Nearchou George

RLDGeorge Nearchou

“New Media create new spaces; new spaces in turn create new architecture”

Douglas Tong Hsu, 2001

I am sincerely and heartily grateful to my supervisor, Toby Shew, for the invaluable sup-

port and guidance he offered me throughout this academic year. The realisation of this

study would have not been possible without his endless influential creativity. Moreover, I

would like to express my sincere gratitude to Professor Igea Troiani who has always been

supportive and inspirational to me.

What is more, I am obliged to my colleagues, Ileana Liaskovitis, Eleftherios Kanakaris

and Francesco Miniati for their support, the endless discussions and productive criticism

regarding my study.

Moreover, I would like to thank my parents and my sister - Andreas Savvas, Niki Savva

Melathniou and Elena Nearchou - for supporting every decision I have made and helping

me through every phase of my life.

Last but not least, I would like to express my appreciation to my girlfriend, Antia Peri-

cleous, for all her support and understanding, and for helping me being motivated and

focused on what I do.

Acknowledgements

This book is a product of research for the needs of the Research Led Design specialisation

(part of MArchD Applied Design in Architecture) at Oxford Brookes University, during

the academic year 2011/2012. For the implementation of this study, the research problem

has been approached intellectually as well as through design, in order to attain the best

possible outcome.

The purpose of this book is to provide the reader with a clear understanding of the poten-

tials and possibilities that will unravel when Mixed Reality is applied in architecture, as

well as how Mixed Reality can be used as an additional tool or service that can enhance

the experience of an architectural space. What is more, a demonstration of how Mixed

Reality can become an additional layer of architecture is available; this can be considered

as an initial approach to the research problem, which can be used as a starting point or as

an inspiration for further development.

Preface

This book provides a holistic multidisciplinary approach to the topic, so that it can be

read by architects, designers, and amateur enthusiasts that are interested in the impact of

architecture by contemporary digitally driven technologies without any prior knowledge

or experience in the field of Mixed Reality.

In the first section of this book - namely ‘Introduction’ - the reader is provided with some

introductory text, in order to comprehend the approach of this study towards the research

problem. Moreover, the research problem and the perspective of the author, as well as the

methodology used for the research, will thoroughly be delineated.

In the second section, a literature review, which identifies findings from other researchers,

is available. This section also informs the reader about the up-to-date general background,

on which this study relies.

Following is a section, whereby the author attempts to create correlations and critically

approach matters, such as experience, Experiential Design, Mixed Reality, real and virtual,

and Mixed Reality in architecture. Finally, the design, which has been developed through

and informed by this research, will be demonstrated, analysed and justified.

At the beginning of the virtual revolution, the virtual world had been considered as a

reality that existed in parallel with real life, but with the two having no connection to

one other. It was perceived as another space, which could be entered using only the

appropriate technologies. That virtual world was called Cyberspace (William Gibson,

1982).Thirteen years later, Dunne and Raby(1995 :61) challenged Gibson’s Cyberspace

with the idea of a reality that exists in real life, and which allows for exploration of new

situations arising in physical space; instead of a reality you can inhabit, and which exists

as abstract digital ‘space’(Dunne and Raby 1995:61).

“Dunne and Raby’s article seemed to challenge the Gibsonian dematerialised cyberspace by attempting to make the invisible electromagnetic climates of digital technology tangible in real physical spaces, reversing the idea that cyberspace was something ‘out there’ or part of another world and reminding the reader of their embodied existence”

Dade-Robertson (2011:84)

eraMoving to the new era of reality

After this dramatic change of perspective regarding Cyberspace, the virtual world has

become a ‘reality’ that complements the physical world and in more recent times, aug-

menting digital information in the physical world. In 1996(155), William Mitchell fore-

saw that “physical settings and virtual venues will function interdependently, and will

mostly complement each other within transformed patterns of urban life rather than

substitute within existing ones”, while in 2003 (129) he suggested that, “...physical space

and cyberspace had actually become locked in an intricate, mutually transforming em-

brace, with functions shifting and dividing between the two in complex ways.” Also,

because of the change of perspective regarding cyberspace as something complementing

the physical world, “by the early 2000, bits had returned from cyberspace. They had gone

on location in the material world”, as witnessed by Dade-Robertson (2011). Through

these major changes regarding the perception of the virtual world, it is apparent that the

‘virtual’ is joining the real, complementing or even clashing with it.

As a result of this shift regarding the boundary between real and virtual, materials in the

physical world are being enriched with information from the virtual world. For example,

a wall painted white can be perceived as a brick wall, after the appropriate augmentation

has been applied on it. Moreover, the phenomenology of physical spaces is altered by

the introduction of virtual elements in the real physical space. As a result, these altera-

tions on the physical space can be considered as an architectural issue, which must be

addressed when designing a physical space that would utilise Mixed Reality.

Introduction | Page 2

fig. 2 - snapshots taken from the video: “Microstoft Vision Office Labs 2019”

Microsoft has recently published a series of videos demonstrating their technological

vision for the near future (2019). In these videos, technological advancements allow the

everyday user to have superimposed real-time information regarding his/her surround-

ings, as well as other useful information.

Such examples include: surfaces, which convey digital information, and which interact

with the user as well as allow the user to communicate with other people, and holograms

and three dimensional augmentations of objects, which introduce new possibilities from

the virtual world in the real world.

visionReality based on Microsoft’s vision 2019


Microsoft’s vision is to bridge the gap between the real world and the virtual world,

which will result in the benefits of sharing information, as well as the interaction

among people and objects, despite the distance that may separate them.

Taking into consideration the Microsoft Vision for 2019, and assuming that those

technologies to support Mixed Reality will be available by that time, it is rather un-

likely that the built environment will not be affected by them. Moreover, not only

Microsoft has this Vision, but similar goals have been set by other leading techno-

logical companies as well. Additionally, several technological innovations, which can

already contribute to the implementation of Mixed Environments, have appeared

(Mixed Reality Environments).

As already mentioned, the achievement of such technologies will have an impact on

the built environment; therefore, the role of the architect will change, and in effect,

Architects will have to find the way to exploit other realities along with the “real”

reality.

So, in the present study, these realities will be approached from an architectural per-

spective rather than a technological one.fig

. 3 -

snap

shot

s tak

en fr

om th

e vi

deo:

“Mic

rost

oft V

ision

Pro

duct

ivity

201

9”.

Year 2019_Architectural space has become ‘alive’! It can interact with the user, respond

to climate changes, respond to user movement, etc. Architectural Space can now be ex-

perienced in a more dynamic and synchronous way than it had ever been experienced

before. The boundaries between real and virtual have become blurred; they have almost

disappeared.

fig. 4 - Tron Legacy. City concept. by Shelest (2009)

futureThe invasion of the Virtual

Conventional materials now have different properties, different meanings and different

uses. They can create different emotions and a different sense of space from what they

used to, for thousands of years.

Holograms interact with the real environment; ‘smart’ surfaces allow you to experience

other realities synchronously and interactively; ‘smart’ materials respond to your needs

and learn from you while you are interacting with them.

Nothing can be taken for granted anymore; new elements have invaded conventional

space; virtual objects are being manipulated as if they were real, while real objects are

becoming responsive in another reality.

Time is no longer an unmanageable dimension; time can be paused. Navigation of time

now is available, in some realities… What is considered real is not only the ‘real reality’,

but rather, all realities carry truths and lies in their own respects.

The introduction of Mixed Reality has significantly changed the field of Architecture;

not only the way we define or perceive architecture, but also the way Architects design.

Moreover, architectural space has been penetrated by other realities, which have altered

the experience of architectural space as we knew it ten years ago.


How will the introduction of Mixed Reality in museums affect the role of the architect

in the near future?

