Web artists need to understand web usability.

WEB ART IN CONTEXT

Given the Internet's pervasive influence, artists recognize unprecedented creative and business opportunities. However, artists must modify methods and strategies when utilizing global communication systems. As new technologies present exciting challenges, artistic creation entails competition and comparison with business applications. On the Internet, art competes with commercial, governmental and educational sites. Significantly, computer science researchers seek to uncover and to resolve problems in the human-computer interaction process; usability testing becomes an essential part of systems development. As the following study reveals, a set of Web art sites present usability problems, which may inhibit viewer access and understanding.

RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY

To illustrate the effects of usability problems, a series of works from the Alternative Museum's Web site will be studied (Alternative Museum 2003). Considering the TAM digital media commissions, heuristic analysis will reveal that serious usability problems prevent accessing pages, understanding navigation, and comprehending functionality. When artists use non-standardized technology, viewers must stop interaction to resolve system-related problems. Failing to follow conventions about content and navigation design, viewers may have difficulties understanding purpose and function. Since a panel of art experts has considered the works exemplary, curators and artists should reassess the user's needs in development.

Since anyone can create a site, what are the responsibilities of Web artists? While distinctions between amateur and professional may become unclear, the majority of art sites present low aesthetic qualities (Walker 2001). Interestingly, Nielsen (2000) proposes using an engineering perspective. By watching people perform tasks on a site, designers can determine successful strategies and problematic features. While all sites exhibit usability concerns, eliminating serious problems can greatly improve the user's experience. By conducting usability tests in development, Web artists can interactively formulate ideas and evaluate results.

PERSPECTIVES GAINED FROM THE LITERATURE

Various usability tests should be integrated with site development. For example, paper mock-ups, page designs, prototype versions, and final implementations can be reviewed at different stages (Krug 2000). Typically, developers initially perform heuristic evaluations to identify and to remove obvious usability problems (Nielsen 1993). Instead of relying on scripted scenarios, evaluators explore the site in an open-ended manner. After repeated viewings, evaluators identify significant issues that require attention. To guide heuristic evaluations, Nielsen (1994) has provided a set of usability guidelines (e.g. user control and freedom, consistency and standards, recognition rather than recall, aesthetic and minimalist design). Finally, evaluators produce a list of problems, which reference usability principles that have been violated. Consequently, the set of commissioned works on the Alternative Museum's Web site will be evaluated in reference to usability principles identified in the literature.

RESULTS OF HEURISTIC EVALUATION

The TAM digital media commissions on the Alternative Museum Web site demonstrate substantial usability problems, which may prevent users from accessing pages and understanding functions. In several cases, artists rely on non-standardized technology and neglect established design conventions. When artists use Flash, Shockwave, or Virtual Reality Markup Language technologies, users must have systems that possess required software or must download needed programs. Accordingly, the value of established communications standards becomes reduced. Also, viewers depend on navigation conventions to be used and content descriptions to be effective. Therefore, usability concerns interfere with understanding purpose and functionality.

How serious are the problems on these sites? Specifically, 3 out of 4 sites employ design strategies, which may prevent or discourage viewing. Considering the one readily accessible work, confusing page design and content descriptions inhibit comprehension, If Web art is to be effective, interaction requirements must be given greater emphasis. Next, heuristic evaluations will reference the four commissioned works.

To View the Buddha Hotel, a user must make a series of decisions. Initially, a navigation choice demands identification of the client's hardware platform.

But, why should users have to identify system requirements? The Internet is based on using hypertext markup language (HTML), which allows users to view content irrespective of hardware (Nielsen 2000). To access this work, viewers must choose between PC or MacIntosh platforms. If a networked terminal is used, which option is correct? Next, a series of screens leads to another option. Since content is defined with the Virtual Reality Markup Language, users must download software to continue. After accessing four introductory pages. users must make more decisions to view the work. However, promises of trouble-free installation leave unanswered questions about potential benefits and time demands. Essentially, Web designers must deliver content simply and effectively.

