---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 01:32:00 +0000
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: virtual reality in a museum setting (fwd)


 ==========================================================================

 FOR SOME REASON THIS MESSAGE COULD NOT BE DELIVERED.
 PLEASE TRY AGAIN.

 IF THE PROBLEM PERSISTS, CALL: MPACT IMMEDIA CUSTOMER SERVICE
                                TEL.: (1 800 361 7252)

 THANK YOU.

...........................................................................

 CE MESSAGE N'A PU ETRE LIVRE.
 ESSAYEZ ENCORE S.V.P.

 SI LE PROBLEME PERSISTE, APPELEZ LE SERVICE A LA CLIENTELE MPACT IMMEDIA
                          AU NUMERO SUIVANT: (1 800 361 7252)

 MERCI.

 ==========================================================================


------------   ORIGINAL ATTACHMENT   --------
SENT 11-27-96 FROM RNET

> other than incorporate it in your web prescence,
> and it might be useful on a gallery intranet too

Right.  Expanding your Web-prescence is simply a
advantage/by-product of using VRML to create your
virtual experience.  VRML (like any 3D programming
lang) can be used for kiosk-style stand-alone VR.
The benefit of VRML is that it is an Internet standard,
and can _also_ be viewed/displayed on the Web.

>>that if you promise VR you must give people headsets
>If you need to be immersed, stereo-scopic lenses
> when we were considering an upgrade...they didnt
> seem to stand up to the everyday wear well.

Yes, but computers (with special emphasis on Internet
Technologies, and even more emphasis on VR technologies)
change at an incredible rate.  At the same time, I
would agree that a fully immersive VR experience may
be beyond the finances/usefulness of a museum.  That's
why I think something like VRML would be of great value.

>You can get an O2 from SGI for about $6,000 (if
>I have played with these and I'm afraid I didn't rate them very highly

Youch!  Really?  That's a discriminating user :)  But,
you are correct; the O2 still isn't a Reality Monster,
or even a Reality Engine, but it _is_ a low-cost approximation.
As I said, if you even think of something like the Nintendo64,
it's got an TREMENDOUS amount of computing power (three micro
processors &c.) and it's ONLY $200!  The O2 also has a
pretty big kick.  The costs of this technology is dropping
DRASTICALLY, and it's being introduced to the user at
a level as far down as "in the home."  I'd say, they day
when a museum can afford a fabulous VR display are not far
off at all...

>> you risk side effects (nausea disorientation, temporary loss of 3D vision,
>This happens much less often with passive-immersion
> As I work in hands-on science centres, I am very concerned about
> keeping the activity content of exhibits as high as possible

Right, I think I may have lost something with the term
"passive immersion."  Passive immersion is just as interactive/
hands-on as "agressive immersion," only the interfaces differ.
It may be too sublte to discuss on a museum list.

> problem, most people were happy using the joystick, it was actual immersion
> that confused them, and I think the joystick made this worse.

O.K.  Well, the problem there is that the scene tries to simulate
reality.  If you want a scene to be visually real(istic) and you
want navigation in the same way that people navigate the actual
world, you are going to fail.  There's no advantage over reality.
If computers are to be useful tools, they are going to have to be
exploited in un-real ways.  Virtual Reality that _simulates_
reality, offers no advantage over reality.  Moving through a scene
by moving your feet, turning your head to gain another view,
these are conventions of reality and constrictions of virtual
reality.  "Alternative Interface" is the name of the game in VR.


> architects are going to become increasingly important in virtual
> spaces I suspect

At least in the good ones ;)

> ideally I'd like to get some sort of force
> feedback too.

Yikes!  That's pretty advanced stuff.  I cannot be
done passively, and requires more immersion than most
anyone would stand.  It's one thing to be viewing a
cathedral, it's another to be touching it ;)  But,
it's definately good that you want so much!

> response as a result of premature overuse it will not be good for us.

That is one way of thinking about it.  I don't know
if there is a lot of competition among museums, or if
there is a chance that one museum might rush to do something
virtual just to get attention.  You are right that the
longer you wait, the better things will get, however that
is _always_ the case.  If you wait a year, things will be
better in a year and a half.  Virtual Reality is constantly
getting better.  At some point, someone has to do something.

> I intend to keep an eye on developments and when something meets my
> ...needs...I'll go for it.

I can say now, that whenever you decide to do something,
it will be amazing.  You certainly know enough, and are
picky enough not to get fooled.  I'd love to see what you
come up with!

..........................................Pioneer Joel




 Look at a Nintendo64: it's
>basically a super-computer for graphics and only costs $200.

It is pretty cool - they've packed a lot into one box
>
>> perhaps some customised derivative of it in the future
>
>I'd commision a Nintendo64 game of your museum...

        Could be fun! especially as I inhabit a medieval church, but the
programming costs....!
>
>> embarassing forever after that
>
        Cheers!
>
>
IAN SIMMONS

- A mind stretched by new ideas never returns to the same shape

                                        - RALPH WALDO EMERSON