The purpose of this study is to provide possible scenarios as well as solutions, and dem-

onstrate how the introduction of Mixed Realities in museums will affect the role of the

architect in the near future. Moreover, the aim of the present study is to create an under-

standing on how Mixed Reality will be used as an architectural element and to propose

a new drawing typology - the ArMR as I named it - to design Mixed Environments.

What is more, this study will examine the alterations caused on experience by the intro-

duction of Mixed Reality in museums, and more specifically, in History museums. The

reason for focusing on History museums in particular is because this type of museum

will benefit the most out of Mixed Reality, as the past will be available to explore in a

synchronous situation.

Furthermore, the purpose of this study is to highlight and amplify the cultural and edu-

cational impact on the visitor. In other words, the study will focus on how the partici-

pant becomes educated by and aware of the context of the museum, through digitally

driven technologies.

Research question:

Additionally to the main research question, other noteworthy questions have arisen re-

garding this study, its approach and implementation.

Questions such as:

- ‘How will the architect design the user experience using Mixed Reality?’,

- ‘How will the architect design the Mixed Reality?’ ,

- ‘How will the architect represent Mixed Reality in architectural drawings?’,

have been identified as sub-problems, which have assisted the process and development

of this very study, especially the part of the design.

Moreover, issues concerning materiality, limitations/constraints and perspective are

crucial for the nature of this study and have to be addressed for the purpose of this pro-

ject. These issues will be addressed either theoretically or through design experimenta-

tion/exploration.

This study will attempt to provide a theoretical framework for the use of Mixed Reality

in Architecture, and primarily in a specific building typology –the History Museum. In

addition, it will focus on how the experience of a user in a museum may be improved by

the use of Mixed Reality, in the near future.

This study will not focus on technologies that may support Mixed Reality, but it will

rather approach Mixed Reality as a concept. In other words, it will not attempt to devise

a Mixed Environment with appropriate technologies that may support Mixed Reality.

Sub-Problems:

Area of study:


fig. 6 - BIM

Illustration of Building Informa-tion Modelling (BIM) file including structural information model, en-ergy efficiency diagrams etc.

fig. 5 - Guggenheim Museum Bil-bao, Spain

The Guggenheim Museum de-signed by Frank Gehry is one of the earliest and most popular examples of CAD/CAM buildings. A building which would be impossible to built without CAD/Cam technology.

Mixed Reality will become a significant part of architecture in the near future. Technolo-

gies will be available and easily accessible -as briefly mentioned in the section ‘Reality

based on Microsoft’s vision 2019’- and Mixed Reality will become an additional issue for

the architect to deal with.

Architecture has always been affected by various revolutions and the new technologies-

introduced by them. Technologies like electricity, elevators, escalators, motion sensor

light switches and several more, have been embodied in the building and the architec-

tural process. Mixed Reality will definitely become part of numerous building typologies

in the near future.

Moving from the Industrial Revolution to the Virtual Revolution (or Information Age),

changes in the way we build have yet again occurred. CAD/CAM (Computer Aided

Design/Computer Aided Manufacturing, fig. 5) allow for the building of complex geom-

etries that were impossible to build before. Building Information Modelling (BIM, fig. 6)

provides so much data and allows for the prediction of possible anomalies and difficul-

ties in the construction process, as well as enables the simulation of buildings, with the

benefit of testing their performance with great accuracy, thus allowing for changes on

design to make it more efficient. Considering the rapid improvement of digitally driven

technologies over the last decade (2000s), - technologies that allow for augmentation of

information in particular, and the introduction of Mixed Reality in the reasonable phys-

Rationale:


fig. 7 - BMW AR drivining as-sistant

fig. 8- BMW AR mechanic assistant

fig. 9 - Grocery shopping application

ical space in general - , it is easy to assume that the built environment will be immensely

affected by them; not to mention the tendency of the virtual world to occupy real space.

Mixed Realities - and especially Augmented Reality - can be met in a wide range of in-

dustries with various applications. Examples have been demonstrated in the automotive

industry, employing mixed realities to assist in the operation of a vehicle (fig. 7), or to

assist professionals in the maintenance and repair of the mechanical parts of it (fig. 8).

More examples are available in the industry of telecommunications (fig. 9 - 13), with

every Smartphone having the ability of becoming a Mixed Reality tool, thus offering its

user endless possibilities and options of how to use it. Moreover, Mixed Realities are be-

ing used for commercial purposes by leading brands and companies (fig. 14 - 16)

fig. 10 - iPhone application fig. 11 - SixthSense


fig. 12 - Augmented Reality Google glasses

fig. 13 - Augmented Reality Google Glasses


fig. 14 (top left) - Adidas fig. 16 (top right) - Wallpaper Ar issue December 2009

fig. 17 (centre right) -AR applica-tion in Architecture

fig. 18 (bottom right) -Historical application

fig. 15 (bottom left) - Esquire Magazine AR issue November 2009

Considering the introduction of Mixed Realities in such industries, it is easy to assume

- or even better envision - that Mixed Reality will become part of Architecture.

Like other technologies that have blended into the urban fabric, Mixed Reality will even-

tually become a tool, a service, embedded under the skin of architectural spaces. There-

fore, the goal of this study is to envisage and examine how these technologies will have

an impact on Architecture.

What is more, Mixed Reality has not been the epicenter of academic minds in the field

of Architecture, but it has mostly occupied the focus of more technical and technological

professions. However, there have been some attempts to employ Mixed Reality in archi-

tecture (fig. 17) , though with little evidence of substantiated research.

Little research has been done in exploring the impact of Mixed Reality on the Built Envi-

ronment from an Architectural point of view. This fact may result in the uncontrollable

use of various realities in the built environment, causing a chaotic situation introduced

by the unreasonable use of technology. Therefore, to prevent this unpleasant situation, it

is vital to consider Mixed Reality as an Architectural problem, explore it and provide a

framework that may preclude any impediment.


To begin with, in architecture, Mixed Reality will primarily affect the experience of the

end user, which will, in turn, affect the role of the architects regarding how they design

Mixed Realities in a physical space.

Therefore, relevant literature has been reviewed to allow for the analysis and compre-

hension of how experience can be defined. Concepts that attempt to define experience

are provided in order to thoroughly comprehend the term. Also, issues, such as what

constitutes an experience and how we can perceive an experience, have been examined,

so as to allow the architect/designer to subsequently enhance it and highlight its charac-

teristics and constraints.

introIntroducing the study


What is more, the literature review focuses on the evolving branch of architecture and

design, namely Experiential Design, which focuses on the design of the experience be-

tween the user and the product, and which would be appropriate in terms of address-

ing parameters that affect the user experience and enable the architect/designer to use

Mixed Reality as a tool of designing the user experience. Moreover, models and theories

that have been presented by various researchers will be provided regarding the dimen-

sions that affect a designed experience according to principles of Experiential Design..

Since there does not exist an established definition of what exactly the term mixed real-

ity signifies, an attempt to define it would be useful, followed by a brief definition of the

various scales where Real and Virtual intersect and form Mixed Reality.

The characteristics of experience and the extent to which it affects Experiential Design,

along with the theories and models, which have been introduced and examined previ-

ously, will be applied in the Mixed Reality framework, in order to explore and exploit

potentials of Mixed Reality in the field of Experiential Design, as well as improve and

enhance the quality of the user experience in Architecture and in the Built environment.

What follows in the next section is a critical theoretical approach towards Mixed Real-

ity. Matters such as limitations, materiality and the relationship of Mixed Reality to place

and space will be addressed, leading to the production of an initial theoretical frame-

work for Mixed Reality.

Moreover, consistent with the characteristics and models that have previously been

pointed out in the literature review section regarding experience, Mixed Reality realms

will be reviewed by attempting to identify what kind of experience these realities might

possibly create.

