Tangible interfaces for digital museum applications

Capurro, Carlotta; Nollet, Dries; Pletinckx, Daniel

doi:10.1109/digitalheritage.2015.7413881

Cited by 18 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The term "smart" replicas has also become popular over the recent years. This refers to the possibility of combining the physical object with further layers of interpretative multimedia information [6,16].…”

Section: Related Work 21 Digital Fabrication To Communicate Ch Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracturing Artefacts into 3D Printable Puzzles to Enhance Audience Engagement with Heritage Collections

Echavarria

Samaroudi

Weyrich

2020

J. Comput. Cult. Herit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three-dimensional (3D) puzzles of heritage artefacts are typically used to engage audiences in the interpretation of archaeological objects in a museum gallery. The reason for this is that a puzzle can be seen as an enjoyable educational activity in the form of a game but also as a complex activity that archaeologists undertake when re-assembling fragments, for instance, of broken pottery. Until now the creation of this type of experiences is mostly a manual process and the artefacts used rarely reflect those in the collection due to the complex nature of the process. The contribution of this article is a novel digital worfklow for the design and fabrication of 3D puzzles that overcomes these limitations. The input to the workflow is an authentic artefact from a heritage collection, which is then digitised using technologies such as 3D scanning and 3D modelling. Thereafter, a puzzle generator system produces the puzzle pieces using a cell fracture algorithm and generates a set of puzzle pieces (female) and a single core piece (male) for fabrication. Finally, the pieces are fabricated using 3D printing technology and post-processed to facilitate the puzzle assembly. To demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed novel workflow, we deployed it to create a puzzle activity of the Saltdean urn, which is exhibited at the Archaeology Gallery of the Brighton Museum and Art Gallery. The workflow is also used with further artefacts to demonstrate its applicability to other shapes. The significance of this research is that it eases the task of creating puzzle-like activities and maintaining them in the long term within a busy public space such as a museum gallery.

show abstract

Section: Related Work 21 Digital Fabrication To Communicate Ch Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracturing Artefacts into 3D Printable Puzzles to Enhance Audience Engagement with Heritage Collections

Echavarria

Samaroudi

Weyrich

2020

J. Comput. Cult. Herit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The design of our installations defined a new vocabulary of actions (e.g., similar to [26,29,30,32]), and the visitors were required to perform these actions in order to achieve certain goals (i.e., capturing the cultural knowledge). All three conditions were specifically designed to communicate the same tacit heritage knowledge by allowing participants to construct a meaningful link between an interactive navigation and the dynamic representation.…”

Section: Role Of Navigationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, applications of TUIs in museums vary in terms of how the museum artifact is embedded in the interface; from using the original artifact itself as an interaction device, such as triggering illuminations and auditory information by touching the artifacts [27], to a semi attached interaction, such as using a wooden magnifying lens with an integrated smartphone for allowing visitors to examine museum artifacts by pointing the lens close to them and then extra digital content (e.g., text, images or animations) is displayed on the smartphone [28], to more detached interaction when the original artifact and the interface are located in distant places in the museum for provoking visitors' curiosity to visit the artifact and to learn about it [29]. Second, communicating information and values of cultural heritage through tangible interaction could be explicitly integrated into sensorized objects by focusing on their physicality [30], or it could be implicitly integrated in a gesture or an action, focusing therefore on the act rather than the object itself [31]. By performing specific actions, the visitor implicitly understands and experiences an intangible value related to a certain object.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Tangible Interaction to Communicate Tacit Knowledge of Built Heritage

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meanings and values of built heritage vary from factual and explicit meanings which are relatively easy to present, to more tacit knowledge, which is typically more challenging to communicate due to its implicit and often abstract character. In this paper, we investigate how tangible interaction influences the communication of this tacit knowledge of built heritage, and howit affects the experience of visitors. Through a between-group comparative study in a real-world museum context, we examined howthe tangible characteristics of an interactive prototypemuseuminstallation influence how visitors perceive a particular story containing tacit heritage knowledge. The communicated story relates a historical journey in ancient Egypt to the physical and architectural characteristics of the entrance colonnade at the Djoser Complex in Saqqara. Our experimental conditions consisted of an interactive navigation (input) and a passive representation (output) components, ranging from traditional digital displays to fully tangible means of interaction. We report on our findings, which showed various differences and commonalities between our three experimental conditions. We conclude with a number of discussion points and design recommendations: (a) to strive for balance between navigation and representation modalities in terms of affordance and the required cognitive effort; (b) to take advantage of physical representation and grasping, such as conveying particular physical details and characteristics; and (c) to consider design aspects of embodiment, physical abstraction and materiality for future research or potential further development of communicating the meanings and values of heritage.

show abstract

“…As already discussed, museums have been experimenting and investigating the use of digital technologies for a number of decades. Alongside this, researchers in the field of humancomputer interaction and other related disciplines have also been studying the design and deployment of interactive technology in museums (for examples see [19], [22]- [24]).…”

Section: Iot-based Interactive Experiencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interacting with Heritage: On the Use and Potential of IoT Within the Cultural Heritage Sector

Marshall

2018

2018 Fifth International Conference on Internet of Things: Systems, Management and Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tangible interfaces for digital museum applications

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Fracturing Artefacts into 3D Printable Puzzles to Enhance Audience Engagement with Heritage Collections

Fracturing Artefacts into 3D Printable Puzzles to Enhance Audience Engagement with Heritage Collections

The Role of Tangible Interaction to Communicate Tacit Knowledge of Built Heritage

Interacting with Heritage: On the Use and Potential of IoT Within the Cultural Heritage Sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About