Kiosks in Museums: Win, Lose or Draw?
A couple of weeks ago, I discussed the issue of technology in museums and asked if tech engages or distracts. The post mainly served to open the question and the responses we received from visitors and museum colleagues were quite varied. I wanted to open the floor to another question…this time looking at a more specific example of computer kiosks in art museums. I’m going to dive in with our own examples at Brooklyn to talk about some of my frustrations, ask some questions and think about when these really work and when they don’t.

I’ll start off with what we consider a win example—our comment kiosks. Throughout the museum, we replaced the paper comment books with electronic kiosks. The interface is not that fun or user-friendly, but it’s simple and many visitors use them to give us their feedback. These have been fairly positive for us. They allow us to see visitor feedback in real-time, they are easier to maintain since we don’t have to replace pens/books, and the comments are available via the web, so anyone can view the visitor response. We actively monitor the incoming feedback and, in some cases, have made adjustments based on the comments to improve the visitor experience. We are working through some issues now to make the kiosks more visitor friendly—softer and less noisy keyboards, height adjustments, easier controls to page through on the touch screens—for the most part they work pretty well and we’ve been told by our visitors that they appreciate the opportunity to be heard.

Next up, let’s look at what might be considered lose example and, wow, does this make me cringe. I’m sure many of our readers have seen the put-the-whole-website-on-the-kiosk-in-some-central-location example in some museum somewhere? We are guilty of the “whole-website” kiosk—in our Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art we have two computers in a study area that essentially display the EASCFA website. I rarely see people using them and when I do, they are not sitting for long and I have to wonder if visitors are getting anything out of it at all. I’ve been discussing all this with the Center’s curator, Catherine Morris, and we’d both like to hear your thoughts on the issue as we discuss possible changes. While we don’t have a lot of time or budget for an overhaul, we are tossing around the idea of displaying the Feminist Art Base, instead of the entire EASCFA site with the thought that perhaps more directed content might compliment the exhibitions and the artists in the Center a bit better. I’ll throw these questions out there: Why would you take space in a museum to show off your web site? Has anyone seen this work well? Is this kind of thing helpful at all?
We’ve definitely got a couple of examples of draw hanging around. In both the Luce Visible Storage area and The Dinner Party installation, there are kiosks that display more information about the works on view. In both installations, we can’t display information about the works alongside the objects, so we use computer kiosks to provide the additional information on demand. The content on these kiosks is actually quite useful (I’d actually go so far to say essential), but both have issues that can make the experience of using them a frustrating one. Let’s take a look at the Luce Visible Storage kiosks first:

Visible Storage is just that, a working storage room that is open to the public with as many as 2000 objects on display. Objects are identified with their accession number… that’s a pretty long number starting with the two or four year date of acquisition…47.203.16 is a pretty typical example of an accession number. Although, there are six kiosks evenly spaced throughout the center, it’s pretty difficult to remember the numbers of the things you’d like to look up. We do provide pencils and paper to make this a bit easier, so those provisions help a bit. When you get to the stations, you’ve probably forgotten the number if you didn’t write it down. Interestingly, we all knew this was going to be an issue and in the original spec for the Visible Storage we were going to loan visitors the Dell Axim so they could do look up objects on the go, but we couldn’t figure out how to check them out without frustration. With no budget to hire a staffer to loan them out when visitors arrived at the fifth floor installation, the thought of people having to turn around and go back to the front desk to get one seemed problematic. If a visitor happened to get one in the lobby, they’d have to tote it through their entire visit only to use it in that one area. Just re-visiting this history to write this post makes me bonkers and we tabled it knowing that kiosks in the general proximity with pencil/paper was going to be the clearest solution at the time.

In The Dinner Party, the kiosks are outside the physical installation space. This may seem odd, but these have been installed in the area where Judy Chicago’s Heritage Panels reside for a very specific reason. The progression follows the artist’s intent and is designed so the visitor has a singular experience with the table/floor, then moves out into the research area where the Heritage Panels (and kiosks) are available for reference. Luckily, the kiosks are just one level of interpretation—we’ve also got a cell phone tour and small booklets that can be used in the installation area unobtrusively. On a recent visit, I remember walking through The Dinner Party with my mother as she started to rattle off details about all the women at the table—that’s what you get for having a history teacher for a mom—she could talk background on all but two of the 39 women featured. We had forgotten to pick up the booklet, didn’t have our phones and by the time we exited the installation and walked over to the kiosk, neither one of us could remember which of the 39 she didn’t know about and we didn’t want to stick around at the computer to try and figure it out. The kiosk had really valuable information, but it was too far out of reach the moment we need it.
In terms of these two draw examples, we’ve got a mobile solution coming next week that should help alleviate these issues for some visitors and place these examples into more of a win category. In the meantime, I’d love to know your thoughts about kiosks in art museums. This link sent to me via Nina Simon was some entertaining, head bobbing in agreement, not to be missed reading. Let’s hear it…seen anything really awesome or really annoying that you’d like to share?