Mixed Reality will be examined in terms of how it can be used as a tool of Experiential

Design- and in a wider extent in architecture – along with which Experiential Design

approach might be applicable while designing a Mixed Environment, depending on

which Mixed Reality realm will be used.

The next section comprises the design, which has been informed and developed by con-

sidering models and theories discussed earlier in this study. In addition, experimenting

and exploratory design tasks and design methods have been applied, so as to produce

the final design.

Finally, the summary/conclusion will be provided based on the literature reviewed, the-

ories, models, approaches and findings that have been examined in this project and it

will summarise and highlight the outcomes of this research project.


Before discussing Experiential Design and Mixed Reality in Architecture, it is required

to comprehend the notion of experience. Also, it is of vital importance to understand

how experience is perceived and how we define it. Moreover, categories of different kinds

of experience will be examined, outlining the strongest characteristics that may classify

them. To begin with, three different concepts about experience will be introduced to

give a brief idea about what is experience as stated by Schmitt(1999), O’Sullivan and

Spangler(1998) and Pine & Gilmore(1999).

experienceExperience

Literature Review | Page 34

First, according to Schmitt (1999:26-27) “experience occurs as a result of encountering,

undergoing, or living through situations. They are triggered stimulations to the senses,

the heart, and the mind. Experiences also connect the company and the brand to the

costumers’ lifestyle”.

Another conceptualization of experience has been introduced by O’Sullivan and Span-

gler (1998:2-3), who state that “an experience involves the participation and involvement

of the individual in the consumption; a change in knowledge, skill, memory or emotion;

and an effort directed at addressing a psychological or internal need of the participant”.

Finally, in their book ‘The Experience Economy’, Pine II & Gilmore (1999) argue that

“experiences are a distinct economic offering, as distinct from services as services are

from goods, but one that – until now – went largely unrecognized. But, like goods and

services, have their own distinct qualities and characteristics and present their own de-

sign challenges”.

The first and second conceptualisations, by Schmitt and O’Sullivan & Spencer respec-

tively, suggest that an experience occurs when an individual is participating and in-

Let’s talk about it: volved in some sort of activity which has an impact on him/her. The former argues that

experience has the ability to arouse and stimulate the senses, the heart and the mind;

whereas the latter suggests that experience may cause a change in knowledge, skills,

memory or emotions. Finally, Pine II & Gilmore have used a different approach to con-

ceptualise experience, by defining it as “distinct economic offering”, which the present

design challenges.

In order to explore and comprehend the concept of experience, it is significant to un-

derstand how a person perceives an experience, as well as how s/he can describe it or

‘talk about it’. According to Forlizzi and Ford(2000), there are three ways to talk about

experience: experience, an experience, and experience as story.

Forlizzi and Ford (2000) defines experience as “...the constant stream that happens dur-

ing moments of consciousness. Self-talk or self-narration is often the way that people

acknowledge the passing of this kind of experience.” In other words experience is what

people perceive and process consciously, and they are aware that it is happening. Also,

by stating “Self-talk or self-narration...”, they want to highlight that people are conscious

and aware of this experience. Moreover, Forlizzi and Ford(2000) states that “This defini-

tion is based on cognitive scientist Richard Carlson’s theory of consciousness known as

Experienced Cognition”.


The second way to discuss experience is by talking about having an experience, as ar-

gued in the book Art as Experience by the philosopher John Dewey. This experience can

be perceived as one that has time limits; it is constituted by a beginning and an end. This

type of experience is derived by the active interaction between the user and the product,

and it is the one employing the human senses and the human mind. Also, as correctly

stated by Woo,H.R.: “The experience is the awareness of what’s happening to us when we

do all this perceiving, acting, and processing.” (Woo, 2007)

In addition, there is a third way one could talk about an experience; namely, talking

about experience as a story- a narrative-. This is a concept that has been supported by

the Artificial Intelligence researcher Roger Schank.(1990). Stories are the conveyors we

use to condense and remember experiences, and a way to transfer our experience to

someone else or a group of people. Furthermore, experience as a story/narrative can be

either real or artificial, depending on the goal the narrator wants to achieve.

Finally, another way to talk about experience has recently been introduced by Woo(2007),

as the concept of art and emotional experience. As stated by Woo, if “Concepts are per-

ceived through cognitive process, then art and emotional experience is made up. This

type of experience involves aesthetic sensory pleasure, construction of meaning and

emotional responses “. In other words, this type of experience can be considered as simi-

lar to the “experience as a story“ concept, but with a more artistic nature.

The four realms of experience: At this point, the characteristics of experience and the parameters which affect it need

to be discussed. As claimed by Pine II and Gilmore (1999) in their book The Experi-

ence Economy: “work is theatre & every business a stage: goods & services are no longer

enough”

According to this diagram by Pine II and Gilmore (1999), experience can be perceived

in two axes; namely, the horizontal axis, which represents the participation of the user,

and the vertical one, which represents the connection between the user and the environ-

ment where experience is taking place. Experience can be categorised into four groups,

according to its characteristics, as termed by Pine II and Gilmore (1999): a) Entertain-

ment, b) Educational, c) Esthetic and d) Escapist.

fig. 19 - The four realms of an experience (Pine II and Gilmore, 1999:30)


The first group - entertainment experience - can be perceived as passive absorption,

through the individual’s/user’s senses. Therefore, in this case, the user can talk about

experience, because this type of experience is one witnessed and processed consciously.

Despite the fact that this experience is passively absorbed, it is still perceived consciously

but without the interaction of the user. Hence, the user does not have the ability to alter

this experience; s/he can only witness it as it is.

The educational experience shares the same viewpoint as the entertainment experience

(experience through senses), only this time the individual/user is actively participating

by using his/her mind to expand his/her knowledge. Therefore, in this case the user can

talk about an experience. The reason a person can talk about an experience is simply be-

cause this kind of experience is perceived consciously; in addition, it entails interaction

between the user and the product. In other words, the active participation of the user is

required in order for this experience to be achieved.

The esthetic experience takes place when the individual is being part of an event or

environment without being able to have an impact; s/he simply experiences it observa-

tionally rather than interactively. This kind of experience is similar to the entertainment

experience. The difference between these two kinds of experience is that, the former is

experienced while the user is absorbed and the latter when the user is immersed. In oth-

er words, the entertainment experience is witnessed as something happening in front of

the user, in opposition to the esthetic experience, where the user is part of the experi-

ence. Consequently, the user can talk about experience, because of the conscious percep-

tion and process, the absence of interaction, and the inability to alter it.

Finally, as regards the escapist experience, “the guest [user] is completely immersed in

it, [so, s/he is] an actively involved participant” (Pine II and Gilmore, 1999). In other

words, the participant is becoming aware of the surrounding environment -whether vir-

tual or real- and has the ability to interact with and alter the experience according to

his/her actions. As a result, an individual can talk about escapist experience, as it is an

experience whereby s/he is conscious of what happens and has the ability to participate

in as well. In addition, an individual can talk about this type of experience as an art and

emotional experience, because it involves aesthetic sensory pleasure, construction of

meaning and emotional responses.


Experiential design is the practice, whereby products and services are designed to pro-

vide the client/user with a unique experience. Therefore, experiential design concentrates

on improving the user experience quality while interacting with the product. Moreover,

the focus of this kind of design is not particularly on the product, but on the experience

it can offer to the user. This so-called ‘product’, can also be a physical or virtual environ-

ment, a setting or an installation designed to offer a certain experience to the user.

“The basic idea of experiential design is that, because we are embodied be-ings, meaning ultimately resides in bodily experiences. We have evolved to act in the physical world, and how we are able to understand abstract information is derived from that capacity. If we design for embodiment, understanding comes free; this is the first major benefit of the approach.”

(Waterworth et al. 2003)

ExDExperiential Design

To achieve such a goal, an approach from multidisciplinary professions (fig. 20) must be

carefully considered, involving disciplines and experts form a wide range of fields, such

as architecture, product design, psychology, environmental design, interactive design,

linguistics, innovators, technologists, computer scientists and many more. Such a mul-

tidisciplinary approach toward such design is required, in order to foresee interactions

between the user and the product, predict emotions and human senses activated by the

fig. 20 -Experience Design diagram


interaction, as well as aid the technology to device and construct what may be needed

to create this experience. As described by Jones, R., (2008), “experiential design is the

practice as working across disciplines, often furthest from their own creating a relevant

integration between concepts, methods and theories”.

Moreover, experiential design is time-based and the designer must predict possible sce-

narios. Of course, such a design could never be accurate on the outcome, so the designer

usually includes certain key points, which would guide the client in order to achieve a

relatively similar experience to the one designed to be offered. These key points some-

times are referred to as moments of engagement, or touchpoints. On the other hand,

more accurate guidance to the user could be achieved by generating active interaction of

the product towards the user’s behaviour. The reason that the control of the experience,

and therefore the quality of the experience, might be improved, is because the ‘product’

will have the ability to accordingly react to certain actions performed by the user and

create certain patters to achieve the desired experience.

In addition, the designer must consider aspects of experience, such as the ones explored

previously. The designer should encourage either active or passive participation, as well

as, absorption and immersion by the individual. Therefore, an experiential design could

provide a combination of such realms, leading to a more complicated and unique expe-

rience for each individual. According to Jones (2008), the mission of Experience Design

is “to persuade, stimulate, inform, envision, entertain, and forecast events, influencing

meaning and modifying human behaviour.”

It is essential to consider the following parameters in order to implement an efficient

experiential design that will enhance the user’s experience. Employing some of these pa-

rameters will generally be adequate to achieve a controlled experience. Some of the most

vital and important parameters that may need to be addressed are duration, intensity,

interaction and triggers.

The parameter of duration in the field of experiential design is greatly important. The

designer must set the limits so that the user receives the designed experience. Firstly,

the designer must consider the initiation of the experience; in other words, when and

how the experience starts. Secondly, a point of immersion will be set up, whether it is

at the beginning of the experience or in the meantime. This point is exactly where the

user becomes aware of witnessing an experience. Moreover, the touchpoints (or mo-

ments of engagement) can be arranged on crucial moments, whereby they will create

an experiential framework in which the experience of the user will fluctuate. Finally, the

experience must come to an end and provide the user with a conclusion at the right time

in order to keep control over the experience.


Moreover, the parameter of intensity is another important factor. This parameter is re-

sponsible for the stimulation of the senses and whether the experience will boost the

adrenaline or calm the user. That can be considered as one of the major reasons why

-amongst the great diversity of professions- psychologists must participate. For the reac-

tions of the user must be predicted, in order to design the next step as well as the overall

experience.

Also, as discussed earlier, the involvement of the user, throughout that chronological

period when the experience is emerging, can define the type of the experience; whether

the experience requires active, passive or interactive engagement of the user.

Another parameter of the experiential design that may be considered as important is the

triggers. The ‘triggers’ will control the experience of the user and attract his/her attention

to keep him/her within the framework or the context of the experience. These triggers

may be symbols or certain other characteristics that would convey the concept of the

overall experience.

To conclude the discussion about the parameters that affect and may be considered for

experiential design, the designer does not usually develop the experiential design across

all of these dimensions. In fact, in some instances to develop an experiential design

considering all of theseparameters. In fact, in certain occasions, considering all of these

parameters might not be appropriate or inevitable, in order to develop an experiential

design . On the other hand, the more accurately and in-depth an experience is designed

across these parameters, the more effective it would be to enhance the user experience.

In order to understand experience and process experiential design, several models and

theories have been developed by Forlizzi and Battarbee (2004). Such models and theo-

retical approaches need contribution from a multidisciplinary area. As stated by Davis

(2003), “experiential systems design must be radically interdisciplinary”. A combination

of professionals with different backgrounds, in the fields of psychology, philosophy, busi-

ness, anthropology, design, as well as engineering and computer sciences, is required.

Forlizzi and Battarbee have classified the models of approaching experiential design into

three types; a) product-centred, b) user-centred and c) interaction-centred.

The first group has been defined by Forlizzi and Battarbee(2004) as ‘product-centred’.

These types of “...models provide straightforward applications for design practice” (2004).

Another description for this type of approach has been introduced by Dalsgaard(2008)

as “Product-centred approaches often have their main focus on the features and quali-

ties of the interface itself, that which can be described and studied in ostensibly objective


terms”. Also, examples of such approaches can be found in the books Designing Pleasur-

able Products by Jordan(2000) and Emotional Design by Norman(2000). Mainly, such

models provide information to assist the designers and other professionals in the process

of creating products that evoke compelling experiences(Forlizzi and Battarbee, 2004).

These models describe the process and the problems which must be addressed while

designing and evaluating a project. Typically, such models are developed in the form of

a list of criteria that should be addressed throughout the process.

The second model is the ‘user-centred’ one. This model focuses on the end user, that is,

the person who will use such a product; the consumer, the client. Therefore, this model

helps the designer to comprehend how the user will interact with the product and what

experience the user might have. So, in this case, the designers focus on a particular target

group, considering cultural, ethnographic, socio-economical and other aspects, which

characterise the client. This model requires several multidisciplinary professionals to

understand how the user might interact with the product.

Finally, a third model of approaching experiential design has been discussed by For-

lizzi and Battardee(2004). This model is the ‘Interaction-centred’ model, which mainly

focuses on the interaction between the user and the product. Similarly to the previous

models, this one requires a multidisciplinary approach in order to be implemented.

The interaction-centred approach permits the designer to understand qualitative and

definitive aspects of experience.

Consequently, considering the above-mentioned observations about the characteristics

of experiential design, it is indisputable that experiential design would be more con-

trolled and accurate if interactive systems were engaged. The reason is that dynamic

and real-time control over the experience could produce more accurate results without

risking the distortion of the experience by unforeseen incidents that may occur. There-

fore, interactive systems can be more accurate on the guidance of the user to achieve the

desired experience. In particular, Mixed Reality would probably be the most efficient

way to enhance the user experience and generate more accurate results for the preferred

experience.

In the next chapter, a brief overview of the characteristics of Mixed Reality will be intro-

duced. Subsequently, there will be a more in-depth explanation of how Mixed Reality

could contribute in enhancing the experience, as well as how experiential design might

benefit from the use of such realms.


First of all, we need to define and comprehend the term Mixed Reality (MR) and what

is perceived as Mixed Reality.

“Mixed reality is a popular technique in human-computer interaction for combining virtual and real-world elements, and has recently been a com-mon technique for human-robot interaction. Despite this popular usage, however, we argue that the meaning of “mixed reality” itself is still vague.”

(Young et al., 2011)

As suggested by Young et al., -in the book Mixed Reality and Human-Robot Interaction

by Wang, X.(2011)-, there has not been an accurate definition of the term Mixed Reality

yet. Thus, I will attempt to provide a more concise definition of the term, after having

done adequate research.

MRMixed Reality


Mixed Reality is considered to be the intersection of Virtual Reality with the real world

using digital technologies. In other words, it is considered as the introduction of virtual

elements in the physical world and vice versa. Moreover, Mixed Reality does not refer to

a given technology. It rather refers to the concept of combining these two worlds -Virtu-

al and Real-. In addition, the field of Mixed Reality has been subdivided into seven scales

of Virtual-Real interactions to demonstrate the amount of each reality (Real-Virtual)

used to form a reality that is considered as Mixed Reality.

Mixed Reality (MR) does not refer to any specific technologies. MR can occur by using

a variety of technologies, whether or not interactive or responsive, but usually dynamic

and synchronous. Moreover, technologies which are commonly used in such MR set-

tings, are cameras, hand-held displays, head-mounted displays (HMD), monitors and

projectors.

