What most disturbs me about Nina’s argument is the clear lack of background work she put into crafting what amounts to a pretty scathing opinion of the IMA.  It seems from Nina’s comments that she is basing her views on a single visit to our galleries during a conference reception. I have no way of knowing how many of those 3 hours Nina spent in our exhibitions and galleries, but it seems that she didn’t bother to ask any staff members of the IMA about efforts we might be making to engage our visitors on-site and around the city.  Aside from a brief two minute encounter in the conference hall after her comments, Nina failed to probe in any depth about what (if any) strategy their might be behind our efforts on-site.

Experience and Engagement

In case you haven’t noticed, Art Museums are frequently considered to be the “stuffier”, less “engaging” older brothers to our sibling science, technology, and “experience” museums.  Nina draws at least some of her professional experience from this field, so perhaps we should cut her a little slack for missing a crucial challenge faced by art museums.

Here's one kiosk I'd love to see in our Museum

Many experiences in art museums can tend to be more subjective… more personal… deeply moving but indeed sometimes less factual than in other types of museums.  This isn’t denying that an understanding of the underlying contexts and histories of these works is important.  Just that this knowledge is a means to an end. Facilitating and encouraging these types of experiences is a primary challenge in creating engaging experiences inside art museums.  Balancing engaging exhibits with a gallery aesthetic which still supports and encourages individual interpretation is not an easy problem to solve.

Perhaps the lack of 10 year old kiosks and flashy interpretive signage makes it appear that we are not attempting to engage our audiences?

There still remains an outstanding debate in my mind regarding whether or not even well designed “experiences” in art museums offer an appreciably better connection to works of art than more unobtrusive offerings of information which allow audiences to pick-and-choose their own experiences with works of art.  Apart from leading audiences by a nose-ring through what they should think/experience there must be a place for a clean, open and personal interpretation of our collections.  These are questions we’re wrestling with here at the IMA as I’m sure many of you are in your own institutions.  Why rush to an answer before we’ve studied our own audiences and local needs?

Missing the Mark

Maybe Nina missed the chance to talk to Tiffany Leason – who was also at the conference reception – about the Viewing Project .  A three year grant funded initiative, the Viewing Project is designed to experiment with ways of engaging visitors with works from the IMA’s permanent collection.  In addition, this project seeks to measure and evaluate this visitor engagement in ways that can lead to concrete answers about these issues.  Rather than guessing haphazardly about what kinds of exhibits might make a difference, we’re attempting to really study our particular circumstance and unique audience here in Indianapolis.

The Viewing Project in-gallery interface

I would have loved to point Nina towards some of our New Media team (most of whom are named Daniel) who could share about some pretty innovative ways we are engaging audiences in ways that allow them to self select their participation.

One of the Dans could have shared about project we did in association with an Egyptian Art exhibit which made use of Flickr both in the galleries and on the streets of Indy.  The project, called “Your Afterlife”, asked scads of people from around the museum and city about what they would take with them into the happily-ever-after which resulted in some really funny, interesting, and touching results.

What would you take with you into the Afterlife?

Or Dan might have shared some of the work we did creating visualizations from CAT scan data of one of the mummies in the show. Visitors could take a peak under the wraps both in the galleries near the display or online at home.

Meet Demetrious the Mummy

Yet another Dan might have talk to Nina about “Project IMA” a project we hosted featuring 16 local designers, which engaged the designers and the community in fashion designs presented in conjunction with an exhibition called “Breaking The Mode”.  The project culminated in a runway show inside the museum and some awesome video which is still really popular on ArtBabble.

Our last Dan may have taken Nina over to the Davis LAB where for over three years now we’ve been experimenting with bringing our online-efforts into the galleries for guests to experience and engage with.  Sponsored by several donors who really care about how technology can be used to enhance the museum experience, the Davis LAB has hosted a wide array of experiences.  In 2006, I built a multi-user physical interface for visitors to explore the IMA’s collection using camera tracking and advanced computer graphics algorithms.  This experience ran in the space for over two years and we tracked hundreds of thousands of users using  the interface to explore art from our collection.

ETX - Multi-User Collection Browsing with Physical User Interface

The LAB has also hosted virtual reality displays, a variety of interactive kiosks, a recreation of ancient Rome which allowed users to navigate through a unique system of interlinked panoramas in addition to many other efforts.  All of these experiences are always available to visitors in the museum and online and are designed to leverage their experiences here at the IMA.

