umesh +D+ R10/R11

Reading 10: “Different ways of learning from Museums” it is personal blog and expression of Saul. He generalises what people can study from museums, matter of individual interest in subject, choice of subject and exhibit. For me personally, anything learning starts with curiosity of subject first and obviously there should be interest, without interest. That means pizza without cheese.

Next is sharing information with friends or others person means exchanging and having dialogue on subject matter broadens owns thinking level on subject matter. It’s natural to have more information seeing the museums with different lens. The personal choice of interest defines the subject matter to dig in the information displayed in the museum or any subject matter.

The writer observe different techniques of displaying the subject matter, labelling- written descriptive manner, audio tour, guided tour, uses of multiple languages, computer interfaces- touch screen. Each technique has its advantages and disadvantages of conveying the information. The designer ‘s choice of display is to tell the larger audience its hidden story in presentable format, which should be coherent with whole exhibition.

The writer basically states the shortfalls i.e., the guided tour: fixed timetable conflicted with timetable, the computer touch screens functioning slowly or dead. I don’t think these are big issue. These guided tour and computer screen technique are more interactive method to connect with the audience and give tons of information. So it’s all personal choice of how to learn from Museum. My goal/ intention of visiting Milwaukee Public Museums & Discovery world this week was in conjunction with academic viewpoint, There was goal set-up for the purpose of visiting. This was entirely different experience than visiting with family members. So it is how you view the world in what time frame, condition and purpose, the answer may not be same for all, but i guess all the answers are true.

Hebior Mamoth

Reading 11: “What Museums Cost Visitors—and Lessons for Information Architects and Information Designers “, the blog starts with bunch of information how visitor can get access to museum, its admission fees, discount fee for student, teacher, membership and pass system. I guess this information can be easily accessible from the particular website of museum. Admission fees are generally priced according to the operation cost and expected profit margin of the museum. The permanent exhibit has its own importance for the Museum to market its product, and changing exhibit add more flavour which attract larger section of audience and gives more momentum to understand new subject matter.

The main point of the blog is to take idea from the museum charging for special exhibit, similar can be applied in the case of information architects/ webpage designer in website to charge certain fees to access the information. It’s good to generate revenue and become sustain for hosting website and which can be refuelled with better resources as a whole. It is basically providing the service on exchange of monetary form, so the service should fulfil customer’s expectation what he needs. There are many sites which gives access to general facilities of its sites, but charges for additional services e.g. www.hulu.com, www.linkedin.com. In academic journal, they are only available after paying certain fees and they are successful.

Specht_N R10&11

These essays discuss the findings of two researchers that visited various museums throughout North America, Europe, and Canada. By doing this they were able to gather a vast amount of data on the visitors, experience, exhibits, display, and admission costs.
The first essay reveals how within market-regions the cost of admission stays within a four-dollar price difference and how the top revenue producing museums set the tone for the overall market. Therefore if one museum decides to charge for an entrance fee the smaller venues generally need to follow in order to survive within the market. It was noted that many of the American museums did not charge for general admission in most instances but still tended to charge for special exhibitions. The author of the essay talks of special exhibitions like items in an a la carte, the visitor can select how little or how much information they would like to view that day. One-day admissions ended up being the most economically viable in comparison to the “packages” or membership fees. The package option turned out to be more limited when it came to deciding which museums to visit since the package pre-determined the museums included, personal preference is nullified. Memberships to the museums functioned best on a local level, visitors could return as many times as they wanted, gain free entry to special exhibits, and/or just give back to the museum with a membership. Oddly enough the discounts were limited by age for students over 30, otherwise blatantly discriminatory against non-traditional students. Something that I also found interesting within the reading was the authors correlation of visiting a museum in person to visiting a museums website. In this day and age it is bound to happen that there will be online exhibitions, well, there already are….flickr, Dribble, Behance, etc. all sort of act like personal galleries of artistic work. The work tends to either be photography or digitally rendered specifically to be viewed on a computer anyways. This difference I’m reaching for is that three-dimensional galleries will never work. Two-dimensional work will always be able to be viewed and considered onscreen, whereas items that are intended to be viewed in a specific environment or touched even cannot be taken in online. With that I feel the authors mention of charging to view work online for membership fees or a one-stop fee makes sense if the work is intended to be viewed onscreen and not in an exhibit or gallery. In an exhibit the notions of user experience are completely different from onscreen, as well.
The second essay discusses how the visitor interacts with the exhibits and chooses to distill the information. The author generally decides to read all of the labels and deems that as thoroughly viewing the items. His partner choose to listen to the audio tapes because of personal preference and in Spain the tapes were in Spanish the partners primary language. The labels of the items where almost always in English and neither more information was given from one or the other depending on the museum. I would think that the labels would tend to have the more generic information and the audio tapes would have more in depth information since it is an additional option. I never thought of choosing one or the other when visiting a museum. I image this could also be because of personal preference but the obvious fact that audio tapes take longer to divulge information than simply reading through a paragraph. The visitors experience could also be applied to digital galleries as well. I tend to shut off any audio options when visiting any site since I tend to use my computer in public areas. If there is an option to simply read the information then that is the primary choice for convenience and promptness of gathering the information. I think that these two realms will eventually meet in the sense that labels could become digital and thus possibly contain audio clips, additional imagery, information, and even video that would pertain to the piece. On the other hand I could see how one could see this as a distraction and possibly an overload of information, that casts over the original work itself. As with most things the overall interpretation of an object comes down to individual circumstances somewhat controlled by an exhibit designer.