Mixed Environments (ME) refer to the environment (real-physical or virtual), whereby

the real and virtual environments intersect, in which physical and virtual elements coex-

ist, interact and intermingle in a more expansive form (Schnabel, 2009). In other words,

these environments consist of a combination of the two worlds (virtual and real).

Overview of Mixed Realities : Because several concepts of engagement between Real reality and Virtual reality have

occurred, Schnabel et al. (2007) have provided a diagram showing the various scales of

the Reality-Virtuality engagement. On the far left side is the Real reality in opposition

to the Virtual reality on the far right side. As we move across the horizontal axis, each

subdivision of mixed reality engages more with the reality of the end that it appears to

be closer to, whether Real (at the left) or Virtual (at the right).

fig. 21- Mixed Reality Continuum by Schnabel et al. (2007)


Therefore, for example, Augmented Reality is closer to the Real reality end point, which

means that AR engages more with the real world and less with the virtual one to form a

reality. Similarly, Mediated Reality is right in the middle, which suggests that it employs

an equal amount of the Real and the Virtual.

Moreover, it is essential to address and define Real Reality and Virtual Reality as well as

the various subdivisions of Mixed Realities, in order to comprehend what is perceived as

Mixed Reality. Therefore, the following paragraphs will define the main characteristics

of each reality within the field of Mixed Realities.

• RealReality

Before starting to explore Mixed Realities it is essential to comprehend what Real Reality

is. Basically, the term Real Reality responds to everything that surrounds us and exists in

the physical world. It encompasses everything that exists in the material world and can

be perceived by everyone as something that actually exists. Moreover, there are many

historical, phenomenological, philosophical, social and cultural categories and defini-

tions of reality that go beyond the framework of this section.

Nonetheless, it is interesting to notice that, with the emergence of Mixed Realities, real

reality -and until recently the only reality- redefines itself and exists in a list of other

realities. This may suggest that not only what we perceive as real matters, but also what

is in between the real and the virtual can be perceived as something that exists.

• AmplifiedReality

The first step from the Real towards the Virtual, has been coined as Amplified Reality

by Falk et al.(1999), in order to complement Augmented Reality (the next step further

from the Real). Amplified Reality is when Real Reality is enriched with additional in-

formation for the properties of physical objects and scenes (fig. ). As stated by Schnabel

(2009:7) “AR [Augmented Reality] is about how the user perceives reality, while Ampli-

fied Reality influences how the perceived reality is made available to the user”. In other

words, the main difference between the two realities -Augmented and Amplified- is that

in the former (Amplified Reality), objects control the flow of information, whereas in

the latter (Augmented Reality), the user can control the flow of information (Falk et al.,

1999).fig. 22 - earthmine Amplified Reality


• AugmentedReality(AR)

Another step further away from the Real towards Virtual, is Augmented Reality. This re-

ality enables a user to perceive virtual objects in a real physical environment (fig. 23a-b,

fig. 24). In other words, it supplements the real world with virtual objects that appear to

coexist in the same space as the real world (Azuma et al., 2001).

Moreover, AR is the situation whereby real objects are superimposed by two and/or

three-dimensional computer graphics, typically viewed through dead-mounted or

handheld displays (Bill- inghurst & Kato, 2002). In addition, Augmented Reality is not

limited to the visual sense but can also be applied through other senses, such as hearing.

For example, a physical space can be augmented with audio to provide the user with ad-

ditional information about the surrounding environment.

• MediatedReality

Mediated Reality refers to the situation whereby information is added or subtracted from

a scene before it is ‘seen’ (Starner et al., 1997); in other words, before it actually reaches

the human eye. Also, Mediated Reality can be described as the reality where there is the

ability of manipulating one’s perception of reality. As stated by Mann(2002), “Mediated

Reality, refers to a general framework for artificial modification of human perception by

way of devices for augmenting, deliberately diminishing, and more generally, for other-

wise altering sensory input”. Additionally, Mediated Reality can provide the possibility

of dynamic alterations to the appearance of objects in the real world.

fig. 23a - National Geographic AR installation fig. 23a - National Geographic AR installation

fig. 24 - Adidas AR


• AugmentedVirtuality(AV)

Augmented Virtuality, as the name suggests, is a

reality which is produced more by using elements

of the virtual world rather than the real world. In

fact this reality is just two steps away from vir-

tual reality. Augmented Virtual- ity is the situa-

tion whereby physical elements, like people and

objects, are introduced dynamically in a virtual

space (fig. 25a-c, fig. 26 - 28). Moreover, these ele-

ments can synchronously interact with virtual el-

ements in the virtual world where they have been

introduced. As characteristically stated by Sch-

nabel(2009), “Augmented Virtuality (AV) looks

into reality from a virtual world perspective”.

Moreover, Milgram and Colquhoun (1999) de-

fine Augmented Virtuality as the augmentation

of a Virtual environment with real objects. There-

fore, Augmented Virtuality is the exact opposite

of Augmented Reality, where virtual elements are

introduced in real environments.

fig. 25a - Virtualised Reality

fig. 25b - Virtualised Reality

fig. 25c - Virtualised Reality

fig. 26 (left)

- Virtualised Reality

fig. 27 (right)


fig. 28 (bottom)



• VirtualisedReality

Virtualised Reality occurs when the user can navigate in a virtually real environment

and has the ability of choosing any angle and point of view s/he desires. Therefore, this

realm allows the user to experience a physical environment virtually. In other words,

Virtualised Reality captures scene descriptions from a number of transcription angles

and allows the user to view real scenes of real events (Kanade et al.1995).

This usually works by installing a set of cameras in a real environment, which allows the

user to move in that space virtually.

• VirtualReality(VR)

To conclude with the Real-Virtual continuum, the last step is Virtual Reality. This realm

presents an entirely artificial computer-stimulated environment. This reality has no con-

nections or interactions with the real physical environment. In Virtual Reality, the user

is completely immersed in an absolutely synthetic environment.


If Mixed Reality realms are reviewed within the framework of the characteristics of ex-

perience, the result will be the definition of a Mixed Reality realm.

For instance, what characterises Amplified Reality is passive participation and absorp-

tion. This occurs because Amplified Reality does not allow the user to actively partici-

pate in or interact with this reality, but it rather affects the way the perceived reality is

made available to the user. Moreover, the user is not immersed in this experience but

rather his/her attention is absorbed by it. Therefore, due to the fact that the user does

not perceive and process the experience consciously, and because there is no active in-

teraction between the user and the product, we can talk about experience as a narrative

(Forlizzi and Ford, 2000).

Augmented Reality is characterised by absorption of the user’s attention and passive, or

active, participation. The reason for that is because AR overlays additional information

in a scene without entailing immersion of the user but absorbs his/her attention in a

display (whether hand-held or head-mounted). Because this realm is in the middle of

the Active/Passive Participation scale, it could efficiently serve Entertainment or Educa-

tional experience. Similarly to the previous reality, we can talk about this experience as

a narrative as well (Forlizzi and Ford, 2000).

Type of Experience generated by mixed Reality

As far as Mediated Reality is concerned, the experience that it could efficiently achieve

would be Esthetic or Escapist. The reason is that in Mediated Reality, the user becomes

immersed in it whether there is the possibility of Active or Passive Participation. This is

because in Mediated Reality, the information perceived by the user is all filtered and al-

tered through some kind of technology, which dominates and manipulates whatever can

be seen by the user. In this case, we can talk about experience, because people perceive

experience consciously and are aware of the fact that it is happening.

Furthermore, Augmented Virtuality can be considered as a realm that can give rise to

Escapist experience. This occurs because the user becomes immersed in a virtual envi-

ronment and can interact –therefore Active Participation- with other elements and ob-

jects in it. In Augmented Virtuality, the user can talk about an experience, due to the fact

that it involves active interaction and employment of the human senses.

