Advertisement

Eye of the Veholder: AR Extending and Blending of Museum Objects and Virtual Collections

  • Ronald HaynesEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Progress in IS book series (PROIS)

Abstract

Enhanced and innovative museum exhibitions are enabled by collaborative use of Augmented Reality, interconnecting collections and complementing physical with relevant virtual objects for all participants. Carefully assembling related objects from multiple collections benefits museum visitors and researchers, cohering experiences in a blended collection environment. We propose collaboration between suitable institutions to develop a Veholder (Virtual Environment for Holdings and Online Digital Educational Repositories) community project. This should help share key museum holdings, rich sources of material for general learning and focussed research, which otherwise remain hidden in storage or in distant repositories. While preserving natural and cultural heritage, this collaborative AR approach can extend the wider impact of collections, aiding our overall understanding, deeper appreciation, and shared knowledge. Discussions about research-based specialist collections held at the Universities of Cambridge and Copenhagen have indicated keen interest in further development, with additional partnering institutions and funding options being actively sought.

Keywords

Augmented reality Museums Virtual collections Blended collections 360 viewing 3D scanning Calibration and real-world scaling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This exploration grew in part from the presentations and discussions at the Augmented Reality conference IFITTtalk@Manchester, in November 2016, and the author wishes to thank Timothy Jung and all the Creative AR and VR Hub group. Special thanks for the ongoing support and collaboration go to the Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies at the University of Cambridge, in particular Robert Foley, Marta Mirazon Lahr, Fabio Lahr, Federica Crivellaro, Frances Rivera, and Alex Wilshaw. Special mention goes to Emily Fricke, visiting Summer Intern from Bucknell University. Additional thanks go to the collaborating partners from Statens Naturhistoriske Museum (SNM), University of Copenhagen, in particular Peter Kjærgaard, Anders Drud Jordan, and Nikolaj Scharff. Special mention goes to project collaborator Richard Mee.

References

  1. African Fossils. (2016, November 28). (africanfossils.org).
  2. Augmented Reality conference IFITTtalk@Manchester. (2017, July 22). www.mmu.ac.uk/creativear/conferences/2015-augmented-realityifitttalkmanchester.
  3. BBC. (2017) Is watching opera in the cinema just as good? Retrieved March, 2017, from http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20150114-opera-in-the-cinema-blasphemy.
  4. British Museum. (2016). British museum—with google. Retrieved November 2016, from www.britishmuseum.org/with_google.aspx.
  5. Carrozzino, M., & Bergamasco, M. (2010). Beyond virtual museums: Experiencing immersive virtual reality in real museums. Journal of Cultural Heritage., 11, 452–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duckworth Collections. (2016). Duckworth collections. Retrieved November, 2016, from www.human-evol.cam.ac.uk/duckworth.html.
  7. Epson. (2016). Epson case study: Brescia museums—A walk in the past with Moverio smart glasses. Retrieved November, 2016, from www.epson.co.uk/insights/casestudy/6217.
  8. Epson Moverio. (2016). Epson Moverio BT-300: A new way of seeing the world. Retrieved November, 2016, from https://youtu.be/hhYPqF3aHUs.
  9. HPE. (2016). HPE Visual Remote Guidance for the Enterprise. Retrieved November, 2016, from https://www.hpe.com/h20195/v2/GetPDF.aspx/4AA5–8053ENW.pdf.
  10. ICOM. (2016). Museum Definition- ICOM. Retrieved November, 2016, from http://icom.museum/the-vision/museum-definition.
  11. Kiourt, C., Koutsoudis, A., & Pavlidis, G. (2016). DynaMus: A fully dynamic 3D virtual museum framework. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 22, 984–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. London Charter. (2016). London charter for the computer-based visualisation of cultural heritage. Retrieved January, 2016, from www.londoncharter.org.
  13. Natural History Museum of Denmark. (2016). Natural history museum of Denmark. Retrieved November, 2016, from http://snm.ku.dk/english.
  14. Niven, L., Steele, T. E., Finke, H., Gernat, T., & Hublin, J.-J. (2009). Virtual skeletons: Using a structured light scanner to create a 3D faunal comparative collection. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36, 2018–2023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Standards Activities—IEEE Digital Senses. (2017, March 4). (http://digitalsenses.ieee.org/standards).
  16. The Megatherium, British Museum, Roger Fenton (1850s) (2017, February 11). (http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/271658).
  17. The museum and the web: Three case studies—Comparing the virtual and the physical visits. (2017, March 4). (http://xroads.virginia.edu/~MA05/macdonald/museums/virtual.html).
  18. Virtual Museum Transnational Network. (2016, November 28). (www.v-must.net/virtual-museums).
  19. Why a Virtual Museum? (2016, November 28). (www.virtual-egyptian-museum.org/About/Story/About.WhyVirtual-FR.html).
  20. Wojciechowski, R., Walczak, K., & White, M. (2003). Augmented reality interface for museum artefact visualization. In Proceedings of the 3rd IASTED International Conference on Visualization, Imaging and Image Processing.Google Scholar
  21. Ynnerman, A., Rydell, T., Antoine, D., Hughes, D., Persson, A., & Ljung, P. (2016, December 12). Interactive Visualization of 3D Scanned Mummies at Public Venues. Communications of the ACM, 5, 72–81 (http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2016/12/210363).

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information ServicesUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations