Week 4 – Internet Content and Information Services

Augmented reality in libraries

Augmented reality is a technology which allows the overlay of images onto the physical world (Van Arnhem and Spiller, 2014). A notable example of the use of AR in libraries, as noted by Jo in this weeks lecture, is Miami University Library’s invention of ShelvAR which scans tagged/RFID library material and overlays a cross on out of place items. Unfortunately a barrier to ShelvAR was the fact that multinational Amazon acquired a patent for similar technology before the Miami University Library could, limiting both options for the commercialisation or free distribution of such technologies, and even competition in this field of library specific library management tools (University of Miami Library, 2020). As publically funded institutions, libraries are often reliant on research and development funding from ever growing fiscally conservative universities and governments which limits their ability to actively invest in the development of library specific technologies.

Another example of the use of ART in libraries is in the field of special collections. AR Rare-BM allows library visitors to “open” the pages and then “flip” through the pages to read the content (Parhizkar and Zaman, 2009). This is otherwise often precluded due to the significance and fragility of those items that are traditionally found in special collections. Forsyth in 2011 also identified that even simply being able to overlay visuals or audio on a physical book through head-mounted displays, rather than handheld devices, facilitate access for disabled (Antonioli, Blake and Sparks, 2014, p. 98).

AR is often designed for specific projects, making library staff training on each platform inconsistent and therefore time intensive for each new project (Billinghurst & Dunser, 2012, p. 61). Budget constraints are therefore an additional obvious issue in acquisition of and updating technology. Another perhaps overlooked potential issue is the safety of library visitors when using AR technology, in terms of accidents as identified by Dunleavy, Dede and Mitchell (2009). This latter point, in addition to increased capital, may have unintentional and overlooked flow on effects for library insurance.

Update 24 March 2020

With COVID-19 impacting on the delivery of museum services, MONA has launched a live stream of one of their living pieces (Tim). Tim has sold his body whilst alive (to be given to the buyer after his death) and is heavily tattooed in accordance with the buyers wishes. He sits at MONA during festivals, and sporadically outside of festival times. A very interesting development in the use of Web 3.0 technologies during this period of time to maintain/increase GLAMR services in this instance.

References

Antonioli, M., Blake, C., & Sparks, K. (2014). Augmented Reality Applications in Education. The Journal of Technology Studies, 40(1/2), 96-107. www.jstor.org/stable/43604312.

Billinghurst, M & Dãnser, A. (2012). Augmented Reality in the Classroom. Computer 45(7), 56-63. doi:10.1109/MC.2012.111.

Dunleavy, M, Dede, C & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology 18(1), 7-22. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1.

Museum of Old and New Art Youtube Channel. (2020). Live stream: Tim. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdR9KP8bXzA.

Parhizkar, B & Badioze Zaman, H. (2009). Development of an Augmented Reality Rare Book and Manuscript for Special Library Collection (AR Rare-BM). In Parhizkar, B & Badioze Zaman, H. (eds.) Visual Informatics: Bridging Research and Practice: International Visual Informatics Conference (pp. 344-355). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-05036-7_33.

University of Miami Library. (2020) ShelvAR. Retrieved from: http://www.shelvar.com/.

Van Arnhem, J., & Spiller, J. (2014). Using Augmented Reality as a Discovery Tool. In Bernhardt B., Hinds L., & Strauch K. (eds.). Too Much is Not Enough: Charleston Conference Proceedings, 2013 (pp. 584-591). Purdue University Press. www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt6wq772.106.

One thought on “Week 4 – Internet Content and Information Services

  1. Good discussion, backed by the literature. You are right, libraries are reliant upon the technological developments of those instutions with greater budgets; and yes, training is also a difficult area for public libraries.

    Like

Leave a comment

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started