Lastly, Virtualised Reality might be used for Educational (or perhaps Informative) expe-

rience. In such reality, the user can have the control – therefore Active Participation- of

navigating through a real environment in a virtual way. Moreover, the user is not im-

mersed but absorbed in the experience. Similarly to the cases of Amplified Reality and

Augmented Reality, the user can talk about experience as a narrative, because the experi-

ence is transferred by an external entity – in this case the environment s/he navigates in.

Critical Approach | Page 70

In this section, I will attempt to define which model and theoretical approach (Forlizzi

and Battarbee, 2004) better suits each reality in the group of Mixed Reality.

Starting with Amplified Reality, it is evident that a product-centred approach is used.

The reason for this is that its main goal is to enrich properties of physical objects.

Moving to Augmented Reality, the same approach as the previous one is once again

employed, due to the fact that AR provides the user with additional information about

certain products/objects. So, the main focus is on the product.

When it comes to Mediated Reality, the approach is different from the previous two

realities; in this case the approach is interaction-centred. The reason for concluding that

such approach is used is that MR manipulates the Mixed Environment (ME), in order

to provide it to the user; therefore, what is important hereby is the interaction between

the two -user and ME- .

Models and theories to approach Experiential Design

through Mixed Reality

Furthermore, Augmented virtuality employs a user-centred approach, because it gives

the user the opportunity to manipulate objects, while it also immerses the user into a

Virtual Environment.

Finally, Virtualised Reality can be perceived employing a user-centred approach, be-

cause the main goal is to provide the required information by the user.

Regarding the models and theories of approaching Experiential Design (Forlizzi and

Bat- tarbee, 2004) in the field of Mixed Reality, we can argue that while realms tend to-

wards the Virtual point of the axis, they tend to be user-centred. So, one may conclude

that in Real reality, experience is rather product-centred, whereas in the Virtual one, it

appears to be more user-centred.

fig. 29 - Mixed Reality and Experiential design.


For the implementation of projects that focus on improving the user experience through

architecture with the additional use of mixed reality, it will be necessary not only to de-

sign the (i) physical elements/structures that will be involved in Mixed Environments,

but also (iii) virtual elements that interact within the physical space.

Apart from employing conventional architectural methods in the process and represen-

tation of a project - such as site analysis, context analysis, materiality, linear drawings,

visualisations, collages, etc - it is vital to devise novel methods considering the use of

Mixed Reality as an architectural issue.

Moreover, focus should be applied on the (ii) representation of the desired experience,

which will subsequently allow the architect to design the mixed reality experience as an

additional layer/service in architecture.

The Mixed Reality architectural design process


four parameters

1. experience

2.triggers

3. field of vision

4. virtual elements

The need for a new drawing typology

The introduction of Mixed Reality in architecture will not only affect the end product -

which is the built environment - but it will also require innovative ways to represent and

design such situations.

Through the research that has been undertaken so far for this study, a possible and po-

tentially efficient drawing typology has occurred. In fact, this new drawing typology is

a combination of conventional architectural methods with methods and characteristics

from the field of Experiential Design.

To design this new layer of architecture, it is essential to borrow characteristics and

formulas developed in the field of Experiential Design. Because these realities are not

something static, but something interactive and dynamic, their design would have been

impossible by employing only conventional architectural methods.

Therefore, to design a Mixed Environmet, parameters such as the human field of vision,

triggers/timing, virtual augmentations complimenting physical objects are necessary to

be considered, similarly as in Experientail Design.

This new drawing typology (ArMR) will be used later on to design the Mixed Environ-

ment in the Oxford University museum of Natural History.


fig. 30 - Disorder in a Dining table by Sarah Wigglesworth and Jeremy Till

What is more, the drawings by Sarah Wigglesworth and Jeremy Till (fig.) have provided

inspiration in the development of this drawing typology. In their project titled Increas-

ing Disorder In A Dining Table, they document the progression of a meal from a per-

fectly laid table, through a motion-trace palimpsest of the dinner party in action, to the

jumble of dirty dishes and crumpled napkins that confronts the host(s) after the last

guest has departed. This approach of representing the experience in an architectural way,

while using characteristics and parameters from the field of Experiential Design would

be appropriate to use, in order to create a new drawing typology which will allow the


fig. 33 - Elevation of Oxford University Natural History Museum

The main objective of this Research Led Design project is to create an intervention in

the Oxford University Natural History museum in such a way that will enable the ul-

timate enhancement and improvement of the user experience. Such intervention will

be approached from a multi-disciplinary perspective and will aim at allowing the most

efficient coexistence of the real with the virtual. To begin with, through the discipline of

architecture, alterations in the building must be executed. These alterations will support

the introduction of virtual elements in the real world, or the virtual world in the real

physical space.

It is of vital importance to employ innovative methods of representing and designing

Mixed Reality as an architectural project. In other words, apart from the design and rep-

resentation of the physical elements/structures introduced in the museum, it is essential

to create a new architectural drawing typology, which will illustrate the design of Mixed

Realities in the architectural space. With respect to the historic value and importance of

that building, it is vital to maintain its neo-Gothic character, while introducing contem-

porary architectural and technological elements that will allow the existence of the past

along with the present in the building. In other words, through architecture and technol-

ogy, the past and the present will coexist in the same space in real-time.

Design Brief

Research Led Design | Page 88

fig. 34

For the implementation of the refurbishment of the Oxford University Natural History

Museum, the approach that has been chosen as the most appropriate one, is that of ‘not

touching’ the building. Trough this approach, new elements will be introduced, without

affecting or having an impact on the existing building. The reason for choosing this ap-

proach is because this building is a Grade I listed building. Therefore, alterations in the

physical structure of the museum are forbidden and any introduction of new structural

elements should be contemplated very carefully.

As mentioned earlier, in addition to the fact that the building is Grade I listed building,

it is vital to maintain the Neo-Gothic character on the interventions as well. Therefore,

elements such as ogival arches will be used. However, what will create the sense of the

contemporary, is the chosen materiality. Sophisticated and hi-tech materials such as

Fiber-Reinforced Plastics and transparent prjection screens have been chosen to be used

for the implementation of this intervention - the observatory-.


fig. 35 - location

The Oxford University Museum of Natural History houses the University’s scientific col-

lections of zoological, entomological and geological specimens. The Museum itself is a

Grade 1 listed building, renowned for its spectacular neo-Gothic architecture. Among

its most famous features are the Oxfordshire dinosaurs, the dodo, and the swifts in the

tower.

This particular Museum has been chosen for the implementation of the current task

because there are exhibits of creatures that have been extinct. Therefore, the introduc-

tion of Mixed Reality in such a building will enable the visitor to learn more about these

creatures, and as a result, this situation will enhance his/her experience. Moreover, the

introduction of Mixed Reality in this particular museum will enable the demonstration

of past times.

The museum is located in the center of the city of Oxford on Parks Road, near Hertford

college and Saint Anne’s college (as illustrated in fig. 35).

The museum


Analysis of the context as it change between 1900(fig. 36) - 2012(fig. 37)

94Research Led Design | Page

96

Context Changes that have occurred within the context of the museum, through the passage of

time, have been studied. A comparison of the context of the museum in 1900’s and that

of 2012 has been done, highlighting the changes.

Research Led Design | Page

98

These design tasks have been created in order to provide some basic understanding of

how the museum would benefit from the use of Mixed Reality. What is more, these de-

sign tasks have been implemented to inspire and influence the development of the final

Research Led Design project.

