These are frustrating times for museums, as they are increasingly having to redefine themselves as 'brand/visitor experiences' in order to compete in a volatile leisure market. One result of this is the need to consider the most effective way to use emerging technologies.
The need for interactivity, which has been the mantra of museum administrators for many years, has rarely involved questioning the usefulness of the ubiquitous winding handle or the big red button, which often deliver dull binary slabs of yes-no learning.
While acknowledging the need to engage visitors through discovery learning, it may now be the time to look at more imaginative and memorable ways to encourage emotional engagement.
The value of any new form of communication needs to be defined and the benefits assessed in order to really make sense of the fascinating possibilities.
As we reflect on the huge explosion of digital media, where rules are neither explained nor considered (probably best shown by Dom Joly's monster mobile phone on the comedy programme Trigger Happy TV), it is no surprise that museum professionals are so resistant to the 'digital space invaders'.
In real terms, the significant breakthroughs are quite limited. It is common knowledge that vast quantities of data may be stored and rapidly accessed, but it is less clear how to present this material in interesting and inspiring ways, other than on simple touchscreens.
For those involved in new media, it is the ability to process and capture input set against the fascinating manipulation of output that computer processing brings when used as an interactive tool.
The power of the real object will continue to be the unique selling point of museums. Traditionalists consistently defend the universal sanctity of the object and resist attempts 'to unlock the glass case', even when digital imaging could provide an extended investigation of the object.
Surely there is a value to view detail by zooming in, raising the lux level or even simply spinning the object in space. If the object and the interactive mechanism are sensitively located in relation to one another, then the power of the display can be maintained.
Sensory environments and surfaces are able to track and respond to users' movements. Physical presence, gesture, sound capture or merely touching an electromagnetic surface can be processed and used to create responsive material. But the precise nature of the physical activity is crucial so that the engagement has a rationale.
The feedback that comes from museum visitors navigating large spaces can be particularly engaging. People usually carry a direct understanding of place and as a result they are prepared to investigate material that is presented in an understandable context - this could be a relief country map or even the texture and surface of a protected fossil.
This process may be seen as just another example of the rollover computer screen, but the whole issue here is the scale of the delivery mechanism and how it can be viewed freely by other visitors. If it is easy to operate and the delivery mechanisms are big enough, then one person is able to use the system on behalf of much larger groups who may be engaged with the learning process.
A more recent technique involves linking the essence of an idea to how the user interacts. For example, a clockwork model of the solar system that has the handle (moon) rotating around a central sphere (the earth) can show the importance of tidal energy.
The winding activity creates a dynamic 'tidal' graphic that explains the importance of storing this natural form of energy, with the interface having a relationship with the subject matter. Normally, the mouse or the touchscreen have no tangible link with such data and as a result do not capture the imagination or engagement of visitors.
These digital solutions need to appeal to a wide range of users and be evaluated for their ease of use. The criticism that consistently challenges the use of such technologies is probably not valid anymore, especially the view that says they are just for younger visitors.
The recently completed £33.5m National Waterfront Museum Swansea, which I worked on, encouraged an unprecedented commitment to technology to support the interpretation.
It also commissioned in-depth independent evaluation that has been very favourable, especially in the reaction to the new media installations located throughout the museum. This view has been supported by numerous comments in the visitors' book.
I do feel there has been surprisingly little structured debate or serious documentation in this field. Even within the community of digerati,'new media' can mean many things, with spatial or sensory interactivity being distinctly marginalised as a discipline.
In the meantime, we should have a collective responsibility to find best practice and value, rather than merely claim that the technology is for the cyber generation and has no place in our precious museums.
Peter Higgins is the creative director of Land Design Studio
The need for interactivity, which has been the mantra of museum administrators for many years, has rarely involved questioning the usefulness of the ubiquitous winding handle or the big red button, which often deliver dull binary slabs of yes-no learning.
While acknowledging the need to engage visitors through discovery learning, it may now be the time to look at more imaginative and memorable ways to encourage emotional engagement.
The value of any new form of communication needs to be defined and the benefits assessed in order to really make sense of the fascinating possibilities.
As we reflect on the huge explosion of digital media, where rules are neither explained nor considered (probably best shown by Dom Joly's monster mobile phone on the comedy programme Trigger Happy TV), it is no surprise that museum professionals are so resistant to the 'digital space invaders'.
In real terms, the significant breakthroughs are quite limited. It is common knowledge that vast quantities of data may be stored and rapidly accessed, but it is less clear how to present this material in interesting and inspiring ways, other than on simple touchscreens.
For those involved in new media, it is the ability to process and capture input set against the fascinating manipulation of output that computer processing brings when used as an interactive tool.
The power of the real object will continue to be the unique selling point of museums. Traditionalists consistently defend the universal sanctity of the object and resist attempts 'to unlock the glass case', even when digital imaging could provide an extended investigation of the object.
Surely there is a value to view detail by zooming in, raising the lux level or even simply spinning the object in space. If the object and the interactive mechanism are sensitively located in relation to one another, then the power of the display can be maintained.
Sensory environments and surfaces are able to track and respond to users' movements. Physical presence, gesture, sound capture or merely touching an electromagnetic surface can be processed and used to create responsive material. But the precise nature of the physical activity is crucial so that the engagement has a rationale.
The feedback that comes from museum visitors navigating large spaces can be particularly engaging. People usually carry a direct understanding of place and as a result they are prepared to investigate material that is presented in an understandable context - this could be a relief country map or even the texture and surface of a protected fossil.
This process may be seen as just another example of the rollover computer screen, but the whole issue here is the scale of the delivery mechanism and how it can be viewed freely by other visitors. If it is easy to operate and the delivery mechanisms are big enough, then one person is able to use the system on behalf of much larger groups who may be engaged with the learning process.
A more recent technique involves linking the essence of an idea to how the user interacts. For example, a clockwork model of the solar system that has the handle (moon) rotating around a central sphere (the earth) can show the importance of tidal energy.
The winding activity creates a dynamic 'tidal' graphic that explains the importance of storing this natural form of energy, with the interface having a relationship with the subject matter. Normally, the mouse or the touchscreen have no tangible link with such data and as a result do not capture the imagination or engagement of visitors.
These digital solutions need to appeal to a wide range of users and be evaluated for their ease of use. The criticism that consistently challenges the use of such technologies is probably not valid anymore, especially the view that says they are just for younger visitors.
The recently completed £33.5m National Waterfront Museum Swansea, which I worked on, encouraged an unprecedented commitment to technology to support the interpretation.
It also commissioned in-depth independent evaluation that has been very favourable, especially in the reaction to the new media installations located throughout the museum. This view has been supported by numerous comments in the visitors' book.
I do feel there has been surprisingly little structured debate or serious documentation in this field. Even within the community of digerati,'new media' can mean many things, with spatial or sensory interactivity being distinctly marginalised as a discipline.
In the meantime, we should have a collective responsibility to find best practice and value, rather than merely claim that the technology is for the cyber generation and has no place in our precious museums.
Peter Higgins is the creative director of Land Design Studio
