Apps for your mobile phone are becoming a feature of many people’s daily life. The rise of the smartphone means we are beginning to expect to catch up with our friends, check the weather and read the headlines simply with a flick of the finger or tap of the thumb.
Many museums and galleries have started to produce their own apps – giving you the chance to experience an aspect of that organisation right in the palm of your hand!
We think we should be doing more in this area, what do you think?
Would you like to see more apps from galleries?
What should they focus on – what’s on in the galleries, information on objects on display, games, video content?OR
Do you think mobiles are the wrong place for experiences with art and culture?
Let us know which side of the argument you come down on.
As food for thought, here’s what we’ve made ourselves or seen and liked from other museums.
Tate’s apps so far (all for iPhone or iPod touch):
The Muybridgizer, How It Is and Tate Trumps
How It Is is an experience, gaming-influenced app based on the Miroslaw Balka Turbine Hall commission from 2009.
Tate Trumps is a game to be played in the gallery at Tate Modern.
We have two guides to exhibitions at Tate Modern: Miro and Gauguin.
And a vintage photography app, to Muybridge-ise your images
We’ve also seen a lot of things we like from other organisations:
Streetmuseum, Launchball, Field Guide to Australian Flora & Fauna, Love Art, Explorer
Beautiful Field guide to Australian Flora and Fauna from Museum Victoria (best on iPad).
Comprehensive Explorer museum guide for the American Museum of Natural History.
Brilliant Streetmuseum app from the Museum of London to see historical images overlaid on the real world.
Addictive physics game Launchball from the Science Museum in London.
Classic Collection tour Love Art from the National Gallery, London.
Kirstie Beaven
Producer: Interactive Media for Tate Online.
View all posts by Kirstie BeavenThis post was tagged apps, mobile, Tate Debate. Bookmark the permalink.
137 comments on Tate Debate: Should museums make apps?
Friday 29 July 2011
Tate Debate: Should museums make apps? | Tate Blog - The UKUncut intervention
via blog.tate.org.uk
more apps…yes definitely with video content!
Report this comment
Having read a few bits of feedback, my first thoughts are keep it simple and free! Forget videos – make it educational and something to keep forever. I tend not to pay for apps as you don’t know what to expect until you receive them – if it’s free to get in to Tate, why charge for apps? If you think they are a good idea, endorse them by making them free also. Obviously the video side of things has caused people problems but would be great for those who can’t attend particular exhibitions. Give me a free app and I’ll try it!
Report this comment
no more apps – this leads to the even more ‘I-am-at-the-museum-but-not-looking-at-the-artwork’ as the AudioTours that cause less attention to the displayed work… apps distracts from art
Report this comment
Why do you go to museums and not look at the exhibits?
I would like a personalised real time guide that allows me to efficiently organise my time to see what I want and also to learn far more about an exhibit than can be displayed next to it.
Report this comment
Given that there is limited cash available for experimentation I would like to see more pictures up on the Google Art Project rather than Apps.
If Apps are really popular and would be a revenue stream then why not?
Report this comment
Exactly Kurt.
1-The Google Art Project is a winner but only as long as it is supported by those who can licence the use of their collection’s images.
2-If museums can realise more funding from sources like apps (nobody argues over whether there should be glossy catalogues) then more art can be bought for exhibition to the public.
As a developer I would add that closely designed apps like the ones highlighted in the article are the exception on the AppStore. It’s possible to waste a lot of time and money building a sprawling, unfocussed and probably un-useful App and that should not be at the expense of acquiring artworks for exhibition
Interesting comments on the article! Thanks.
Report this comment
Apps and art are just begining to cultivate an exciting relationship. New experiences and engagement are possible through new media but this is the most important thing to remember. The apps strength lies in it’s ability to provide a different kind of experience and this should be considered. Tours, education and videos are all very well but that should be on the website. ‘The way it is’ was very successful in my opinion as the artist had a specific vision for it and augmented the ideas present in the work. Bjork had just released an app album allowing the music and ‘game’ elements to become one. I have recently designed an app for mac and wii remote for a public engagement project funded by CERN (large hadron collider) to explore science and music – new things are possible so exploit them, don’t just rehash old ideas into new mediums as the appropriate channels already exist.
Report this comment
Thanks everyone so far, this is great!