For the implementation of these design tasks, particular focus has been applied on the

content of the museum and on what elements would be the most appropriate to use as

augmentations/projections from the virtual world. Obviously, the dinosaurs have been

in the centre of attention and the reason for that is their extinction, which results in

the lack of exhibiting them – apart from their skeleton – in the museum. Moreover, the

reason for using the dinosaurs as the main element of augmentation, in this stage, is the

absence of physical elements which would assist the understanding of the user regarding

how they used to behave.

In my opinion, that is exactly where mixed reality could transform experience; allowing

real-time interaction with extinct animals, unreal creatures, surreal figures, and in gen-

eral, any case whereby reality – our reality as we know it – is not enough. This is the case

where mixed reality can - and should - advance, improve, and take the user experience

one step further.

Design tasks


100

Design Task 1:Augmented Reality

Since Augmented Reality is perhaps the most popular Mixed Reality, I decided to be-

gin with this one. The collage illustrated on the left (fig.) is a representation of how the

Oxford University Natural History Museum would look like after the introduction of

Augmented Reality.

Trough the augmentation of dinosaurs, vegetation and waterfalls, the transformation of

the interior space of the museum has been achieved, thus creating a more dynamic situ-

ation. What is more, this Mixed Environment (ME) allows the visitor of the museum to

become educated and informed about the way dinosaurs used to behave, as well as real-

ise their size and other physical characteristics.informed about the way dinosaurs used

to behave, as well as understanding the scale of them and other physical characteristics.


102

Design Task 2:Amplified Reality +Augmented Reality +Mediated Reality

The second collage - which is the second design task - uses a wider range of Mixed Reali-

ties rather than just one type of them. A combination of Amplified Reality, Augmented

Reality and Mediated Reality has been used to further challenge the transformation of

the spatial experience of the museum.

Elements introduced in the space that are considered as Amplified Reality are the guid-

ing lines on the floor, which help the user navigate through the museum. What is more,

augmentations of written information about the dinosaurs’ skeleton are another form of

Amplified Reality.

On the other hand, augmentations of interactive dinosaurs in the space are available

through Augmented Reality.

Finally, Mediated Reality provides the user with a virtual environment superimposed on

the real environment, which in the case of this collage is the part of the building on the

right site of the image.


104

Design Task 3:Augmented Virtuality

The Virtual Room: The third and last design task concerns Augmented Virtuality,

which as the title suggests, augments virtual worlds on top of real spaces, hiding every-

thing under a layer of electronic bits.

In this case, an empty room, with approximate dimensions of 6m width, 10m length

and 4m height, has been used as the base to accommodate the augmentation of virtual

worlds.

The top-left picture illustrates the abovementioned room without any augmentations,

whereas the rest of the pictures illustrate three different sceneries.


110

fig. 42 - The observatory

(eye level perspective from 1st floor)


fig. 43 - The observatory

(eye level perspective view from ground floor)

112

The first intervention, which has been designed for the Oxford University Natural His-

tory museum, is titled ‘the observatory’. This was initially inspired by the nearby obser-

vatory of the University of Oxford.

The purpose of this intervention is to create a space, where the visitor will be able to have

a panoramic view (fig. 42) of the exhibits of the museum and be informed about its con-

tent, with the assistance of Mixed Reality. In this space, Amplified Reality will be used to

highlight properties of the exhibits and provide information about them.

The experience created in the space of this intervention can be considered as educa-

tional, according to the Pine and Gilmore (1999) chart, because it requires active par-

ticipation(?) on the part of the user. However, it does not require the immersion of the

individual in this kind of reality, as this can be absorbed through his/her senses. What

is more, the experience produced in this intervention can be defined as an experience

(as introduced by John Dewey, 1980) because it is formed with a beginning and an end.

What is more, the design of this intervention has been approached through a ‘user- cen-

tred’ model, whereby the experience of the user has been in the epicentre of the design

focus.

Intervention: The observatory


The structure of this intervention has been designed by using the ogival arch, in order to

create an intervention which does not look strange in the museum. In other words, the

shape of the pointed arch has been used to design something that does not stand out.

10 10’

114

fig. 44 - section 10-10’

scale 1:100


Exceptional Strength; on a

weight to weight basis GRP

profiles are stronger than

structural steel. The excellent

impact strength of GRP pro-

files reduce damage caused by

accidental collisions.

Fiber-Reinforced Plastic

GRP or FRP Structural pultruded profiles are manufactured by combining a resin ma-

trix with a fibre reinforcement. This is formed and cured in a continuous process creat-

ing a product of extraordinary strength and resilience. GRP Structural Pultruded Pro-

files provide a variety of benefits and mechanical properties matching or exceeding steel

equivalents. A wide range of structural profiles are available including U Channel, I

- Beam, Tube, Box, Angle, Rod & Hand Rail.

fig. 50

MaterialityMateriality:

116

Light Weight; Weighing up to 80% less than steel and 30% less than aluminum, GRP

profiles provide equivalent performance for considerably less weight.

Corrosion Resistant; GRP Profiles are generally unaffected by exposure to a wide variety

of corrosive chemicals and environments. A synthetic surface veil is applied, in order to

provide a resin rich layer, thereby enhancing the already excellent corrosion resistant

properties.

Maintenance Free;The corrosion resistant

properties of our GRP Profiles eliminate

the necessity of periodic painting or sur-

face treatment.

fig. 51 - FRP join


fig. 44 - section 10-10’

scale 1:50

118

Despite the fact that this study does not intent to examine technologies that may support

Mixed Reality and devise these interventions, I will attempt to devise this one to demon-

strate how easy it is even with the technologies available today.

For the projection of the information of the exhibits, a High Definition projector is

needed, in order to project on a Woehburk WhiteLine (fig. ), which is a transparent

screen that allows high quality projections, while the observer is able to see through it.

What is more, a conventional video camera (even a webcam would be efficient) con-

nected to a computer will be needed for eye tracking, which can be achieved with the use

of an appropriate software. Finally, pressure sensors must be applied on the corridor to

enable the tracking of the user and then calculate the angle of the perception of the user

towards the screen and the exhibits of the museum.

example of eye tracking software available at <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgmONlusBV8>

fig. 4

6 - W

oehb

urk

Whi

teLi

ne


Plan of a fragment of Intervention 1: Observatory

fig. 4

7

120

structural glass

WoehBurk W

hiteLine


Structural Model of the Observatory

122fig. 48a Research Led Design | Page

fig. 48b

124fig. 48c


fig. 49a -

Visibility to - and from - the intervention is constantly available from any point in the central area of the museum

126

fig. 49b


fig. 49c

128

fig. 49d


Architectural Design of Mixed Reality

As mentioned earlier in this study, a new drawing typology has been invented to allow

the architect/designer to design a Mixed Reality Environment.

To be able to do so, the architect/designer must consider four parameters: 1. duration

of experience, 2. triggers/timing, 3. field of vision, 4. virtual augmentations/physical ob-

jects.

ArMR

130

The architect/designer needs to draw a plan of the Mixed Environment and highlight

where the user starts to experience (fig. 51a) and interact witht Mixed Realities. Moreo-

ver, triggers/timing must be set on the plans as illustrated on fig. 51b. The reason for set-

ting this triggers is to devide the experience in smaller fragments and make the design

of a mixed environment easier. Moreover, the field of vision (fig. 51c) is vital to be illus-

trated on the plans and then visualasitions with a perspective from that point must be

created to show what virtual elements would be introduced in that intervention. In this

case - because this intervention is designed using Amplified Reality - virtual projections

of information complementing the physical elements - the exhibits of dinosaurs - will

be available.

Moreover, Virtualisations are essential to represent the Virtual elements that must be

projected at certain moments to complement (in Amplified Reality) physical objects

(the physical objects pointed on the plans).

