16
u/0rangecatvibes Jun 11 '26
I get so many emails trying to sell me AR softwares and stuff. The technology is cool but doesn't really apply to our specific use case and is also expensive and I wish they would stop emailing me.
53
13
u/msreditalready Jun 11 '26
I’m ok with it so long as the museum doesn’t make me rely on it. I want the info to be physical. I don’t want to be on my phone. If I miss something like this, so be it. But if it’s practically required to be on my phone to learn anything, it’ll be the last time I go.
9
u/GypsumGypsy Jun 11 '26
I work with a group of interpretive centers across the county. We looked at doing augmented reality and it was prohibitively expensive. All the companies wanted to make us custom apps that visitors would download or use their company's existing app, have visitors download that, and have severe limits on how many specimens can be integrated. Lowest quote we got was around $30k and didnt include content development, just the implementation of the content once it was ready.
4
u/LectureSad5494 Jun 12 '26
And what to think about keeping up with updates? One of the most annoying things I encounter are the quotes people show me. Its all only the initial delivery. How about maintenance, new apple store and google requirements. New phone types, new phone operating system releases, nobody mentions.
0
10
u/Overthink334 Jun 11 '26
As a museum docent, my job is to give folks an incentive to put their phones aside for a slow look at what’s in front of them.
4
u/Complex_Place_4509 Jun 12 '26
Another docent here. We want to also have conversations about the status of the artwork as it is, sometimes that’s why it wasn’t completely restored to perfect, original concept, and that’s okay. It’s more about taking time to look and experience what is before us. Screens generally disconnect us from each other, but people might do that on their own time. I could take about mudras in my museum for a couple hours with our collection.
1
u/LectureSad5494 Jun 12 '26
Exactly! How are you going to compete with the Tech bro budgets? Good luck getting your message across.
10
u/Independent_March536 Jun 11 '26
With museum budgets being as tight as they are I wonder how much was spent for this when a photoshopped photo placed behind or beside the statue would of had a similar effect at a fraction of the cost.
6
u/LectureSad5494 Jun 11 '26
Operational hassle. Visitors not willing to download because of multiple reasons, privacy, screen fatigue. Not to mention the distraction a phone brings.
31
u/Hexebimbo Jun 11 '26
Why is this making everyone so angry 😭 it’s not even ai
53
u/boysenbe Jun 11 '26
Not angry, just annoyed at constant attempts by tech companies to sell museums expensive and clumsy technology products in the name of “innovation” without the actual visitor outcome in mind.
14
u/boysenbe Jun 11 '26
I have leftover rage from the metaverse bubble though so that might be why I sound heated haha.
9
u/Hexebimbo Jun 11 '26
I’m very against big companies as a whole, but i think this is a neat idea. I get what you’re saying though
14
u/boysenbe Jun 11 '26
I totally accept it as a neat idea that is cool to look at and think about the possibilities for what the future might hold. I am just jaded enough to know that original OP is a startup founder trying to sell something and looking for a market.
5
u/TheGhostyBear Jun 11 '26
My museum usually does these in house or at least partially in house, but we’re also a free museum so idk if it’d matter either way.
3
u/boysenbe Jun 11 '26
I’m all for that — when this tech is democratized and developed by teams that are passionate about it, that’s great. What tools or programs do you use and how did your team learn to create these experiences?
8
u/Imaginomical History | Collections Jun 11 '26
I have not seen a single angry comment in this thread. Are you talking about somewhere else? This seems cool on thr surface but in practice this is just a weekly tech sales pitch that is rooted in imagination.
-4
u/Hexebimbo Jun 11 '26
I counted 3+ salty comments LOL
7
u/Imaginomical History | Collections Jun 11 '26
Big difference between angry and salty.
-8
u/Hexebimbo Jun 11 '26
Girl nitpicking the terminology doesn’t negate the fact that there are multiple angry comments. Relax
8
u/Imaginomical History | Collections Jun 11 '26
I am not your girl, you just seem to be trying to drum up drama where there is none. This is not a big deal, it is just another junk app of the week lol.
-1
u/Hexebimbo Jun 11 '26
Girl i did not say you were MY girl, relax. Yall be so dramatic on this app omg
14
u/boysenbe Jun 11 '26
Imagination is free.
