IxD “fails
The Pentax 67 camera aka “the beast” of all cameras is a single lens reflex medium format system for 120 and 220 film. It weights a whopping 5 pounds in comparison to the 890g the Canon 5d Mark IV or the 915 g the Nikon D850 weighs. Most known for it’s buttery bokeh and unrivaled portrait capabilities, it’s a camera like no other. With such a heavy, well built camera body you’d imagine it is built in a manner to grip the camera with ease and efficiency. However, if you thought that, you’d be wrong.

The “hipster” handle that mounts onto the Pentax 67 looks super rad — something you’d see a photo of on a trendy Tumblr account but the actual functionally and design of the handle is beyond pointless. Not only does the handle add weight to an already heavy camera but the majority of cameras are designed with the grip on the right side. This is because the right hand usually grips onto the side of the camera to easily allow your index finger to reach and click the shutter button. The users left hand is generally rested underneath the lens to add balance and to focus the lens for the shot. (As with many items, the design is generally made to meet the needs of individuals who are right handed to meet the majority of their audience.)
In order to maintain balance of the Pentax 67 camera (except when using a tripod) the user must hold onto the handle when the photo is being taken. When using the handle while taking a photograph, the user would have to focus the camera and then move their hand back to handle creating a margin of error that is unnecessary. Why does the user need a handle on the left to rest their hand or hold the camera with? They do not.The handle is also towards the front of the camera as opposed to the side which also is awkward.


When analyzing Ben Shneiderman’s eight golden rules of interface design, it’s clear that the handle has failed many rules making this an “IXD Fail.” For starters, consistency. If a user is shooting with a Pentax 67, it’s almost guaranteed that they have some photography background and have shot with a range of other cameras as well. No other camera out there has a handle on the left side (at least to my knowledge). Since the user is most likely experience with other cameras, their hands will be already accustomed to how to properly hold a camera to shoot as efficient as possible. Almost every camera has a grip to the right of the camera to hold onto or rest your hand on as you use the shutter or other buttons on the right side. When not shooting on auto, it’s standard to focus with your left hand since the right hand will be clicking the button. The overall design of the camera body is consistent with the majority of other slr or dslr camera bodies but the handle is a new, unneeded element that really serves no purpose.
This also goes hand and hand with universal usability. Holding the camera from a handle on the left side instead of grasping it by the body from the right side is not intuitive or conducive to the shooting process. Whether you’re a novice or an expert, young or old, the way you hold the camera sets you up for failure or success. You wouldn’t hold a steering wheel with your hands crossed so why would you hold a handle when your hand is clearly needed to hold the focus?
If anything the handle also increases the margin for error which breaks rule #5 of preventing errors as much as possible. If the user has to move their hand back to the handle after focusing to maintain balance of the heavy camera, it opens the possibility of missing the focus. Any movement could move the focus off slightly — granted the user most likely is looking through the view finder and will notice that the object is out of focus but then it requires them to once again move their hand from the handle to the lens to focus yet again, slowing down the process and efficiency of the shoot and again, increasing the margin of error.
In my opinion, the best possible way to improve this interaction and overall user’s experience with the camera would be to get rid of the handle completely. It does not serve enough of a purpose to be deemed useful. Luckily the handle can easily be taken off the camera body. Additionally, a design to improve holding the camera handheld from the right side would improve the overall interaction with the camera. In fact, there actually already are some companies that produce a grip that can be placed on top of the camera on the right side to allow the user to easily grasp onto it when taking a photo or hold it.

Additionally, the camera is too heavy for a standard neck strap but if a stronger strap could be implemented into the design on the right side that could also improve the overall design. Many camera users would also be used to a grip interface of that nature. The grip would have to be to the side as opposed to the front like the current wooden handle as the hand grabs the camera from the side. Something similar to the image below but potentially built of the wooden material or another durable material.

On the flip side, a IxD “fail” can also be a digital experience. For example, many websites are not intuitive enough to allow the user to quickly access the information they are looking for. If a consumer or applicant gets frustrated on their journey of achieving or meeting whatever their goal and reason for being on the website was, then that company or brand just lost that client-customer relationship.
A brilliant example of an IxD fail digital experience is Blackboard HuskyCT. Over the weekend, I used this site to complete my homework and also upload content as a teaching assistant. Professors and teaching assistants group content into learning modules to provide an organization structure to their students and ease of access to the content. However, I find this site extremely clunky from both a user’s perspective and an individual uploading content to it.

For example, in the learning modules, it requires users to click through every page in order to see the last page’s content. When completing my homework this weekend for another course I’m taking I found myself wanting to refer back to the last page of the module to see what the assignment was. Every time I went back to open up the last page of the module, I was required to click through every single previous page slowing my process down. Luckily, the site is not trying to sell me something and it’s content I need otherwise I would have gotten frustrated and left. This is a golden example of how Husky CT fails to meet rule 6of Ben Shneiderman’s Eight Golden rules of permitting easy reversal of actions. In good interaction design, actions should always be reversible to keep the user happy and allow for the best possible interaction and experience with the site.
Additionally, I have never seen two professors use HuskyCT in the same exact manner. From learning modules, to items, to folders, to sidebar options, the capabilities of Husky CT although limiting and “clunky” allow professors to have some control. I often find that it is messy and confusing and the user has to relearn how to respond and interact with that specific class’ HuskyCT site.


I also feel that although I am given the illusion of having control on HuskyCT, the site breaks rule 7 and users are really not in control. The options to create content are limited from the backend standpoint and the user really has no sense that they are in charge of the interface or that it responds to their actions. I think HuskyCT could be improved by implementing a more user friendly BlackBoard system or developing a system for all Digital Media and Design professors to use to more efficiently share course content and recieve interactions from students.