@Alexandra, currently we have three free apps and two paid for. We’d love to know what you think of those free ones – are they in the right direction?
@Paul – interesting point. What if the app was to be used out of the gallery rather than inside? Would experiencing something about the works when you *aren’t* in the museum make a difference?
Report this comment
Museum Apps have their role if they come to give more information or more content before, during of after the visit. According to me, they do not have to interfere with the visitor experience.
And please, as far as it is possible, do not limitate yourselves with apps on the iPhone !
Report this comment
I like museum apps as long as they are high quality and free/affordable. I have stopped downloading them mostly because they are often poor quality and rushed. I would rather check a (mobile optimised) website to see upcoming exhibitions and museum information – but apps that compliment or expand upon an exhibition are definitely worth it.
I would like to see more audio tours and information on art/museum pieces as iPhone apps – perhaps you could scan a little barcode next to each piece with your phone and then listen to or read some commentary about each piece. For a small fee this could cut out the hassle of queueing for headphone sets and encourage visitors to pay for the tour (I never bother when at galleries but would with this option). For galleries with huge collections such as the V&A it would also encourage multiple visits as you could check out one room at a time and really make the most of each visit, rather than scanning through the whole building in a rush.
I LOVE the Streetmuseum app from Museum of London too, really great ‘pocket-sized museum’.
Finally I would also like to see more community iPhone apps being used to make collaborative art pieces – perhaps kind of ‘One Day On Earth’/365 Project/’Learning To Love You More’ sort of projects. Museums and galleries are in a unique position to kick-start these sort of apps and projects.
Report this comment
Thanks Alice. We didn’t really touch on the mobile browsing versus apps in the preamble – like your distinction.
Report this comment
Of course you should do more apps! They are a great way to engage a wide range of audiences and a fantastic, emerging artistic, informational and educational form. What is the purpose of a museum?
Report this comment
I’m all for apps adding something to the visitor experience, perhaps giving extra information or encouraging participation and engagement. Please don’t just limit the apps to the iphone though, use the android platform aswell!
Report this comment
Hello TATE, apps for art? Gee that’s a tough one. I saw ‘How it Is’, Balka, on my computer, and got a sense of what the exhibit was, but I didn’t experience it, did I? I am very happy for the video because I couldn’t get to TATE to see it physically. apps give an idea about art.
Imagine, reading a book all about swimming, how to swim, showing pictures and videos of someone swimming, and discussing techniques of swimming strokes. Discussing water temperature, and swimming suits. Great! Now you know all about swimming. Except you don’t know how it really is, cause you don’t actually know what if feels like to have the cold water surrounding your body. But you can talk endlessly about swimming with the swimming scholars. – - – - – - – The point is that art, like swimming, can’t be fully experienced, or appreciated without being physically there and in the moment. in my opinion.
Report this comment
Valid point, Susan.
Does the sharing of info “giving the idea” to people like you, who couldn’t get to see it in person, make it worth doing though?
Even though we know the experience is a different and potentially information-focused one?
Report this comment
Apps could definitely help people to get a deeper experience while they’re in the museum and afterwards. Something that contextualise the work historically and in teh artist’s life is the minimum you can deliver to help people understand art beyond what they see while they’re there. A place like Tate, where you can easily spend days seeing work and reading the captions, an electronic alternative to that experience is vital. Apps could be a good channel to tell visitors about new exhibitions, events and things relevant to the exhibition they’re seeing and others. Instead of talking about a paid or free version, Tate should invest in both. Something for tourists to make most of their visit and something for regulars/art lovers where they can get the best ‘bang for your buck’ rate.
Report this comment
Does anyone else agree with @Nick Donovan that apps should focus on the “experience” – more the things only apps can do, rather than using apps as a new channel for distributing content?
Also Android users – tell us more about the kind of apps that are currently in the Marketplace that you think are great examples (we haven’t got any Android apps in the post so far).
Report this comment
Kirstie, I think you’re getting spammed… (comments about mobile operator below…).
Does Tate moderate comments ?
Report this comment
Are you asking a museum to perform censorship? Really?
Report this comment
That’s just not the topic here.
Sorry but it is polluting the exchange.