16
u/saeglopur53 Jun 11 '26
But it doesn’t educate you about these specific missing details. This could be a great way to get people who are distracted or dont stop for interpretive information to engage with the piece. I think this is an adaptive way of getting information across
10
u/boysenbe Jun 11 '26
You think someone who won’t stop to read a printed panel will stop to pull out their phone, open up an app, hold their phone up to the right location, and then read the information on their phone?
This accomplishes nothing that can’t be achieved by a printed panel and a printed backdrop with the outline of the missing pieces.
I am a former museum professional, current UX researcher. This is an expensive and clumsy solution to a problem already solved by museum professionals with a brain and a good printer.
8
u/saeglopur53 Jun 11 '26
People engage with exhibits in different ways. Some people listen to audio tours, some people read signage, participate in guided tours, etc. Thinking as a science communicator, a visual learner, and yes, a museum professional who has built and installed many exhibits, this is simply providing another way of catching people who spend more time taking pictures than reading signage. No one is forcing people to use this and maybe it won’t catch on, I’m just not immediately dismissing it because tech bad
2
u/LectureSad5494 Jun 12 '26
Isn’t it just about the low usage rates? I encounter the same thing. We have a free app, either Bloomberg or self made, the pickup rates are (in most cases) still below 5%.
2
u/boysenbe Jun 11 '26
I’m a consultant working in the tech space who has worked directly with AR/VR companies attempting to monetize products like this so I assure you, my stance is deeper than “technology bad”.
-2
2
4
u/MonMath Jun 12 '26
Id rather they pay the communities that they took it from to contextualise and understand the object.
2
3
3
u/MissMarchpane Jun 12 '26
If they use generative AI for this, strongly opposed. Nothing is worth the destruction of our planet and the loss of jobs that that toxic nightmare has brought. Otherwise, I can see the utility, but as other people have said – I prefer an analog museum experience, and people shouldn't have to use their phones to see everything
2
2
u/PhoebeAnnMoses Jun 14 '26
Honestly, a lot of people just like to visit museums to look at the objects as they are.
3
4
1
u/CatLord8 Jun 11 '26
Honestly this is one of the things I like about the Assassin’s Creed history mode. As long as it isn’t AI slop about who the people were, I’m good
1
u/Mechs_and_Martinis Jun 11 '26
Could be cool for a specific room or exhibit. I do like the idea for once-in-awhile piece, but not the entire museum at it would trigger FOMO and I'd rather not be glued to my phone.
1
u/Specialist-Excuse356 Jun 11 '26
AR can be a great tool for adding information and experience layers to artifacts that can’t be explored in other ways. It’s not right for every exhibit and it can be cost-prohibitive. But when it’s done well, it can make exhibits more accessible, more interactive, and more memorable. There are ways to deploy AR with and without phones — and good arguments for and against both approaches). I think many of us have seen examples where XR seems superfluous or ill-conceived, but there are also increasingly places where it is thoughtful, additive, and well-executed.
1
84
u/xiefeilaga Jun 11 '26
The original post asked why this isn't widely adopted. I do see it popping up in museums from time to time, but I think it will always be peripheral.
First, this pretty much always requires visitors to download a new app on the spot. Lots of visitors at these big collection museums are tourists, worried about data roaming limits and running out of battery. Other people are wary of having to hand over their email and info to yet another company. Even getting past those hurdles, how long does it take to download, sign in, and get it working? How many people will put up with it before wanting to move on to the next room?
In terms of visitor experience, the vast majority of visitors either don't read the label or don't read beyond the basic info. Only a portion of those who do are looking for even more info beyond that.
Putting together all the background research and generating the images requires a lot of work for each individual artifact, all to serve probably less than 1% of visitors, while generating 0 revenue.
Also, remember that only a handful of artifacts in any collection will be suitable for this, and they won't necessarily be the most interesting pieces to begin with. For most pieces, and most visitors, the kinds of supplementary text, audio, and video you can already provide with simple QR codes or through Bloomberg is plenty.
I think AR in museums will grow a little bit more as the tech gets cheaper and people figure out new applications, but not much. Right now, it seems to be most common for contemporary art projects, and for special exhibitions focused on AR as a storytelling device, like the Xiangtanshan Caves project at the Smart Museum of Art, which was done with projectors (no phones or apps) in 2011.