So I am reading left and right about AR and how technology can do this and that, the other and its brother BUT I am still not nailing this elusive research question. My interest has always been in HCI (Human Computer Interaction) and how do Human beings interact with the medium in a museum context. This is what I researched about, wrote about, dissertated about (is that a word??). So, deng it, why does the question have to be about technology? it doesn’t, IMHO.
I want to know:
-if you add context to objects VIA AR, how do people react? Do they actually learn more?
– if you allow access to a participatory component (such as tags, own domain idea, tweets etc.), how does that influence their ‘involvement’ in an exhibition?
I was reading about I, Object (part of Live!Museum) and was thinking this is the chicken and egg idea: do you use objects in a gallery to trigger contextual content (which I think would still give a false idea about the objects themselves and they were never ‘born’ in a gallery) or do you use an outdoor space, recreate an AR context and position the objects in their rightful place? Granted, some things like paintings, where originally made to be hung in indoor spaces, but objects I think are a whole different bowl of wax. Are objects the point or are contexts the point? I am leaning towards the latter…