Benjamin,
This is a great topic and one that I have wrestled with for many years as an interpretive exhibition designer. Here are my answers to your questions.
1.) I think that museums will continue on in today's culture regardless of changes in technology. Museums that are effective at attracting visitors and sources of funding will continue to survive. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, for example, will be relevant no matter what technologies they employ or do not employ. But that is an art museum, filled with some of the most beautiful objects and images on earth. They also feature entire original environments like the interior of an important Frank Lloyd Wright designed living room, and the entire Temple of Dendur. Interpretive museums have a more difficult time, but still, if they contain objects and stories that visitors can relate to, then they will survive. The Intrepid Museum in NYC has numerous aircraft that continue to enthrall visitors just with their presence. The SR-71 Blackbird comes to mind.
2.) I partially answered this in the first question. To expand on that, we can also use the Yin Tu Tang house at the Peabody Essex Museum in Salem, Massachusetts. It is an entire 200 year old Chinese courtyard style merchant's house that has been transported brick by brick from mainland China and reconstructed outside the Peabody Essex. Most of the day-to-day original contents of the house are intact, as well as the histories of those who called it home for generations. Visitors are given 30 minutes in which to explore the house on their own with hand held audio wands. Discrete numbers engraved on small stone cubes placed around the house cue visitors as to which number they should press as they explore a location or room. The audio program is beautifully produced with layers that include brief curator's comments, and thoughts from ancestors of the original builders of the house. It starts out describing interesting details as you explore a room. This is one of the best exhibitions of any kind that I have seen anywhere. It is totally immersive, and when visitors are inside the house, they are both transported back in time and in geographic location. This exhibit will always be relevant.
3.) I am not an expert in this area, but have experienced different immersive technologies over the years. We have designed recreated physical environments in which sound, light animation, and video projection are employed. This is immersive in a sense. I think that you are focused on true technologically produced immersive environments. I have not seen many of those other than at theme parks.
4.) If a specific immersive technique can enhance a storyline or bring a topic to life for the visitor, is within reach financially, and is reliable, then it should be explored for use in museums. Typically these types of technologies are expensive and require ongoing maintenance to keep them working. I could see many applications for this technology. There are two issues related to these technologies that should be addressed. First, the quality of the production needs to be first rate. There is nothing worse than amazingly effective technology that immerses visitors in a boring and poorly produced show. How many terrible feature films have you watched? It is the same issue here. Quality counts, and quality is typically expensive. The second issue is that immersive technology has to take into account the location and status of the audience. Are they seated or standing? Is the experience 180 degrees or a full 360? Visitors can get lost pretty quickly with action taking place all around them, especially when you are trying to communicate a message. Perhaps nesting the experience within another more traditional seated audience might be an option. When the time in the story arrives where you want visitors to feel like they are being dropped into the middle of the action, then use it.
5.) I cannot speak to this as a museum employee, but as a designer. The technology is fantastic, and can detract from the message if handled poorly. If visitors remember the technique, and not the message, then the museum has emulated an amusement park, where message is secondary or not present at all. The technology is expensive in terms of infrastructure, equipment, maintenance, and media production. On the other hand, well heeled museums can use the technology effectively to enhance the story that they are trying to tell. Can you imagine being on the deck of the USS Massachusetts under attack from enemy aircraft, with the guns blazing all around you, and aircraft flying overhead. The sound, the visuals, the vibrations, and even the smells could be emulated. It would provide an effective simulation of combat, which might be helpful in understanding what war was like in this given instance.
------------------------------
Michael Hanke
Exhibit Designer
Design Division, Inc.
Amherst MA
Original Message:
Sent: 11-16-2015 10:31 AM
From: Benjamin Watson
Subject: Should museums and galleries use immersive technologies?
I work as the Senior Information and Audio Visual Technologies Specialist at the National Infantry Museum in Columbus, GA. I am also in college and have a draft of a research paper due this week on the topic: Should museums and galleries use immersive technology to stay relevant in today's changing culture? I would love to have some more feedback from other museum and gallery professionals. If you would like to help please answer the five questions below and include your name, title, and the institution you are with. Also, if you have any images and videos of immersive technology used well in museums and galleries those would be helpful as well.
1. Are museums and galleries losing their relevance in today’s changing culture?
2. Why are/are not museums losing their relevance in today’s changing culture?
3. What are some of the emerging immersive technologies available to museums and galleries?
4. Why should museums and galleries use the available immersive technologies available to them?
5. What is keeping museums and galleries from using the immersive technology available to them?
My thesis is: Museums and galleries should use immersive technology when it adds to the story they are trying to tell but not just for the sake of using technology; immersive technologies can take a good experience and make it a great experience, visitors are wanting to engage with objects, artifacts, and artwork in more in depth ways, and museums and galleries who refuse to or are unable to adapt their content to a millennial mindset will probably not survive.
------------------------------
Benjamin Watson
Sr. Information & Audio Visual Technologies Specialist
National Infantry Museum Foundation
Columbus GA
bwatson@nationalinfantryfoundation.org
------------------------------