KarenR_R11

The price of admission to a museum is not determined solely by what other museums in the area are charging. Perhaps it is a consideration taken by the operator when figuring what price they must charge, but it is not a big one. The fact that museums in one community all have similar admission prices is the result of other things.

The price of admission must be determined by what the museum costs to operate. It is a business like any other and has many expenses. The owner has to pay to heat it, to clean it, to light it, and to otherwise maintain the property. They have to buy insurance on the building and the objects inside of it. They have to buy permits to operate, I’m sure, and signs, and advertising so people know it’s there. They have to pay employees to sell you a ticket, to stand there and take your ticket, to show you where to go, to guard you, and to guard the exhibit. And taxes, there’s always taxes.

The price of admission to museums all in one community would be similar because the cost of utilities, labor, and taxes would be the same, or very close, for each museum in that community.

There are several other factors that would determine price. A publicly owned museum would be less than a privately owned museum because they receive subsidies from the government. Museums that do not charge admission are most likely publicly owned. The square footage of the property would affect the cost. The smaller the property, the cheaper it is to maintain, the less you would need to charge. The price is also determined by how many and how badly people want to get inside. A museum that contains objects of little value or interest may be cheaper than a museum that houses a world famous masterpiece.

Museums full of things that people want to see, and are willing to pay full price for, do not have much incentive to provide discounts, especially to travelers from foreign countries. There is not much hope of gaining repeat business there, if any; no matter what price you pay, you are not likely to come back. They have one shot to make their money off of you, and they are not going to waste it.

I do not think that charging admission to a museum is anything like charging for access to a website. The cost of operating a website is not anywhere close to the cost of operating a museum. How would you justify the fee? I have never paid for access to a specific website, nor for a premium membership or “a la carte” option. I pay my cable bill for Internet access.

When you ask people for money, you must provide value in return. The museum provides you with the experience. You can get up close to things you might only otherwise see in a book. You can walk through a building you have never been in and take a picture to prove you were there. It may not be much, but it is something and people buy it. It is much harder to provide value with a website. Especially when there are so many fantastic websites that are free, as Carliner mentioned. Even with “a la carte” options, what are you paying for? It seems like access to information that you could likely find elsewhere. If I am going to pay for information, I would rather pay for admission to a museum than a website.

Heidi + R + 11

This article was of more interest to me, perhaps since it deals with websites and charging a price to view them. It was interested to see the comparison of websites and museums, and how one could charge admission to both. That similar museums could link together and offer an admission price to view all of them just as some museums do. I found that interesting a comparison could be drawn from museums to websites. Websites to me are often just large articles, or books online, a community to talk to and an artistic outlet. I do gather information online, but to me it should be free and easily accessed, if I came across something that cost me a fee, well I would put on my pirate hat and find a way to get it for free. The internet to me is tool to get information, a museum is a place to learn and interact with that information. I will pay the admission price to a museum because I understand the museum has the additional funds of paying security, maintenance, updating their shows, etc. A website has funds and fees are involved, but compared to taxes, electricity and what not the fees for a website are so minimal compared to a building such as a museum. I see no need in charging a fee for a website and I for one would not comply. I pay the fee to see the actual works in person, yes I can go look at any piece of art I want online, but to see it in person, to see the actual size, brush strokes and true color of it, is priceless and something I do not think a screen can depict. The website to me is an aid, it aids the museum, but should not take place of the museum, and is not near enough to the real thing to be charged to view.

Heidi + R + 10

This article I found interesting to read, but learned little from. These observations can be made from anyone going to a museum and are observations I agree with. For example if there is information that I am not interested in I pass through it quickly. If there is information that others who are at the museum with me are interested in I will take the time to indulge them and look at this information. Often times there is something one sees that the other does not, thus why going to the museum with others is very beneficial. It gives you another perspective to see things from. Yet I found a majority of the article to be one persons perspective of their travels and their experiences. This author obviously is well traveled and has been lucky enough to see many museums. But his experience is one I may not agree with or ever experience myself, and I found that the "theme" or message in the article is that everyone has a different preference of learning at a museum. To me that's a no brainier, there are audio, tours, and signs for that reason. So in the end this article was like a "cool story" rather then something informational or eye opening.

