Advertisement

Art and Coffee in the Museum

  • Nikolaos PartarakisEmail author
  • Emmanouil Zidianakis
  • Margherita Antona
  • Constantine Stephanidis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9189)

Abstract

Natural interaction refers to people interacting with technology as they are used to interact with the real world in everyday life, through gestures, expressions, movements, etc., and discovering the world by looking around and manipulating physical objects [16]. In the domain of cultural heritage research has been conducted in a number of directions including (a) Personalised Information in Museums, (b) Interactive Exhibits, (c) Interactive Games Installations in Museums, (d) Museum Mobile Applications, (e) Museums presence on the Web and (f) Museum Social Applications. Most museums target family groups and organize family-oriented events in their programs but how families choose to visit particular museums in response to their leisure needs has rarely been highlighted. This work exploits the possibility of extending the usage of AmI technology, and thus the user experience, within leisure spaces provided by museums such as cafeterias. The Museum Coffee Table is an augmented physical surface where physical objects can be used for accessing information about artists and their creations. At the same entertainment for children is facilitated through the integration of popular games on the surface. As a result, the entire family can seat around the table, drink coffee and complete their visit to the museum acquiring additional knowledge and playing games.

Keywords

Ambient intelligence Tabletop interaction Augmented reality Cultural heritage Interactive surfaces 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the FORTH-ICS internal RTD Programme ‘Ambient Intelligence and Smart Environments’ [1, 15, 29].

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Iurgel, I.: From another point of view: Art-E-Fact. In: Göbel, S., Spierling, U., Hoffmann, A., Iurgel, I., Schneider, O., Dechau, J., Feix, A. (eds.) TIDSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3105, pp. 26–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/ (2004)
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    SPARQL Query Language for RDF. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
  10. 10.
    Grammenos, D., Zabulis, X., Michel, D., Sarmis, T., Georgalis, G., Tzevanidis, K., Argyros, A., Stephanidis, C.: Design and development of four prototype interactive edutainment exhibits for museums. In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) Universal Access in HCI, Part III, HCII 2011. LNCS, vol. 6767, pp. 173–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Conversational agent at the Heinz Nixdorf MuseumsForum. In: Proceedings of Re‐Thinking Technology in Museums (2011). http://www.idc.ul.ie/techmuseums11/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15&Itemid=7
  12. 12.
    Garzotto, F., Rizzo, F.: Interaction paradigms in technology‐enhanced social spaces: a case study in museums. In: Proceedings of DPPI 2007, pp. 343–356 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kortbek, K.J., Grønbæk, K.: Interactive spatial multimedia for communication of art in the physical museum space. In: Proceeding of MM 2008, pp. 609–618 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hornecker, E., Stifter, M.: Learning from interactive museum installations about interaction design for public settings. In: Proceedings of OZCHI 2006, pp. 135–142 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aarts, E., Encarnacao, J.L.: True Visions: The Emergence of Ambient Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). ISBN 978-3-540-28972-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Valli, A.: The design of natural interaction. Multimedia Tools Appl. 38(3), 295–305 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Falk, J.H., Dierking, L.D.: The Museum Experience. Whalesback Books, Washington D.C. (1992)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    McManus, P.M.: Families in museums. In: Miles, R., Zavalac, L. (eds.) 16 Towards the Museum of the Future: New European Perspectives. Routledge, London and New York (1994)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hooper-Greenhill, E.: Museums and Their Visitors. Routledge, London (1994)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Baillie, A.: Empowering the visitor: the family experience of museums, a pilot study of ten family group visits to the Queensland Museum. In: Museums Australia Annual Conference (1996)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    MORI: Visitors to Museums and Galleries in the UK, Research Study Conducted for the Council for Museums Archives and Libraries (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moussouri, T.: Negotiated agendas: families in science and technology museums. Int. J. Technol. Manage. 25(5), 477–489 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kelly, L., Savage, G., Griffin, J., Tonkin, S.: Knowledge Quest: Australian Families Visit Museums. Australian Museum and National Museum of Australia, Sydney (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sterry, P.: An insight into the dynamics of family group visitors to cultural tourism destinations: initiating the research agenda’. In: Smith, K.A., Schott, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference 2004, Wellington, 8–10 December, pp. 298–406 (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sheng, C.-W., Chen, M.-C.: A study of experience expectations of museum visitors. Tourism Manage. 33(1), 53–60 (2012)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    McRobbie, M., et al.: Pervasive Technology Labs Program Report, August 2005Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Walczak, M., McAllister, M., Segen, J.: Dialog table. In: Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Karat, C., Campbell, R.L., Fiegel, T.: Comparison of empirical testing and walkthrough methods in user interface evaluation. In: Proceedings ACM CHI 1992 Conference, Monterey, CA, 3–7 May, pp. 397–404 (1992)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nielsen, J.: Paper versus computer implementations as mock-up scenarios for heuristic evaluation. In: Proceedings of INTERACT 1990 3rd IFIP Conference on HCI, pp. 315 – 320 (1990)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikolaos Partarakis
    • 1
    Email author
  • Emmanouil Zidianakis
    • 1
  • Margherita Antona
    • 1
  • Constantine Stephanidis
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas (FORTH), Institute of Computer ScienceHeraklionGreece
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CreteRethimnoGreece

Personalised recommendations