Explore Virtual Rome through Linked Panoramas

Now the Davis LAB plays host to ArtBabble and encourages connections with the IMA’s blogs and online communities.  We find that users engage with the content in new and different ways in the galleries and that we receive a large number of comments from physical visitors from within the space.  Mind you, we are encouraging this online/onsite engagement while preserving – for the moment – an open, clean interpretive experience in many of the galleries.

Visitor Experiences in the Davis LAB

I do think that mobile content deployments offer some intriguing options for user experiences in our galleries.  These platforms can preserve an aesthetic which supports personal connection, while offering unobtrusive ways for visitors to explore deeper connections to works of art on their own devices and at their own pace.  As such, we’ve started work on a new software system for mobile tours which can connect to our back-end content management practices and drive experiences on multiple content platforms including kiosks, phones, and web-browsers.

The project is called TAP and you can expect to see it “in the wild” sometime this fall in connection with our Sacred Spain exhibition.  Beyond serving just ourselves in this endeavor, we’ve been working with a collaboration of like-minded folks on some possible meta-data standards for mobile tours and platform architectures that can work for lots of different museums.  An early version of this spec (TourML – pronounced turmoil) can be seen in action in the Dallas Museum of Art’s new mobile tour.  You can read more about our progress on the Museum Mobile Wiki,  follow the effort on twitter (#mtogo) or watch this space for more info.

Innovation

It’s worth taking a bit of time to talk about how innovation happens within museums.  This is a question I get asked a lot these days and, as such, I’ve thought a good bit about it.  I think it’s fair to say that we all seek after innovation in what we do.  At times it seems to be ephemeral… a gossamer to be grasped at.  Other times, you find yourself standing right in the middle of it without knowing how you arrived.  I can honestly say that during the last three years, the IMA has truly been the most innovative organization I’ve ever been a part of.  (This includes several major research universities, and the supercomputing center that invented the first web browser.)  If there’s one thing I’ve learned about innovation, it’s that it never occurs in a vacuum.  Certainly Max Anderson’s strong leadership and risk-tolerant style play a significant role here, and I’d like to think that our web team has had some pretty interesting ideas over the years.  The truth, however, is that the innovation others have identified in the IMA’s technology and online efforts is only a leading indicator of true institutional innovation and change happening just under the surface.

Those of you working in larger organizations know how difficult it is to push forward initiatives without comprehensive and wide ranging support from your colleagues.  Likewise, almost everything you see online has its roots in the support, efforts and beliefs of dozens of professionals from every department around the IMA.  Who is it, do you think, that populates the Dashboard with statistics?  Who’s responsible for the underpinnings of deaccessioning on the web?  Who is it that co-creates, consults, connects and supports the videos on ArtBabble?  Many of these folks have worked in art museums for decades and have devoted significant portions of their careers to advancing the arts in a non-profit setting.  To have their support and collaboration has truly been one of the great honors of coming to the IMA.

It should not be surprising, therefore, that the first-fruits of innovation can most easily be seen online.  Bricks, mortar and people’s opinions take significantly longer to change than our websites do.  We plan our exhibitions years into the future. Planning for a building expansion can approach the decade mark. Even our educational programs are planned at least a year out.

There are very few efforts in museums which move at the pace and timescale of the internet and social media. But like the buds on a tree, the innovation you see online is propped up by an ecosystem of support throughout the IMA which allows it to succeed at all.  I wish each of you could take the time to understand the institutional change we have been experiencing here at the IMA.  As it stands however, the most evident and easily accessible proof of this transformation is visible online.  Over the coming years, I’m extremely confident that this change will pay ongoing dividends for our visitors.

In Conclusion

Finally, I don’t mean to be overly harsh with Nina.  She is a brilliant professional who brings a lot of value to our profession in her writing and contributions to the field.  I do take exception, in this case, to a poorly informed series of articles.

