Response to The Enemy and readings, assignment 6
I had always seen VR and AR as passively observable experiences, so it was interesting to read in The Poetics of Augmented Space about how it could also involve extracting information from space and using that information to deliver the experience. I was surprised to find that The Enemy did this too, by reading the body language of the audience and using that information to judge if they reacted differently to the different sides and finally to identify them with one of the people. I wish the exhibition would have explained more exactly how the body language was judged because I feel like for many people, simply leaning in to inspect details from the 3D models such as tattoos could be mistaken for body language. I think the fact that the models can’t see or respond to me warped my body language- I hold myself differently when I know I am being seen and am conveying nonverbal messages than when I am alone. The Poetics of Augmented Space also defines and explains the difference between VR and AR, and I actually didn’t see a particularly compelling reason why the Enemy needed to be VR rather than AR. The images on the walls could have been AR images projected onto real empty picture frames, and the 3D models could have just as easily walked around in a real museum as a fake VR museum. Maybe it was helpful not to be able to get distracted by other visitors to the museum, but I got quite distracted instead by the jarring effects when I move or turn and the world doesn’t quite move or turn in the same way I expect it to, or when I accidentally walked inside a fake wall. I found out that originally the VR experience was richer- viewers were transported into the territory of the people being interviewed (e.g. surrounded by rubble) but apparently the interesting background was too distracting and people would rather explore it than pay attention to the interviews. I thought Gallery One was really innovative, using an incredible range of different technologies such as Xbox Kinect and facial recognition algorithms. I think the framework of The Enemy would have been very much at home in Gallery One – it could be a good extension of the “create your own tour” feature, in which all the pieces of art chosen by a visitor can be arranged inside a virtual gallery for them and their friends to walk around, and/or interviews with the artists could be recreated in the same fashion as the Enemy, with models of them standing in front of their artwork.