Report this comment
What pollutes the exchange is the dramatic downfall of the museum profession provoked by the cuts to the arts (and to everything else) which are in part a consequence of outraging tax dodging by corrupt corporations. Tate is a public institution and as such, I have the right to demand them to stop working under the umbrella of those corporations like BP or Vodaphone who put me and many thousands of museum colleagues on the job centre queue. TATE’s actions undermine the ethics of the museum profession.
Report this comment
yes I think it would be wonderful!!! I LOVE THE TATE.. nearly first stop when in london
Report this comment
I think apps are a great idea if they help to engage with the work on display, and maybe to show connections with other works or historical events.
Could there also be a way to interact with what other people think about work – so rather than just downloading more information, you could contribute to the discussion too?
And like Aude said, not just on iPhone. I would definitely have used the Gauguin app, but I don’t have an iPhone.
Report this comment
Sorry I meant ‘How it is’. #doing10things@once
Report this comment
Thanks Gareth !
@Kirstie : Well actually, I think it might be quite more complicated to make the apps focus on the visitor experience.
For me, “meeting the artefact” makes the visitor experience. At that time you feel something.
On that point I completely agree with Susan Milligan : even though you can provide contents to enhance the visitor experience, you have to wait for the experience to take place.
The apps must provide additional content to the exhibit and the website.
For eg : I don’t use a museum app if I can’t go to the exhibit. I have a look on its website to get more information about it.
Report this comment
I think @Nick Donovan is right to an extent although I think it is easy for apps to get this wrong. As an iPhone user, I don’t want apps clogging up my screen that I have only used once and likely won’t ever use again. I would much rather have a ‘resource’, like Streetmuseum or a museum guide, that I can refer back to again and again. However we are just in the baby-step stage of this technology and I am intrigued and excited to see what museums/galleries and artists will be doing with mobile technology in 10 years time.
Report this comment
I think they are a great idea and definitely add to the experience. I think if the apps have premium/interactive content that is in addition to what is available free (for example what you expect to get in a paid for programme/catalogue) then a small charge is reasonable.
From a technical point of view, I would advise you don’t forget the other platforms such as Android and Blackberry as there user numbers are massive. Although they don’t have quite the same established market place for apps you can provide easy installation via QR Barcodes on marketing material.
Without getting too technical if you go down the multiple platform route you should really consider having a core developed in a standard technology (for example web technologies such as HTML/CSS & Javascript) and wrap a native app container around each of these using something like Titanium http://www.appcelerator.com/ or the open source Phonegap http://www.phonegap.com/ or your costs will likely sky rocket trying to maintain code bases for each app on each platform (also it is easier and cheaper to resource web developers than mobile developers).
Regards,
Jon
Report this comment
One thing I notice about your examples, Kirstie, is that many of them occupy that mental space outside of the “core” museum experience of interacting with the stuff of the museum. Tate Trumps happens in the in gallery, but it’s not strictly an interpretation of the art. Muybridgizer is the same way. I haven’t tried How It Is, but it sounds similar.
Streetmuseum and Victoria’s Field Guide are explicitly for use out in the world. Launchball can be played anywhere. AMNH’s Explorer does have interpretation, but the feature I hear everyone talking about is the navigation, so that’s also outside of the box of “interacting with the museum’s stuff” and wayfinding in a big place like AMNH or Science Museum, London, can consume over half of the total time of a visit. One opportunity for mobile experiences (app or mobile web) to shine is in these interstices.
Report this comment
That’s true Ed, I hadn’t actually noticed, but I have focused on apps that are less about the traditional museum experience.
Now you point it out, I think I am *personally* really interested in the possibility for these in-between experiences, though I realise (from this thread as well as elsewhere!) that a great collection browsing tool is something many people relish.
Report this comment
I think there should be apps, but we need to think carefully about what content they contain. Most of the apps I have seen are “look more closely at the object in front of you” which will only interest people for a short time and get samey quickly. I would love to see a greater variety of apps that could include gaming (I’m fond of gaming)or at least something to download in the museum, but able to use it outside of the building.
We get this idea that apps are a way to get the stuff in the store out to the public, but sometimes the reasons they are there is because we have plenty of them. We need to think about what the app is for and have a definete purpose rather than simply “getting our stuff out there.”
