AI, Conference, game, slides, virtual heritage, Virtual Reality, visualisation

Researching Digital Cultural Heritage

My presentation Inside Out: Avatars, Agents, Cultural Agents for Researching Digital Cultural Heritage, in Manchester, is available at: https://www.slideshare.net/nzerik/inside-out-avatars-agents-cultural-agents

Advertisements
archaeology, augmented reality, Biofeedback, game, heritage, virtual heritage

AR/MR case studies and zombies on a dig

Why do we use augmented reality for heritage? To show what is not there, navigate and orient people, to reveal what is created intangibly by our indirect actions, or to reveal our impact on material remains..

But AR/MR/games can reveal archaeological methods along with intrinsic reasons to play games, zombies!

Zombies are slow and can be animated or rendered clumsily; they provide a protagonist on limited AI resources; they are associated with death, decay and the past. We have some experience with zombies and biofeedback or skeletons and archaeology..

  • Example: Library Skills, Archival and archaeology methods
  • Goal: The goal can be serious exploration; but with imaginative constraints and settings.
  • Game mechanic: For example: dig up zombie, match to correct time using dating methods
  • Feedback: If correctly matched to time period, zombies are animated and run amok.
  • Setting: archaeological dig, a mortuary or a library.
  • Affordance: Find artefacts that placate zombies; mortuaries require following correct rituals to rebury zombies; library archives inform player of artefacts of value to zombies-find books of power to protect against zombies.
  • Reward: Videos or machinima augmented glimpses of potential past/individual narratives.
  • Game platform: does it have to be 3D? Could it be designed in minecraft (open source or otherwise), minetest, or terrania? Augmented reality: how could it be involved? Oh I have some ideas but that would be telling and I’d have to charge..

augmented reality, Conference

Augmented reality development: ARKit or ARCore?

Augmented reality is both promising and cutting edge, even interaction paradigms may need to change:

There are two new major augmented reality frameworks, one for Apple iOS (see Peter Jackson’s Wingnut Studio Unreal/Apple ARKit example) and ARCore for Google phones..which should you consider, ARKit or ARCore? (https://developers.google.com/ar/discover/ ) see https://medium.com/super-ventures-blog/how-is-arcore-better-than-arkit-5223e6b3e79d …

OR side-by-side https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNXBvDKRg1M

A good feature list comparison: https://www.newgenapps.com/blog/arkit-vs-arcore-the-key-differences

The opportunities for archaeology are huge: http://www.dead-mens-eyes.org/arkit-and-archaeology-hougoumont-farm-waterloo/

I said two options, but there are many, plus there is the more expensive HoloLens option (self contained totally portable mixed reality system with figure gesture recognition) and the new meta HMD, with wider field of view (90 degrees and about a third less in price).

The HoloLens at Curtin1505.jpg

 

 

Academic, augmented reality, Book, Digital Humanities, heritage, virtual heritage, Virtual Reality

The latest book that isn’t (yet)

RethinkingVirtualPlaces_Pantheon-Rome

The book that isn’t, I just drafted and sent for internal academic/publisher review a book on virtual places. So it may be modified, it may not get finally published (not sure what happens, I signed a contract) but I cannot resist listing some of the issues it tries to cover, hope they are issues for you too..

Continue reading “The latest book that isn’t (yet)”

3D and game editors, design, Virtual Reality, visualisation

hardware, software, simple coding

Time for a quick update on recent tech offerings

Academic, Book, Conference, design, virtual heritage, Virtual Reality

Rough Outline on Architected Place

I am finishing a chapter (Chapter 3: ‘Architected’ Places) for my own book on Virtual Places, but the structural arc has escaped me until now. It will be polemical and controversial so I need to rewrite it to show that I realize this, there will be gaps and generalizations.

The basic premises are:

  1. Architectural theory is essentialist.
  2. Architectural tools are instrumentalist, architects don’t work on or near the site, as they need specialist tools connected to databases not to experiences.
  3. Architectural media is loath to include people and architectural spaces don’t work as places without people (Marseilles, by Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona Pavilion, architectural masterpieces tend to be pavilions).
  4. Architects are not trained in user experience design and evaluation.
  5. Nor are architects trained in interactive media, their tools (see argument 2) are instrumentalist and passive.
  6. Traditional architectural craft is embodied, sited, takes time and records care. This is less and less the case.
  7. So applying theories of architecture, or practices of architectural design to interactive digital media in order to create virtual places, may well leave some gaps. How to resolve these in the design of virtual places? Corruption? Fancy theory? Post modernism? No, through embodiment, multimodality, role-play (and thematic affordances), allowing user-infill, environmental change to affect the design environment, and digital personalized patinas, materials that show the effect of time, wear and care.