This week I looked at an article that centered around augmented reality as a technology that solves a problem that digital humanists have been challenged with in the museum space. The question of how technology is changing the way we interact with objects in a museum brings further questions such as it impedes or enhances our experiences. I think that this is subjective based on what the person wants to take away from an art exhibit. That being said, augmented reality is a solution in that is an option for people to have digital information/curation if they want it without disturbing the more traditional technology free movie goers. This is part of what De angeli means by “effortless engagement” where digital experience is not hindered by other forms of technology dependent on things like GPS or even internet in the article.
Augmented reality has distinct uses and different from virtual reality. Where virtual reality puts you in a completely virtual world for one to explore, augmented reality just adds some digital environment features to the real word you are in. What this paper brilliantly describes is a headset that uses Plexiglas make your headset, which uses cellphones as its display and processing source, unobtrusive when not in use.
Dark colors won’t reflect on Plexiglas and hence your phone will know (using nfc) when to show you something. The benefits to this technology in the museum is that an nfc chip is small and nearly unnoticeable meaning that if a person choses to not use this tool, they do not have to but it makes it available for anyone with a smartphone in a museum.
What this means is that people will have the option to have digital curation available to them if they so choose it. Whether technology impedes or enhances the way we interact with does not have to have a definitive answer. Instead, I think that technologies like this that provide an augemented reality option showcases the role of technology in relation to the humanities. Technology offers flexibility and the opportunity to make more of our experiences with humanities based objects and works.
This paper continues to talk about some of the realistic difficulties with logistics of implementing the technology in museums such as the costs. While the discussion of implementation is not particularly relevant to the question of whether we should or should not integrate more technology in museums, it does show that if we are to embrace more kinds of cutting edge and seamless technology, it requires ease of use and support from the audience. From an economic approach, I believe that if there is a greater demand for technologies like these to be implemented in museums, that they will change the way we interact with museums. One day, augmented reality headsets might be part of the process of buying an entrance ticket just like 3D glasses at the movie theatre. For scholars and others worried about the authenticity of a museum, technologies like augmented reality will satisfy both those who do not want the museums changed and those who want more technological tools to change their museum experience.