Report this comment
I do agree with @NickDonovan RE: apps having the ability to create new experiences and levels engagement – rather than just being another channel for pushing out information – as well as having potential for becoming art in their own right.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
Re: Android Apps – the best (and pretty much only!) one I’ve found is produced by MoMA – it’s a very comprehensive listing of their collection, searchable and browsable, and with extra info such as art terms and brief biogs/overviews of artists and their works. I would be very unlikely to use my phone in a gallery and agree with many similar posts to that effect, and I’m not particularly interested in quizzes and games. However what I do crave (as an artist and educator) is good access to the knowledge bank of info that is contained on gallery websites (such as Tate) while I’m on the move.
Report this comment
@Tracy Would you want this as an app, or would it be as useful to be able to browse this through a (mobile-friendly) website?
Report this comment
I think that apps are a useful way to consolidate the experience and gives the visitor something to take not just home, but pretty much everywhere.
The only issue I have with museum apps at the moment is that they are pretty much exclusive to iPhone, iPad users. There is a growing number of people with android phones and it would be great to have these apps on the other platform too.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This page is being hijacked by soap dodging counties UKuncut.
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
And on another note. I am an app developer, I have published apps and I do this for a professional living.
We have been in discussion with numerous art institutions / partnerships in the North West about producing apps. There is a massive wealth of information sitting there which could be utilised and shared through out the world. Galleries, museums and other institutions have been digitising their assets for years in an expectance of platforms like these.
Its a shame there really is no money to do anything anymore. These institutions now have to worry about keeping staff employed, the lights on and the general costs of keeping and bring in exhibitions and the like.
The real discussion should be “If Vodafone and others paid their true tax liabilities could museums then afford to produce apps”
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
I am all for apps, but it needs to be remembered that they are for a niche market that mightn’t be inclusive. An app might be designed to accommodate a whole range of users but ultimately the real users will be that small percentile of smart phone users who use apps for heritage/touring/arts visits. This group is further distiller downwards if, as at museum of london’s streetmuseum and londinium apps, only iPhone apps are designed. Furthermore – such augmented reality apps only work to their full benefit if you are one of the key niche users actually in London!!!
I find apps that promote collections so much more beneficial – a means of extending the collection to a wider audience. Tate accessions have stories behind them that cover the world. You should geotag them so that wherever the user is can find out about things or artists from their county/region. Don’t restrict it to just the niche users at your venues.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
With a middleware SDK like Corona you can product an app which will work across iOS and Android without having to code twice.
The apps hit a larger market if done correctly by opening up the entire world to the collections of the museum. This in turn can induce tourism, funding and the status of the museum / gallery when trying to acquire grants and private funding.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
Will the the revenue generated from the application be taxed?
Report this comment
GENIUS POINT.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
@Keith Harrison
Interesting – you would like more opportunities to browse the collections of museums on your phone.
I think that @ Ed Rodley is right, I come down on the side of more “in-between” experiences.
Perhaps you’re right – perhaps that is focusing on a niche market.
It’s good to hear that you actually want more browsing of objects and associated information, and geo tagging is a great idea to make searching more relevant.
Just a reminder, this discussion is about apps for museums and galleries. Please let’s keep posts on topic.
Report this comment
I thought museums were about critical thinking. Sorry, probably my degree, masters and years of experience working on museums mislead me.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
I would suggest an interactive app that you could use within the museum to provide more information on the different exhibits. Of course its doubtful that you would be able to afford to create such a thing whilst companies such as Vodafone defraud the country
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
As a few have already pointed out, there are a number of reasons why museums and galleries might create apps – and they’re very similar to classic publishing opportunities:
* to augment the experience in-gallery (Tate trumps, IWM’s own Duxford Air Shows app)
* as a take-away after a visit (like the book of the gallery, maybe BL’s treasures)
* to generate revenue from audiences who may never visit the museum or gallery (we’re releasing a posters app in September for this purpose)
Each of these has different use-cases and tests to see if they’re a good idea. In-gallery apps must help extend and augment the visitor experience and ultimately their appreciation of the object / art / message. Personally, I think that apps can really help with this, but a clear vision of how they’ll be used, and testing with users during development, are both key. In our case, we created the Duxford app to give real-time information on planes that are flying , allow people to share that info, and direct them to where in the exhibition spaces they can find out more. There’s a very clear visitor requirement for this type of information and the capabilities of handsets (real-time aspect of use, GPS etc) really helped to effectively communicate this.