While accessing 201: a space algorithm, system configuration becomes a problem. Depending on available software, user experience may differ. Using a terminal at the local library, a warning screen indicated that Shockwave must be installed to view the work. On another system, numerous shockwave files needed to be downloaded. While automatically downloading fries, a different warning screen indicated a potential security risk when requesting access.

At this point, what should a user do? Is the user expected to open the files irregardless of warnings? Apparently, users must make decisions, which relate to programming languages and to network security. According to Nielsen (2000), designers should accommodate user-controlled navigation. As a consequence, development issues should be handled by developers, which would leave users in control.

Turning to Re:mote_corps @ REALities, system configuration and content explanations appear problematic. Viewing the site from a local library terminal, a security warning stated that Shockwave software must be installed. As public terminals provide little control over software configuration, the site remained inaccessible. With a different system, users could see a screen that resembled a chatroom.

However, the screen lacked explanations about purpose or procedures. Significantly, the focus of opening screens should be on what users can accomplish immediately (Nielsen 2000). Above the scrolling text, a box simply stated: connected. Besides access problems related to downloading software, the relation between interface elements are left undefined.

On the first screen of World of Awe: Roam I.O, page design, link descriptions, and content presentation leave functions and purpose unclear. Essentially, the user must try to decipher the relation between the animation, text, and links.

Appearing in different colors and forms, links lead to auxiliary sources of information. Specifically, three links appear above the main text; links placed in this position normally indicate global navigation features. On the left-side of the main text, links relate to system requirements, software downloads, and keyboard functions. Using different colors for links, global navigation and keyboard illustration are light blue, and systems requirement and software download are yellow. On the second line of the main text, a light blue embedded link highlights World of Awe. Hence, what should the user do first? Interestingly, a Web page should answer the following questions (Krug 2000): what site is this; what page am I on; what are the major sections of the site; what are my options at this level; where am I in relation to the rest of the site; how can I search? In effect, a visitor to a site should be able to quickly scan information, understand relationships, and choose actions. Here, page layout leaves users searching for answers to fundamental questions.

By failing to provide essential information on the first screen, viewers may lose interest quickly. Instead of accessing key parts of the site, the supposed global navigation features offer general information (Technical Outline, Treasure/Crumbs Report, and Modify the World). Following these links, users may have difficultly returning to the initial screen; browser functionality appears to be broken. After several reviews of the interface, a faint yellow arrow can be noticed in the upper right-hand corner (pointing upwards); contrast is reduced because of the dark background. Besides the low contrast problem, placement of the back button is usually in the upper left-hand corner (facing left). Looking at the link under system requirements (Open GL), the user accesses a separate download page; link description is uninformative. Underneath, the GO TO DOWNLOAD link also provides little information even though a 15-minute download is involved. To be more effective, link descriptions should explain content, indicate file size, and estimate download time (Nielsen and Tahir 2002). Below the download link, the keyboard illustration appears different from the text links. While color defines the illustration as a link, reasons for the different format are unexplained. Because the initial page fails to define the purpose of the work and the relationships between the elements, information gained through the keyboard function link seems unintelligible. Therefore, when are keyboard functions applicable? In addition, the embedded link raises questions about how the work is to be understood. Apparently, the first two sentences of the main text attempt to clarify significance. However, self-referential descriptions give minimal clues (In the context of World of Awe, Roam I.O provides an interpretation of the Sunset/Sunrise). What is the function of World of Awe? What is the relation between World of Awe and Roam? Following the embedded link, users may gain some perspective by reviewing the associated World of Awe site. Instead of clearly explaining features and relationships, the main text serves to confuse the user; background material should be accessible through links. Ineffective content design, link descriptions, page layout, and site structure create problems for understanding the purpose of the work.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Considering the commissioned works presented by the Alternative Museum Web site, serious usability problems derive from ineffective page and content design. Consequently, users must assess system requirements, determine security risks, and guess navigation options. As expectations about Web art are still being formed, artists may benefit by research, which seeks to include users in systems development.

