3 thoughts on “How will museums of the future look? | Sarah Kenderdine | TEDxGateway 2013”
I keep having mixed opinions on this. On the one hand, I feel like this is a great development for researchers and examiners because this can help guide their research, and keep others out. But on the other hand, there’s a part of me that worries whether this will end up replacing a lot of experiences that we can have as visitors. Or if this will end up replacing our museums, even. I originally started commenting based on an overwhelmed/disagreeing point-of-view, but I keep rewriting because the more I think about it, I’m not quite sure. Either way, I feel overwhelmed by the idea of replicating and looking further into artifacts and art.
I think conceptually and from a preservation standpoint, this makes a lot of sense. Once a space is gone, closed to the public, or damaged, we aren’t able to recapture it. Documenting and enhancing in this way provides a way to reconnect with the spaces and work. I think part of it also has to do with our expectations of the interaction. If it’s not framed as a replacement, viewed as a way to recapture or augment an experience not available to the general public, I think it’s a really powerful tool.
I largely agree with Ray re: the preservation of these sites. For instance: any of these sites, like the grottos, once they are listed as like, UNESCO World Heritage Sites, for instance, everyone wants to visit and the sites often suffer from the attention. This makes me think then too of Google Maps’ projects, not only their ones in art museum across the world that employ the same types of hi-res imaging, but also the ones the street-view places like the Grand Canyon…
Chez de Steph 
I keep having mixed opinions on this. On the one hand, I feel like this is a great development for researchers and examiners because this can help guide their research, and keep others out. But on the other hand, there’s a part of me that worries whether this will end up replacing a lot of experiences that we can have as visitors. Or if this will end up replacing our museums, even. I originally started commenting based on an overwhelmed/disagreeing point-of-view, but I keep rewriting because the more I think about it, I’m not quite sure. Either way, I feel overwhelmed by the idea of replicating and looking further into artifacts and art.
LikeLike
I think conceptually and from a preservation standpoint, this makes a lot of sense. Once a space is gone, closed to the public, or damaged, we aren’t able to recapture it. Documenting and enhancing in this way provides a way to reconnect with the spaces and work. I think part of it also has to do with our expectations of the interaction. If it’s not framed as a replacement, viewed as a way to recapture or augment an experience not available to the general public, I think it’s a really powerful tool.
LikeLike
I largely agree with Ray re: the preservation of these sites. For instance: any of these sites, like the grottos, once they are listed as like, UNESCO World Heritage Sites, for instance, everyone wants to visit and the sites often suffer from the attention. This makes me think then too of Google Maps’ projects, not only their ones in art museum across the world that employ the same types of hi-res imaging, but also the ones the street-view places like the Grand Canyon…
LikeLike