The latter two reasons to create an app are much more rooted in having quality content and a clear business case (be it brand-reach, sponsorship or a paid-app model). As content creators museums and galleries should, I think, be active as digital publishers as a way to broaden reach and drive revenue generation. In these cases, quality and rich content (or plane addictiveness in the case of Launchball) are critical and stuff like video, audio, deep zoom or interactive diagrams add quite a lot of value. I think that it’s interesting that most of the comments so far have largely left this type of app out.
Regarding Android: our policy is to cross-deploy everything to iOS and Android. This is partly to hit as large a market as is reasonably possible, but it’s also really important as far as access and the digital divide is concerned. Android phones are, on average, far cheaper than iPhones. As such, I think you could argue that we have an obligation to publish to them, unless we’re happy with only the better-off having access to our content and experiences.
Phew – done now.
Report this comment
Thanks @Tom. Your Duxford app sounds like an excellent example of something that makes complete sense on a mobile device, and is led by a visitor need rather than by the technology.
I agree it’s interesting that we’ve touched less on the rich content or publishing side of things. There hasn’t been much discussion of tablet apps, which I think might drive the publishing of quality content since it does seem so much more enjoyable to consume video or images on a tablet-sized screen, than on the small screens of the average smartphone.
Also agree that iOS is a niche within a niche and that we should be aiming for publishing across platforms.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
So we can discuss apps in Museums and Galleries, we’re going to have to delete off-topic comments.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
I love the idea of museum apps. I work in the arts and there’s plenty more we can all do to use the tools emerging technologies provide. And increasingly these technologies are becoming material, too: they present not just new ways of delivering, accessing and experiencing art, but new artistic possibilities.
As a member of Tate, I’d welcome an app that tells me what’s on and gives me more information and context on the work. And I’d welcome explorations in the creation of art for that platform, art that perhaps never appears in the main gallery.
However. I won’t remain a member of Tate if you continue your association with BP and Vodafone. These are toxic brands with a whole raft of ethical blind-spots. They make you look increasingly ridiculous. By all means develop apps, but find a more suitable partner.
Report this comment
I think mobiles and corporate sponsorship are both better left out of art and culture. As a society we already spend an inordinate amount of time ‘glued’ to our electronic devices, personally I would prefer my museums and galleries mobile and marketing free. Surely there is a limit on how much information we can actually consume and if people wish to research further they can do already through existing channels. Although sponsoring a debate about mobile usage by a mobile phone company appears to suggest you have already made your decision.
Report this comment
Isn’t one of the nice potentials of mobile the opportunity to actually decrease the amount of information and interpretation on display in gallery spaces, push some of it to mobile/guides for people that want it, and in doing so make the spaces more experiential and relaxing?
… possibly.
Report this comment
And how would this benefit people who can’t afford smart phones? Considering all the people currently being put out of work or having their benefits cut because the bankers trashed the economy and so many corporations like Vodafone don’t pay their taxes, the Tate should be thinking more about accessibility for all regardless of income.
Report this comment
Galleries already do this. There’s a level of information in guidebooks or audioguides that can’t be found simply on the gallery floor.
Obviously I’m not suggesting that this is an answer for every bit of interpretation or information. But these technologies do allow you more options that galleries have traditionally had. For instance, what if the overriding aim of the gallery space was to be clean and empty, such as “The Weather” in the Turbine Hall or work by Dan Flavin? Mobile and guides offer you a way to deliver the information that some people want without compromising the space. IWM use this approach with audioguides in our historic sites (HMS Belfast and Churchill War Rooms) as delivering all of the interpretation though traditional means would ruin the experience of being in the spaces themselves.
There are also options to provide the technology to people in-gallery if they don’t have, or don’t want to use, their own kit. I believe Tate gave out iPhones at Gauguin if people didn’t have their own to use the guide app on.
It’s also not a one-size-fits-all argument. Some people (16 – 24 year olds) are increasing using their mobiles as their primary (and sometimes only) way to consume information. You could argue that being on these platforms extends reach, participation and access.
Report this comment
Decreasing the amount of information on display would surely mean people who don’t have access or the skills to operate mobile technology would lose out. I can’t see how the opportunity to learn less is more relaxing when the opportunity to learn more is restricted.
Report this comment
This point of view appears predicated upon the believe that none has anything to benefit by using mobile apps over alternatives. Something that the huge number of apps in use in just about every area of activity must surely bring into question.
