness of breath. Still, the experiment helped us better understand the importance of novelty and immediacy in interactive experiences.

User feedback included ideas such as a “symphony made of breath” or a “tiny breath-activated musical instrument”, showing the potential for future development.

One critical insight was that the context and target audience for these tools remained vague. For such sensory designs to become meaningful experiences, we must clearly consider who will use them, when, and in what kind of setting. Without this, even the most poetic or tactile design may fail to create resonance.

Reference

Bonino, G., Mazza, A., Capiotto, F. and others (2024) ‘Pupil dilation responds to the intrinsic social characteristics of affective touch’, Scientific Reports, 14, Article 24297. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-74566-3
Castellotti, S., Scipioni, L., Mastandrea, S. and Del Viva, M.M. (2021) ‘Pupil responses to implied motion in figurative and abstract paintings’, PLOS ONE, 16(10), e0258490. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258490
Hanington, B. and Martin, B. (2012) Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions. Beverly, MA: Rockport Publishers.
Howes, D. (ed.) (2005) Empire of the Senses: The Sensual Culture Reader. Oxford: Berg. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580907074550