MW2010: Matthias Krauss and Manfred Bogen, Conveying Culture Heritage and Legacy with Innovative AR-based Solutions

Matthias Krauß, Dr. Manfred Bogen, Fraunhofer IAIS, Germany Conveying Cultural Heritage and Legacy with Innovative AR-based Solutions

Outline
Motivation: Why Augmented Reality (AR)?
AR: Types, potential and current state
Bottom-up approach
Top-down approach
Conclusion & further work

Introduction: A naive view
One main task of museums is to convey cultural heritage
Museums usually try to do this by exhibiting artefacts (authentic if possible)
This is fine in most situations

Introduction: A naive view
One main task of museums is to convey cultural heritage
Museums usually try to do this by exhibiting artefacts (authentic if possible)
This is fine in most situations
But in some cases, it is not.

Challenging artefacts to exhibit: Examples Very small and very large objects

Challenging artefacts to exhibit: Examples Dangerous objects Marie Curie and her daughter Irène in the laboratory at the Radium Institute in Paris, France, 1921. Photo: Association Curie Joliot-Curie, source: www.archievement.org

Challenging artefacts to exhibit: Examples Fragile objects (”Do not touch“), invisible processes Prismen-Spektralapparat, Joseph v. Fraunhofer, 1814

In these cases, Augmented Reality can:
Extend physical objects with virtual additions
Replace physical placeholders by virtual artefacts
Show invisible processes in physical objects
Suspend unwanted physical laws

Augmented Reality types and status Augmented Reality Side-by-side Video-based AR See-through AR Spatial AR Technial effort / immersion effect robust current emerging theory

Bottom-up approach
Bring museum state of the art closer to AR
Based on proven stable technology
Extend with simple AR aspects
Emphasize relation between authentic artefact and virtual reconstruction
Pro: Simple to implement, robust
Con: Limited immersion effect

Bottom-up example: Spektralapparat Original Spektralapparat Virtual Spektralapparat

Top-down approach
Bring AR state of the art closer to museums
Based on advanced AR approach
Increase robustness for everyday use
Reduce implementation effort by using available COTS base technologies
Pro: Natural experience, immersion effect
Con: Requires willingness for innovation

Top-down example: Spinnstube ® 2
Fully featured see-through AR
3D stereo, head and interaction tracking
Affordable and robust (COTS components)
Benefits from recent 3D and gaming trends
Based on four years of Spinnstube ® experience

Conclusion and further work
Both approaches feasible for museums
Spinnstube 2: available Q1/11
Evaluation of Spinnstube 2 and Spektralapparat
Adaption of Spinnstube to museum-specific needs
Implementation of advanced AR technologies in museums
Conveying cultural heritage with innovative AR-based solutions is doable now

Thanks!
Questions?
[email_address]
[email_address]

http://www.archimuse.com	34
http://www.museumsandtheweb.com	23
http://conference.archimuse.com	11
http://www.slideshare.net	9
http://translate.googleusercontent.com	1

MW2010: Matthias Krauss and Manfred Bogen, Conveying Culture Heritage and Legacy with Innovative AR-based Solutions

by museums and the web on May 31, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

5 Embeds 78

Statistics

MW2010: Matthias Krauss and Manfred Bogen, Conveying Culture Heritage and Legacy with Innovative AR-based Solutions — Presentation Transcript