Nina says on her blog that, “I believe that every museum can grow its audience as long as it is willing to grow with that audience by taking risks, trying new things, and communicating openly.”  In my opinion, I think that the IMA has been an example of these very things over the past few years and has contributed significantly to the community of museums.  I’m not asking for any special treatment or exemption from criticism.  On the contrary, what I’d like most is the chance for a little conversation on the topic.  So… if something we’re doing strikes you wrong or seems out of place…  all you’ve got to do is ask a few questions.  You can find me most easily here on the blog, or on twitter (@rjstein)

Thanks,

Rob

You can click on any of the graphs to get a larger view.  The points in the graph are all ArtBabble users.  The lines between the points represent an invite that was sent.  The top point in this graph represents a fake user, “ArtBabble”, that has “invited” all the first tier of users.  The blue lines represent these pseudo-invites.  The red lines represent an invite that was sent and has not yet been accepted.  Finally, the green lines represent an invite that was sent and accepted.  This graph also lets us easily see that the longest invite chain included six people.

This graph shows the same information as before, but is layed out a little different.  Finally, it was interesting to drop the fake ArtBabble user to get another perspective.  It’s fairly easy to pick out who our power-inviters are.

Thanks to all those who have spread the love, and drop us a line if you would like an invite.  Once we can announce a few of the partners, we will retire the invites and allow ArtBabble to go public.

Thanks to Tad!

Last week I announced the opening of The Davis LAB and launch of ArtBabble. If you stopped by on Saturday to check out the LAB and chat with IMA staff, thank you so much. It was a good turn out. Our goal is to plan more events in the next year where we get to meet those in the local community interested in what we’re doing with the blog, technology and more. A couple of readers expressed some interest in seeing some photos of the LAB. We’re also setting up some times for other museums to visit, to learn more about the LAB, see the installation, and more or less, talk shop.

Brad testing out ArtBabble

The back half of the space is set up similar to a living room, using furniture from our Design Center.  This area is dedicated to using ArtBabble.  Visitors in this secton can act as a Davis LAB user and rate videos, leave comments, or invite friends.  ArtBabble is still in ‘invitation only’ stage, so this is a good way to get some invites out there.  Although, leave me a comment and I’ll make it rain ArtBabble invites for you.

Stand still!

The kiosks have operated very well considering the restrictions we’ve placed on these machines.  All of the computers in the LAB are running on kiosk software.  I know what I would have done to a unrestricted computer as a youngster (if they had computers back then), so the kiosk software restricts access to questionable online content, disables certain keyboard actions, turns the computers on/off and more.   I’m sure someone will hack the kiosk software though.  Can’t wait.

Robbie setting up the computers

The entire LAB was set up to run automatically.  Lighting, computers and the projector all power automatically.  Some of us check up on the LAB from time to time, but it was designed to run by itself, with minimal impact on museum staff.  In the past, the hurdle with technology in the galleries was the human time involved in maintenance and trouble shooting.  This plan initiated by our IT and Design staff should alleviate that problem.   The space has been open a week.  So far, so good.

As always, I would love to hear your feedback on this post – ArtBabble, The Davis LAB, the design (which I love), kiosk software, Noelle’s great Wednesday post and more.

“This is really cool,” he said timidly, referring to the space. Daniel showed him the new animated trailer for ArtBabble, to which he replied, “That was not cool…I mean that was not long enough.” 

Another visitor asked if he could take a nap in the corner because he found the furniture and atmosphere so relaxing. It was a pleasure to watch kids, teens, parents and docents use the computers and ArtBabble video Web site as tools for learning and for fun.

This leads me to a larger question I’ve been asking myself (and some of you): What are the pros and cons of interactive games in art museums, and how far should we go with the concept? The Davis LAB doesn’t include games per se, but getting on a computer and exploring ArtBabble is, like a game, a lot of fun. For the purpose of this post, I’ll classify interactivity as anything from paper scavenger hunts to computer kiosks in the galleries. All these activities turn upside down the traditional museum experience of walking through galleries and looking at the art on the walls with an element of relational interactivity between the visitor and the art.

NPR recently explored the topic in a piece called “Interactive Games Make Museums a Play to Play”, by Elizabeth Blair, which highlighted the Smithsonian American Art Museum’s Luce Foundation Center for an alternative reality game they created. A teacher I know testified that interactive games in museums prompted her students to look more closely at the artwork. NPR noted happiness, clear instructions, feedback, shared experience and being part of something bigger as benefits to interactivity.

I wonder if some museum visitors find interactive games disruptive or cause them to focus less on the physical art as they attempt to check off a work they just found through the interactive game and rush off to the next masterpiece. Should museums use interactive technology like video or audio tours as a revenue generator at the risk of taking attention away from the physical piece of art? Or is it our duty as museum professionals to ensure that the technology only enhances the connection? Are games a marketing tool to woo new audiences to art, or are they the future of art? I have heard the argument that “high brow” art clashes with “low brow” games. Do we need to be entertained at an art museum by something else, or do we go to let the art entertain us?

