Do Touch This: Turning a Plaster Bust Into a Tangible Interface
Article No.: 9, Pages 1 - 8
Abstract
Plaster busts are common exhibition pieces in museums, but they usually are off-limits for touch. While modern exhibition concepts increasingly involve interaction, this rarely includes touching a plaster bust. However, there may be a wealth of information associated with these cultural heritage objects, e.g., their making and their creator’s craftsmanship, which tangible interaction could make accessible right on the object. We equipped plaster replicas of such a bust with capacitive sensors and developed a tangible prototype in collaboration with two domain experts from the art museum “Staatliche Antikensammlungen” (Munich, Germany), a curator and a sculptor, in an iterative design approach. Then we tested it in a lab study (N=12) and an in situ study in the museum (N=20). We describe our technical approach, which we also made public as a git project1, and discuss our study results about busts as tangible interfaces in the art of sculpting.
References
[1]
Gottfried Boehm. 01 Jan. 2009. Plastik und plastischer Raum. Wilhelm Fink, Leiden, Niederlande, 19 – 46. https://doi.org/10.30965/9783846747414_003
[2]
Marion Buchenau and Jane Fulton Suri. 2000. Experience Prototyping. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (New York City, New York, USA) (DIS ’00). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 424–433. https://doi.org/10.1145/347642.347802
[3]
C. Capurro, D. Nollet, and D. Pletinckx. 2015. Tangible interfaces for digital museum applications. In 2015 Digital Heritage, Vol. 1. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Granada, Spain, 271–276. https://doi.org/10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2015.7413881
[4]
Luigina Ciolfi and Liam J. Bannon. 2002. Designing Interactive Museum Exhibits : Enhancing visitor curiosity through augmented artefacts. In Eds.), Proceedings of ECCE11, European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics. Eleventh European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, Catania, Italy, 311–317.
[5]
Heritage DAHG (Department of Arts and the Gaeltacht). 2011. Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities.
[6]
Kristin N. Dew and Daniela K. Rosner. 2018. Lessons from the Woodshop: Cultivating Design with Living Materials. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174159
[7]
Sandra Dudley. 2013. Museum Materialities: Objects, Engagements, Interpretations. Routledge, Abingdon, England.
[8]
Gido Hakvoort. 2013. The Immersive Museum. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces (St. Andrews, Scotland, United Kingdom) (ITS ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 463–468. https://doi.org/10.1145/2512349.2514598
[9]
Jason Heikenfeld, Paul Drzaic, Jong-Souk Yeo, and Tim Koch. 2011. A critical review of the present and future prospects for electronic paper. Journal of the Society for Information Display 19, 2 (2011), 129–156.
[10]
Eva Hornecker. 2011. The Role of Physicality in Tangible and Embodied Interactions. Interactions 18, 2 (March 2011), 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/1925820.1925826
[11]
Eva Hornecker and Matthias Stifter. 2006. Learning from Interactive Museum Installations about Interaction Design for Public Settings. In Proceedings of the 18th Australia Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Design: Activities, Artefacts and Environments(Sydney, Australia) (OZCHI ’06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1145/1228175.1228201
[12]
Yvonne Jansen, Pierre Dragicevic, Petra Isenberg, Jason Alexander, Abhijit Karnik, Johan Kildal, Sriram Subramanian, and Kasper Hornbæk. 2015. Opportunities and Challenges for Data Physicalization. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3227–3236. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702180
[13]
Rosalind E Krauss and Rosalind Krauss. 1981. Passages in Modern Sculpture. Mit press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
[14]
Anna Macaranas, Alissa N. Antle, and Bernhard E. Riecke. 2012. Bridging the Gap: Attribute and Spatial Metaphors for Tangible Interface Design. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1145/2148131.2148166
[15]
Mark T. Marshall, Nick Dulake, Luigina Ciolfi, Daniele Duranti, Hub Kockelkorn, and Daniela Petrelli. 2016. Using Tangible Smart Replicas as Controls for an Interactive Museum Exhibition. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839462.2839493
[16]
Lise Milne. 2011. The Significance of Aesthetic and Heritage Values in a Public Policy Environment: Victoria Theatre Case Study. Ph.D. Dissertation. Auckland University of Technology.