AndreaLRO11

The cost of museum entrance can obviously greatly control who and who cannot see the museum. When I was going to to these museums for the class assignment I asked a few people if they wanted to accompany me. The first thing they responded with was "how much does it cost?". I am a poor college student, and so are all my friends. Randomly dropping lots of money on something like a museum especially ones that are marketed towards mostly children is not especially desirable. Normal admission for adults in Discovery World was about 17 dollars. For students it was about 10, and I was required to show my UWM identification. While looking through the exhibit, I kept feeling like, well I paid 10 dollars to be here I better get a look at everything. So while fees can be hindering, they also keep the viewers focused and make sure they have a real desire to be there.
Everyone knows going on a "free day" at a museum will be a huge free-for-all of people and the museum will be way to crowded and potentially full of children. Something I admittedly do not enjoy.
I've never been to museums in Europe but it was interesting to hear about them in this article. Getting the passes for several museums seems like too much pressure to me. Trying to rush through museums and seeing several in a day sounds like it would take the fun out of museum trips completely. If you go to a museum you have to really want to go.

KarenR_R10

This reading, Reflections on Museums 3, provided more information about Saul Carliner than it did about learning or information design. It was very noisy.

From this reading I learned that Saul Carliner is very well traveled. He can speak multiple languages including Spanish and French, but his primary language is English. He is very interested in history. He travels with his partner whose primary language is Spanish. His partner has some interests that are similar to his and others that differ. Saul prefers to read any written information provided in museums. His partner prefers to listen to provided audio guides and inspect the objects themselves. They both dislike guided tours, even though they provide more information, and the both find videos and computers in museums to be time consuming.

Remove the personal information about Mr. Carliner and company from this post, and what is left is nothing that is not obvious to anyone who has ever been to a museum.

You go to a museum because you or someone you know is interested in what is going on there. At the museum, supplemental information about each exhibit is provided to you in several different formats: written words, audio guides, tour guides, videos, touch-screen computers, etc. Some people prefer one format to another, for personal or practical reasons. Some people prefer to ignore the supplemental information altogether and focus exclusively on the object or exhibit itself.

I did not find any of the information Carliner provided to be very significant. He discussed the different ways information is presented. He stated that people will prefer one presentation to another. He did not indicate which presentation was most effective in communicating the information. He did not say which presentation most people are drawn to. He did not say whether or not he retained any of the information he gained. Any assessments made of the different presentations of information were strictly personal, and only represented Saul Carliner, one person.

I am not sure what I am supposed to take away from this as a student of design. Simply stating that people have choices and that different people choose differently is useless because it is obvious. Why do people choose? How do people choose? What do people choose? I now know why, how, and what Saul Carliner chooses, but what good is that?

ANdreaLRO10

This article focused on some points that I was thinking about during the museum trips, specifically the trip I took to Discovery World. People go to museums because they are interesting in certain subjects. It's easy to watch yourself float around a museum and only sticking to the exhibits that interest you. Museum are supposed to be fun, so focusing on something that is too confusing or that doesn't cater to your interests in any way just does not make sense.
At Discovery World there were a lot of involved and text heavy exhibits. Most people looked at them and kept moving. Very few individuals want to stand and read huge statements, especially in a crowded museum. I think for someone to seriously go through every exhibit and comprehend what they were all about, it would take like 12 hours. I'm not sure if the museum is designed with the knowledge that everything is not going to be looked at. If it is, I think that's kind of strange. Is some knowledge more valuable than others?
The article also raised the issue of problems with computer touch screens as part of the exhibits. I think the most awkward part of using the screens is how few of them there are. With a huge crowd in and area and 3 touch screens, it is uncomfortable. It's not worth waiting to use one so it's best to just move on. During my trip to discovery world I just watched some kids play with "Tic Tac Toe George" rather than actually play myself. I was too crowded with kids to even bother waiting around to do it myself. Making aspects of museums that can only be used by one or two people at a time doesn't work out very well. Maybe some sort of hand held tablet with a touch screen that museum goers could use while walking through would work better. Like an audio tour telephone. But, something like that opens a whole slew of new and more difficult problems.

umesh +D+ Final proposal

The URBAN EDGE: redevelopment of the Inner Harbor

The Main objective of the project is to create postindustrial spaces along harbor active, making access to larger people to celebrate the world largest freshwater, which is 20% of the world. This will be achieved by development of UWM’s Freshwater harbor campus solely research institute of freshwater and collaboration of private water industries, integrating with riverwalk. The project examines in three different lenses, one in larger picture accessible to the harbor & riverwalk (100 acres), second masterplannig the inner harbor campus (30 acres) and third by Detail sections of water flow from the roof of building to the ground and flow to the harbor. In all the three scales, the riverwalk, stormwater management will be main design strategies.

My goal for the final proposal in information design is to illustrate the main idea of river walk making accessible to the harbor & River Walk: Integrating multiple users and activities within riverwalk along the water edge to appreciate the values of harbor. Extending the riverwalk from the third ward to North of Bayview (create transition space) and capturing experiential moments. Create welcoming gateway by redesigning the railway bridge above Greenfield ave.