RSS 
Eastern Parkway/Brooklyn Museum
August 19th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
re: the Visible Storage and Axim problem, maybe Scanlife EZcodes would work for that application:
http://mashable.com/2008/08/13/scanlife-iphone-app-2/
August 19th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I will say, in this new mobile app launching next week, we are solving it but in creating this app we needed to consider a) how to make it accessible for as many phones as possible and b) how to make it easy. While I’m not sure about the EZcodes specifically, my colleagues have described their experiences with QRcodes as problematic and confusing for visitors - they can be pretty difficult to use. In general, we are trying to stay away from QR codes or similar in this mobile app for simpler accession number look up that can be used on a variety of mobile devices.
August 19th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
I think the kiosks at the visible storage are ok. True, it is hard to remember, but people who are interested will try to remember the number anyway.
However, there are cases when a group of objects hung on the wall and all the labels are placed at the bottom. (See Egyptian galleries) I wish there are some technology devices (even a simple pin with a tiny number) to link the object with the label on the bottom.
August 20th, 2009 at 7:43 am
Hi Shelley,
The more I use technology (of any sort) in museums, the more I think about why the technology is there in the first place.
If the technology doesn’t help me do something better than I could do at home instead (like your website in a kiosk example) or do something that I couldn’t do otherwise (like see a magnified view or IR view of an artwork) why is it there at all?
Unfortunately, many art museums seem to de facto use the near-infinite storage capacity of technology as an excuse to effectively make longer labels, even if in the form of multiple screens, or artist interview videos.
I look forward to seeing your continued explorations of gallery tech.
August 20th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
[…] capabilities. Is comes down to a question of design intent or, more specifically, platform. Brooklyn Museum’s Shelley Berstein has written a blog post about kiosks, so I want to share some […]
August 26th, 2009 at 10:44 am
[…] been on a bit of a failure kick lately—cautious observations of visitors glued to screens and kiosks that drive me slightly bonkers—you may be wondering how this could possibly be different. We designed this interface as more […]
August 27th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
In the work we did with the Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh, we focused on presenting a complementary experience to the gallery content and in developing a form factor for an interactive experience more suitable for a gallery. What we arrived at (a prototype, really) is more of a standing desk. Some pics are here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gradientlabs/sets/72157622036232897/
A large format touch screen monitor is held at a drafting table-like angle, and people stand at it. The interactive lets people explore a temporal network of Warhol-related content, some of which is physically in the gallery, most of which is not. There’s an online version you can use here:
http://warhol.gradientlabs.com
It’s been quite interesting to see how people respond to interactive content vs. static content on the walls. There is quite a bit of text content on the walls in the gallery (which we also designed), and people regularly spend 20+ minutes in this one room reading and looking at the analog timeline that circles the gallery at eye level and the larger text surrounding it.
The interactive was originally designed to be an online experience, and there unfortunately wasn’t a sufficient budget to develop a gallery-tuned experience. We simplified the UI and tuned it for touch interaction, but it has far too much text content for a gallery. People don’t want to read on screen, but they’re happy to move around and read text.
Overall, I’d say the form factor itself has been quite successful, but the interactive we put on it isn’t ideally suited to a gallery. The interactive content needs to be more distributed through the gallery in smaller, more directed chunks.
I’ve been advocating for a mobile app and perhaps a physical token system. It would be far more useful if we could let people capture a record of the things that interest them and empower them to go to an in-gallery interactive and corresponding website to dig deeper. These sorts of things are under discussion as we plan the next iteration of the project.
September 10th, 2009 at 12:39 am
As a visitor I only appreciate technology screens that provide an extra layer of information that is helpful beyond text panels and the visual data of the exhibit. It’s distracting and annoying when there are info stations that are too much in the space of the exhibit where people linger and stare rather than engage with the material subject matter. I appreciate when they are easily accessible but not too much a part of the space. I guess that’s where the debate comes in though.
In regards to the open storage exhibit, have you considered having a laminate card with the numbers printed on it and providing dry erase markers or wax pencils? Assuming there is nothing nearby that the writing could end up on. Visitors could pick up a card and mark off the items they wished to look up and return the cards when they’re done. Maybe have some sort of option on the kiosk so that information being looked up could be emailed to the visitor if they chose.
Problem solving was not the point of the article, I realize, but it got me thinking about how I like to interact with an exhibit. I do like lots of accessible information.