A couple of weeks ago, I blogged about plans for The Davis LAB, and shared some early design concepts.  Well, on Saturday it opens and you can see it for yourself.  Phil & Noelle in marketing, just sent out a Facebook invite to all of the IMA Fans.  If you’re free on Saturday, stop by our new space to meet staff, check out the final designs, maybe get some free stuff and…that’s about it.

Computer interface for The Davis LAB -We have some amazing designers on staff.

Actually that isn’t it.  The opening of The Davis LAB is also your first chance to experience ArtBabble — our new online, HD, art video station/website – really, much more – a new way of experiencing video.  It’s currently in its Beta version with many of us (Marketing, Education, New Media, Application Developers and more) still tweaking, writing content, adding videos, finalizing design, etc.  In recent posts, I’ve preached a little about releasing sites or projects in a less than perfect state.  We’re doing the same thing with ArtBabble, but with a twist.

ArtBabble sneak peak - we've got great designers here

The twist is this.  If you visit artbabble.org – you get a sign in screen.  We’re being slightly protective about the site for the time being.  We are still making changes by the hour and importantly monitoring the quality of video delivery.  If you’re going to take the time to watch our brand new documentary on Maya Lin, a conversation with Robert Irwin (featuring our very own Richard), or relive some of the highlights from our Roman Art from the Louvre webis, we want you to experience this in 720p!  So, we’re releasing AB in its Beta state, where membership has its privileges.  Sign up for an account and we’ll gradually release access to ArtBabble with your own set of invites.  You can spread the love – kind of like you did when you got your Gmail account.

Or – if you can’t wait for one of the AB admins to release your account, you have (2) options.  The first, is visit The Davis LAB starting Saturday and beyond.  We will have the unrestricted version of ArtBabble running in the space on a projector or our computer stations.  You can Play Art Loud, select any of our videos, find the official defintion of ArtBabble – and send invites to your friends, families and fans – directly from the LAB.  Option (2) – If you live outside of Indy, have other plans or just want it now, leave me a comment.  I’ll look up your e-mail through WordPress and send you an invite.  I have plenty.  Babble On.

Don't you want to send some invites?

Initial graphic treatment by Matt K

It’s not typical for us (or other museums/institutions) to share pending design or identity work.  But in the spirit of transparency, not taking ourselves too seriously, and just ‘doing it’, I thought I would share some of the preliminary work and concepts.  Earlier this week I met with members of the Design Studio – David Russick – Chief Designer, Matt Kelm – Graphic Designer, and Brad Dilger – Installation Technician – to finalize plans for the reopening of this space that will include a mixture of darker wall tones, versions of the graphic treatments in this post, track lighting,  a large projection, touch screen computers and furniture featured by the Design Center (you can actually buy the furniture that will be in The Davis LAB).

Space, as of yesterday (no flash!)

There has been a real conscious decision by David and Matt to tie in creative solutions to the integration of graphic design, furniture and technology.  It’s hard to truly visualize the end result based on flat drawings, paint chips and carpet samples, but I’m starting to see it come together and I’m really excited.  It will be unlike any other space in the museum and both David and Matt have shown real awareness of the needs of this environment.

Periodic table inspired graphic by Matt K

In terms of technology, we will be debuting a brand new video website via a projector and providing a comfortable environment, where visitors can lounge, search and select what they want to watch (remember, I’m against the orientation video).  We also want to encourage participation from our visitors, so we are installing (4) computer workstations, using the new (very hip [but not Mac's]) HP Touchsmarts.  Everyone will have the opportunity to share their perspectives via many of our online identities such as this blog, Flickr, exhibition websites and other new digital projects.  We create websites and videos and podcasts because we want you to have meaningful and unique connections with the museum and art.  But – we also want to hear directly from you.   Don’t be shy.

Subtle prompts for you to interact, again by Matt K

So that’s the inside scoop on what’s happening in The Davis LAB later this month.  When you combine looming deadlines, lots of work, creativity and last minute ideas, stuff has a tendency of changing – but for now, this is our design direction for this space.  Or perhaps this is a clever ploy by yours truly, to motivate you into visiting in person after January 24th.

Happy New Year!