The fact that some individuals may not wish to use them is no reason to remove the benefits from others.
If museums are not to be free to use sponsorship then they must make their users pay more.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
This comment was removed by a moderator as it was off-topic.
Report this comment
Interesting comments.
I’d say definitely more apps and definitely multi-platform, hoping they’ll replace audioguides as on-site tools to engage visitors and explain artworks!
Report this comment
On one side I feel that going into a cultural venue should be an opportunity to enter an oasis of calm, to be allowed to think, contemplate and take in the experience, clear of the clutter of texts and tweets and beeps that surround us the rest of the time.
On the other hand I love my tech and being able to pull up additional information in an instant is brilliant. I love the idea that I could get artists and curators statements in plain English. I can get context if I want it, see additional works by the artist or movement that aren’t on display, engage my kids in something and take it away to follow up at home and perhaps return to re-evaluate my initial thoughts and ideas.
I worry about the rush to create apps for apps sake though. While many of the museum and gallery apps I’ve seen are brilliant, are they all really needed? Do they all add to the experience enough to warrant the cost of development? Look at any of the app stores, for every Angry Birds there are a thousand crappy games. Also using that analogy it is often the simplest cleanest apps that work the best. I’m still not there on video, if only because of download limits etc.
I’m still excited to see what comes next though….
As for deleting comments, they are not strictly off topic but even if they were, that a cultural institution is stifling debate is horrific. The sponsor here is part of the very technology Tate is instigating a debate about. You can’t split the two out. As soon as the sponsor is associated with you, you open yourselves to criticism. Don’t like it? Don’t take the money. That’s sponsorship 101.
Would I prefer here to just read about apps yes, but I prefer freedom of expression more. After all isn’t that what art is all about?
Report this comment
The Museum of London’s Streetmuseum app is ace. More things like that please!
Report this comment
I second everything Adam says! Particularly that it’s all very well offering more, better-presented information about the object, but why can’t that be available to everyone, using that lovely, cheap, accessible technology: PAPER! I’m fed up of exhibits with badly-written, uninformative labelling.
Report this comment
Seems an odd question. A bit like asking “should museums build websites?”…
To which, answer is: yes, in some contexts – no in others
I have to say, I’ve been fairly underwhelmed by a number of museum apps. I banged on about this a while back (http://electronicmuseum.org.uk/2009/12/18/great-about-mobile/) – the fascination with collections per se seems somewhat bizarre.
However – use of mobile because it is *mobile* and not just because you can – is a whole other matter. I think we’re only just beginning to see innovation in this space, and there’s lots of room for more exciting stuff.
Report this comment
Yes for apps! I prefer museum apps that have additional content such as video, interviews, event details, and “behind the scenes” sort of stuff, etc. I am not so much in favor if just putting up every piece in the collection, though those who enjoy looking at art will undoubtedly choose to see a piece in a museum and not just on a device. Perhaps an app where you can curate your own show in a digital gallery space using pieces from the collection or pieces from recent exhibitions would make this approach more interesting and interactive. Bringing art to people in any way is a plus!
Report this comment
If the purpose of these apps is to liberate the information and resources held by the museum, I would question whether the app stores are essentially the wrong channel for distribution. Why decide to liberate information, then put it behind a pay-wall (even if the apps are free, you still need to buy the specific application to run the app).
A more sensible use of budget would be to create engaging browser-based experiences, which can be equally rich if we leave behind the now outdated platforms. This makes the information open to all, and will hopefully engage the extremes at each end of the age bracket, who don’t necessarily have access to smart phones.
Report this comment
Good point @Chris, and we shouldn’t forget that many mobile experiences with museums/galleries will still happen through the browser, no matter how many apps we have! @Keith Harrison also made the point that apps themselves are necessarily for a niche audience.
Though you say browser-based experiences can be equally rich, I wonder if there are also ways, as @Mike Ellis says, that the “mobile-ness” of mobile can be better harnessed, and whether apps currently allow us to do that more easily?
Report this comment
Interesting response Kirstie. You can still optimise experiences for mobile in the browser, for instance you still have access to contextual sensors such as GPS.
We recently undertook a project for English Table Tennis, http://spotlight.etta.co.uk/. Although it’s not a museum project, it still shows how a browser based tool can work across platforms and still help people discover new venues and events using mobile specific contexts such as current location. This, for me, is the future.
