1. Information Visualization and Data Art Presentation by Borra, Erik Dresscher, Paulien Kampman, Minke

2. Traditional InfoVis “The use of computers to interactively amplify cognition, using visual representations.” Based on abstract data and large datasets Computer based Produces a visualization Is readable and recognizable Interactively amplifies cognition Card, et.al. (1999)

3. Pousman Casual InfoVis as a complement to traditional InfoVis Centrality Gradience w.r.t. InfoVis  Ambient (informative, peripheral), social (ego-centric, data- centric), artistic (data driven, open to interpretation) Def casual:  user population, usage patterns, data type, insight (analytic, awareness, social, reflective), design: utilitarian vs useful How to evaluate them, how to use elements InfoVis ?  insight based, systems components, usability, longitudinal analysis, experience sampling

4. Vande Moere Tension / Continuum between traditional and artistic InfoVis. The main difference is the data mapping approach and choice of metaphor; 1. Data Visualization (What, How, Why) 2. Visualization Design (Highlights) 3. Ambient Display / Informative Art (Non-intrusive informing) 4. Visualization Experience (Conceptual exploration) 5. Visualization Art / Data Art (Exploring possibilities)

5. Kosara Two sides of a scale:  1) pragmatic visualization  2) artistic visualization. User friendliness The sublime is that what inspires awe and grandeur and evokes emotional response. The third way:  to unify them through the common concepts of critical thinking and criticism, i.e. science

6. How does Aesthetic differ from InfoVis? Info VisAesthetic Vis User Populationexpertuser Usage Patternmomentarycontemplative Data Typeworkpersonal Insightanalyticalsomething else Designutilitarianuseful Data mapping1 to 1? to ? Visual transferrelates directlyimaginative Interpretationdesignerviewer Visualisationuser friendlysublime Evaluationscientificpersonal

8. How can these systems be useful in Information Visualization? Certain characteristics / elements can be used There should be an InfoVis critique (critical theory) There might be a common frame of evaluation

9. Certain characteristics can be used Theories of insight  analytic,  awareness,  social,  reflective. Design Challenges  utilitarian vs useful,  pleasing,  ambiguity,  integrate in lives of users.

10. There should be an InfoVis critique Neutral voice  discuss the work not the researcher Focus on facts  backup statements No self promotion  don’t mention your own work. Clear goal  to provide an alternative conclusion.

11. Common frame of evaluation Although less productivity focused and different usage patterns, different data, and different systems, there can be:  insight based evaluation,  system's components or comparative evaluations,  experience sampling,  longitudinal studies of utilization.