For my museum site visit, I went to the Getty. The exhibit that I found that fit this activity perfectly is called “The Life of Art: Context, Collecting, and Display”. The goal of the exhibit is to give visitors the opportunity to sit down and more closely examine some items from the Getty’s collection; this examination was aided by the use of interactive iPad activities, displays of items, and text panels giving additional information. The examination of the items focuses on four categories: technique, function, history, and display. Different items were given different iPad activities. Some allowed the user to rotate the virtual object and click on various important features to learn more about them (see first photo). Others used the iPad camera and allowed the user to compare the object with another item in real time (see second photo).
I spent a while using the technology as well as observing my friends and other museum-goers interact with it as well. One of the first things I noticed was that people tended to go straight for the iPad without really looking at the actual item first. Then, most people would swipe through the iPad activity, but not spend enough time to read all the content, and them move on to the next item. Most people did not actually sit down and complete the entire activity. This made me start to think that maybe the iPad was not quite interactive enough for people to stay engaged. However, there was one pair of people who spent nearly five minutes in front of one iPad/item display. They were extremely excited about the exhibit and kept asking each other “Oh, did you read this part?”, “Did you see this?”, etc. These two actually seemed to read through all of the content instead of quickly swiping through. This makes me think that it really depends on the person and their original interest in the item to estimate how long they will spend looking at the exhibit.
Additionally, I observed that the iPad activity which had the user lift the iPad and use the iPad camera to compare the item and another image/item in the same frame to be more popular than ones where you simply swiped through some additional content on the iPad. This is probably because this activity was the most interactive.
I also examined the exhibit myself. I definitely found that the iPad technology especially was really helpful for learning about these items in a more meaningful way. The iPad activities challenge you to find things about the item, for example “Can you find the maker’s mark on the item?”, which really allows the user to focus on specific and interesting details about the items that may have normally been overlooked. It also allows for extra information to be included with the item that would not fit in a normal wall text blurb. After spending time with this exhibit I really feel like I learned more, was more engaged with the items, and will remember the items better than I would have if they were exhibited in a more standard exhibit. The Getty definitely uses technology successfully in this exhibit.
I’ve also enjoyed the Getty’s use of technology! It’s not overwhelming, but it really provides useful contextual information. I remember spending a long time watching this video, which I probably wouldn’t have ever encountered or spent time with in my regular life, but really made an impression on me at the Getty.
This is a really cool use of technology in a museum! I really like the idea of the using the more interactive iPad camera activity, and prompting the viewer to find certain things on the item. I think by incorporating the “challenge” questions, the Getty is finding an innovative way to communicate information, instead of just traditionally listing the information on a text card.
This seems like a really interesting exhibit. I especially liked how the interactive technology would “challenge” the viewer and ask them to identify certain aspects of the work. It is interesting how often IPads are used within digital exhibitions. Its as though it is assumed everyone already knows how to use an IPad. It is unfortunate how some people seem more interested that the technology rather than the piece itself, but it seems like a great technological component for those genuinely interested in the items.
I really appreciated the observations that you made! Aidan and I are part of the iPad interactive team for our own exhibit, and this makes me want to rethink what we’re working on depending on how people have reacted with the iPads in this exhibit. I’m not entirely sure if we have the technological capabilities to make use of the iPad camera within the app that we’re using but I’m definitely excited to explore the possibilities.