An open and future proof, singular code base that isn’t tightly coupled with any particular platform or means of distribution.
Report this comment
I enjoy museum apps and I use them frequently. As regards your questions, my thoughts are as follows:
1. I most enjoy/use apps *after* having visited the museum/exhibit attached to the app. While I have downloaded apps for museums that I’ve not visited since the download, after the initial viewing, I find I never open that particular app. However, after recent visits to the V&A and the National Gallery, I return to the apps as a means of reliving/re-experiencing those visits.
2. Thus, for me, it is important that apps be functional outside the museum itself. Again, for me, such is the case not as a means to “substitute” for an actual visit but, rather, as a means to deepen/prolong what was valuable about the visit.
3. I agree with above commentators vz. keep it simple, focus on the art (not bells and whistles), and do give people information about the art. Information does not equate with “taming” our viewing; it can enhance our viewing and prompt us to read/view more deeply on our own.
4. Free apps are very important. Minimize fee-based apps.
5. I agree with posts above, vz. being mindful of your associates/financial supporters. Don’t pretend that what the Tate does is apolitical. Museums are as ideological/political as any other institution (as many of your exhibits have been quick to point out).
Report this comment
There seems to be an App based stampede at the momemt? I like my smartphone to give me this or that! There are many detailed and in some ways technical replys. i would like to raise a simpler question (if the moderator allows) Are these apps cost effective to produce given that the typical user appears to be a smartphone user wishing to enhance their exsperience? Would the funds be better spent producing something that reaches out to a wider audience?
Report this comment
I love apps that give information about exhibitions and are a ‘souvenir’ of the exhibition. (The Cult of Beauty one was good)
No games though – not a gallery thing at all!
Report this comment
You run a slippery slope asking about apps and mobile in museums when you ask a question along the lines of, “Based on what you’ve seen or done, do you think we should do more?” There are a few hierarchies of interaction with museums, and @edrodley begins to get at them above. I often think I see Maslow at work in this hierarchy.
Basic Need – what’s on, how do I get there, where do I park, what are the hours. There’s little reason to do this in an app, especially an app dedicated solely to this. Mobile web serves it well and most museum web analytics that I’ve seen have shown this to be a well-visited portion of the website.
Exhibit Derivative – the modern version of the audio tour. That, as you move about the museum, there’s additional information and content available through your mobile device. It’s where the modern layer of tech is at and tries to satisfy the visitor need of having a guide or docent available throughout the museum for everyone at all times. This is baseline app stuff but also doesn’t fundamentally change the museum experience.
Extend the Experience – This is where it starts to get interesting and some of the apps described above, Muybridgizer, Streetmuseum, Victoria’s Field Guide, Launchball, etc, head in this direction. These aren’t direct interactions with the museum and its displayed content, but leverage the museum as a source of an experience.
The Next Step – And this is rare and won’t be discovered by a focus group. This is where you try out something insanely new that sounds crazy and tickles and itch of many. Twitter nor the iPad were invented by a focus group but worked with existing tech in new ways that surpassed and delighted people.
I want to see museums innovating on the 3rd and 4th tiers, but here’s the rub. It’s hard to do those well unless you’ve worked your way up to creating those kinds of experiences. You need to cut your teeth on the lower end experiences to see how to develop, what it means to manage that sort of project, and how to create meaningful interactions. At the same time, doing that lower tier often helps museums reorganize internally to create a new digital infrastructure that allows the really good stuff to happen. If you start out at the top, you may create something brilliantly bespoke, but it’s difficult to scale that experience and succeed again.
So, yes. Do more apps. Not because everyone else is making an app but because you have something to share, an experience to extend, a way to engage people. Do the crappy apps and get them out of the way so you can wrap everyone’s head around how to do the hard stuff. It’s a learning process both internally and externally. Along the way, be insanely skeptical that this stuff is working and if it’s not, kill it off. And, when you get the crazy idea that nobody’s tried before, then you’re in a position to try because you have the mechanics in place.
The apps that create new experiences, whether it be gaming in the museum, or adding a user-contributed augmented reality layer to an exhibit, or pull the content out into the real world, are the ones that we ultimately need to create. The experiences don’t have to satisfy everyone—hell our own content doesn’t do that—and be comfortable with that.