[17]
Eslam Nofal, Vanessa Boschloos, Hendrik Hameeuw, and Andrew Vande Moere. 2016. The Role of Tangible Interaction for Communicating Qualitative Information of Built Heritage. In Proceedings of ARQUEOLÓGICA 2.0-8th International Congress on Archaeology, Computer Graphics, Cultural Heritage and Innovation. Polytechnic University of Valencia; Valencia, Spain, 8th International Congress on Archaeology, Computer Graphics, Cultural Heritage and Innovation “ARQUEOLÓGICA 2.0”, Valencia, Spain, 441–444.
[18]
Eslam Nofal, Rabee M. Reffat, and Andrew Vande Moere. 2017. Communicating Built Heritage Information Using Tangible Interaction Approach. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (Yokohama, Japan) (TEI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 689–692. https://doi.org/10.1145/3024969.3025035
[19]
Elena Not, Dario Cavada, Stefano Maule, Anna Pisetti, and Adriano Venturini. 2019. Digital Augmentation of Historical Objects Through Tangible Interaction. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 12, 3, Article 18 (June 2019), 19 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3297764
[20]
Claire O’Malley and Danae Fraser. 2004. Literature Review in Learning with Tangible Technologies. NESTA Futurelab Rep. 12 (01 2004).
[21]
Daniela K. Rosner. 2012. The Material Practices of Collaboration. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (Seattle, Washington, USA) (CSCW ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1155–1164. https://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145375
[22]
Daniela K. Rosner and Kimiko Ryokai. 2009. Reflections on Craft: Probing the Creative Process of Everyday Knitters. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition (Berkeley, California, USA) (C&C ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1145/1640233.1640264
[23]
Jinsil Hwaryoung Seo, Janelle Arita, Sharon Chu, Francis Quek, and Stephen Aldriedge. 2015. Material Significance of Tangibles for Young Children. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction(Stanford, California, USA) (TEI ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 53–56. https://doi.org/10.1145/2677199.2680583
[24]
SSSB Suib, Jo ML Van Engelen, and Marcel RM Crul. 2020. Enhancing Knowledge Exchange and Collaboration Between Craftspeople and Designers Using the Concept of Boundary Objects. International Journal of Design 14, 1 (2020), 113–133.
[25]
Clement Zheng and Michael Nitsche. 2017. Combining Practices in Craft and Design. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (Yokohama, Japan) (TEI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 331–340. https://doi.org/10.1145/3024969.3024973
[26]
Rachel Zuckert. 2009. Sculpture and Touch: Herder’s Aesthetics of Sculpture. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 67, 3 (08 2009), 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6245.2009.01359.x arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/jaac/article-pdf/67/3/285/34527007/jaac_v67_3_285.pdf
Recommendations
Comparing Tangible and Multi-touch Interaction for Interactive Data Visualization Tasks
TEI '16: Proceedings of the TEI '16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied InteractionInteractive visualization plays a key role in the analysis of large datasets. It can help users to explore data, investigate hypotheses and find patterns. The easier and more tangible the interaction, the more likely it is to enhance understanding. This ...
Tangible 3D tabletops: combining tangible tabletop interaction and 3D projection
NordiCHI '12: Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense Through DesignIn this paper we present the tangible 3D tabletop and discuss the design potential of this novel interface. The tangible 3D tabletop combines tangible tabletop interaction with 3D projection in such a way that the tangible objects may be augmented with ...
Tangible Meets Gestural: Comparing and Blending Post-WIMP Interaction Paradigms
TEI '15: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied InteractionMore and more objects of our everyday environment are becoming smart and connected, offering us new interaction possibilities. Tangible interaction and gestural interaction are promising communication means with these objects in this post-WIMP ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2021 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 22 June 2021
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
C&C '21
Sponsor:
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 108 of 371 submissions, 29%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 229Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)54
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View allView Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format