Is the art community aware of usability issues? On the opening page for the TAM digital media commissions, a disclaimer warns potential users that problems win be encountered when viewing the artwork (Alternative Museum 2003). Essentially, curators have excused artists from considering the needs of users. The disclaimer states that downloading software and using sites will be frustrating; everyone is not to have access to these works. Addressing consumers, sponsors admit that the products are unusable, to what other industry would such actions represent responsible behavior? Even though consumers on the Internet control navigation (Nielsen 2000), curators and artists have discounted audience reactions.

How can artists create compelling Web art? Interestingly, artists face the same technical limitations as designers of commercial sites. In industry, usability engineers have become indispensable partners during systems development. Because initial designs usually cause unanticipated problems, iterative design seeks to include different perspectives (Badre 2002). Several iterations of design and continuous testing are usually needed to match the capacities of the media to the needs of the users. While designers attempt to expand the limits imposed by HTML, the separation of content and presentation must be maintained (Nielsen 2000). Thereby, a variety of software can access and translate the same content. 'To determine whether tasks can be performed, usability testing becomes essential, if people fail to identify products, to find information, and to perform work, a Web site remains worthless. Significantly, artists in the TAM digital media commissions failed to explain relationships, to demonstrate functions, and to define purposes.

Significantly, the problems observed on these sites have been addressed by the literature. Thus, users should be unconcerned about platform requirements for viewing sites (Nielsen 2000); mandating software downloads should be eliminated. Alternatively, links should include content description and download times (Nielsen and Tahir 2002); users can thereby determine interests and options. Essentially, the viewer should remain in control of the interactive process. Given the complications of providing multimedia over the Internet, development strategies must allow default presentation formats when particular user's systems lack specified features (Tannenbaum 1998). Considering content design and navigation options, usability testing can provide direct feedback to designers. In fact, Web artists face the same usability problems as Web designers. Seeking to use the Internet for creative expression, artists can benefit by establishing a dialog with the users.

CONCLUSION

The TAM digital media commissions on the Alternative Museum Web site show serious usability problems, which may prevent users from understanding and accessing the work. Because curators dismiss the audience's needs, artists remain unaccountable. Unfortunately, users lose interest quickly when content is disorganized and functions are unexplained. Being in control of navigation, consumers avoid poor design. To be effective communicators, Web artists need to become responsive to user requirements.

NOTES:

1-Alternative Museum 2003. Digital Media Commissions: Buddha Hotel (Angie Eng), 201: a space algorithm (Jennifer and Kevin McCoy), Re:mote_corps REALities (Tina LaPorta), and World of Awe: Roam I.O (Yael Kanarek), http://www.alternativemuseum.org/home.htm. Accessed: March 17, 2003. Email: [e-mail]

2-Badre, Albert N. 2002. Shaping Web Usability: Interaction Design in Context. Addison Wesley.

3-Krug, Steve. 2000. Don't Make Me Think Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing.

4-Nielsen, Jakob. 2000. Designing Web Usability. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing.

5-Nielsen, Jakob. 1994.. Heuristic evaluation. In Usability Inspection Methods, edited by J. Nielsen, and R. L. Mack. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

6-Nielsen, Jakob. 1993. Usability Engineering. Academic Press.

7-Nielsen, Jakob, and Marie Tahir (2002). Homepage Usability: 50 Websites Deconstrucred. New Riders Publishing.

8-Tannenbaum, Robert S. 1998. Theoretical Foundations of Multimedia. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman and Company.

9-Walker, John A. 2001 Art in the Age of Mass Media, Pluto Press.

HENRY GUILD earned a Doctorate in Computer Information Systems from Nova Southeastern University; his dissertation showed how a Web-based customer support system was an example of knowledge management. Additionally, Henry obtained a Masters degree in Fine Arts/Photography from Hunter College. Also, Henry works for the New York City Police Department as a photographer.