These projections will be projected on the Woehburk WhiteLine transparent screen, and

the angle will be calculated between the position of the user, the angle on the screen and

the physical object, so the projections of information appear at the correct loaction (re-

garding the physical object) at all times.


fig. 51a - Experience

132

fig. 51b - Triggers/timing


fig. 51c - Field of vision

134

fig. 51d - Physical elements


fig. 52

136

ArMRThe Observatory

Aplified Reality

fig. 5

3 -

Virtualisations Representing the Projections of Virtual elements


138

Trigger 1fig. 52a

fig. 53a


140

Trigger 2fig.52b

fig.53b


142

Trigger 3fig. 52c

fig. 53c


144

Trigger 4fig. 52d

fig. 53d


146

Trigger 4fig. 52e

fig. 53e


148

Trigger 4fig. 52f

fig. 53f


150

Trigger 5fig. 52g

fig. 53g


152

Trigger 6fig. 52h

fig. 53h


154

Trigger 7fig. 52i

fig. 53i


156

Trigger 8fig. 52j

fig. 53j


158

Trigger 9fig. 52k

fig. 53k


conclusion

Throughout the last decade, there have been numerous major technological advancements. Architecture

is a domain, (among several others), which is (and will be) greatly affected by the rapid development of

technology. As such, it is inevitable that the way architects design will not be significantly altered in the

near future. In effect, architectural space and the way it is experienced will also be immensely influenced

by technology. The attempt to bridge the gap between the real and virtual world is a fundamental change

that is closely correlated with architecture. This is due to the fact that the way architectural space is de-

signed can be greatly affected by this change.

The introduction of Mixed Reality will significantly change the field of Architecture; not only the way we

define or perceive architecture, but also the way Architects design. Moreover, architectural space is being

penetrated by other realities (apart from that of the physical world), which are altering one’s experience

of architectural space.

Summary/Conclusion

Throughout the present project, there has precisely been an exploration of how Mixed Reality affects ar-

chitecture and the role of architects who, consequently, need to find ways of dealing with other realities

generated by mixed environments. There has also been an attempt to demonstrate that, since the way

architects design will be transformed in the near future due to the introduction of mixed environments,

the interaction of architectural space with the user will inevitably give rise to a new kind of experience.

These issues have been approached theoretically as well as through design, in order to attain the best

possible result.

Moreover, there has been an attempt to explore the potentials and possibilities that will occur when

Mixed Reality is applied in architecture, as well as how Mixed Reality can be used as a supplementary

tool or service that can improve the experience of an architectural space.

More specifically, this study has demonstrated how the introduction of Mixed Realities in History Mu-

seums will affect the role of the architect, as well as how Mixed Reality will be used as an architectural

component, in the near future. At the same time, there has been an examination of the transformation

of experience due to the introduction of Mixed Reality in museums.

Furthermore, this study has highlighted the cultural and educational impact on the visitor, by focusing

on how the participant becomes educated by and aware of the context of the museum, through digitally

driven technologies.

162

Based on the conviction that Mixed Reality will become part of numerous building typologies in the

near future, this study has approached Mixed Reality as a concept that will improve the architectural

experience of space. It has also provided a theoretical framework for the use of Mixed Reality in Archi-

tecture, and primarily, in a specific building typology – the History Museum. It has also focused on how

the experience of a user in a museum may be improved by the use of Mixed Reality.

The abovementioned aims have been achieved, after having delineated certain crucial notions, such

experience, experiential design, models of approaching experiential design, and Mixed Reality and its

ramifications. Subsequently, there has been a discussion of the type of experience generated by each

Mixed Reality ramification.

Finally, the design, which has been developed through the abovementioned theoretical framework and

research, has been presented, analysed and substantiated. The approach of representing experience in an

architectural way, while using characteristics and parameters from the field of Experiential Design has

been used, in order to create a new drawing typology which will allow the designer/ architect to design

the Mixed Reality of a space/place.

For the purposes of implementing the design for the present study, it was necessary not only to design

the physical elements/structures that involved in Mixed Environments, but also virtual elements that

intermingle within the physical space.

Apart from employing conventional architectural methods in the process and representation of this

project - such as site analysis, context analysis, materiality, linear drawings, visualisations, collages, etc

- it was vital to develop original methods considering the use of Mixed Reality as an architectural issue.

Moreover, there has been focus on the representation of the desired experience, which has subsequently

allowed for designing the mixed reality experience as an additional layer/service in architecture.

Through the research that has been undertaken for this study, a feasible and potentially effective drawing

typology has been developed. The drawing typology that the present study proposes is a combination

of conventional architectural methods with methods and characteristics from the field of Experiential

Design.

The main objective of this Research Led Design project has been to introduce intervention in the Ox-

ford University Natural History museum, in such a way that will enable the ultimate augmentation and

advancement of the user experience. This intervention has been approached from a multi-disciplinary

perspective, aiming at allowing the most efficient coexistence of the real with the virtual.

Two collages have been created for the purposes of the design of the present study. The first collage - the

first design task - is a representation of how the Oxford University Natural History Museum would look

like after the introduction of Augmented Reality.

164

Through the augmentation of dinosaurs, vegetation and waterfalls, the transformation of the interior

space of the museum has been achieved, resulting in a more dynamic situation. What is more, this Mixed

Environment (ME) allows the visitor of the museum to become educated and informed about the way

dinosaurs used to behave, as well as apprehend their size and other physical features.

The second collage - which is the second design task - uses a wider range of Mixed Realities rather than

just one type of them. A combination of Amplified Reality, Augmented Reality and Mediated Reality has

been used to further challenge the transformation of the spatial experience of the museum.

Elements that have been introduced in the space, which are considered as Amplified Reality, are the

guiding lines on the floor, which help users navigate through the museum. In addition, augmentations of

written information regarding the dinosaurs’ skeletons are another form of Amplified Reality. Mediated

Reality provides the user with a virtual environment superimposed on the real environment.

The third and last design task pertains to Augmented Virtuality, which as the title suggests, augments

virtual worlds on top of real spaces, hiding everything under a layer of electronic bits. This new layer of

architecture has been designed through employing characteristics and formulas developed in the field of

Experiential Design. Characteristics such as timing, triggers, etc, have been used in order to to allow for

their efficient design, due to the fact that these realities are not static, but interactive and dynamic; hence,

their design would have been impossible by employing conventional architectural methods.

166

Books

Alben, L., 1996. Quality of Experience: Defining the Criteria for Effective Interaction Design, inter-actions 3.3 May - June 1996, 11.

Carlson, R., 1997. Experienced Cognition, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dalsgaard, P., 2008. Experiential Design: Lessons from Designing Engaging interactive Environ-ments. Book chapter in Pinder, S., 2008. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction. : 85-106.

Davis, M., 2003. Theoretical Foundations for Experiential Systems Design. Proceeding of ETP’03, Berkeley, California.

Dewey, J., 1980. Art as Experience. Perigee Books, New York.

Jordan, P.W., 2000. Designing Pleasurable Products: An introduction to the new human factors. Tay-lor and Francis, London, England.

Kanade, T., Narayanan, P.J., Rander, P., W., 2001. Virtualized reality: concepts and early results. Cam-bridge, Massachusetts.

Liu, Y. T., 2001. Defining Digital Architecture. Birkhauser: Berlin.

Norman, D., 2004. Emotional design: why we love (or hate) everyday things. Basic Books, New York, NY.

O’Sullivan, E. L. and Spangler, K. J., 1998. Experience Marketing: Strategies for the new millennium. Venture Publishing Inc., 1st edition.

Pine II, B. J. and Gilmore, J. H., 1998. Welcome to the Experience Economy. Harvard Business Re-view.

Pine II, B. J. and Gilmore, J. H., 1999. The Experience Economy: work is theatre & every business a stage: goods & services are no longer enough. Harvard, Business School Press.

Schank, R., 1990. Tell Me A Story: Narrative and Intelligence, Northwestern University Press.

Schmitt, B. H., 1999. Experiential Marketing: How to get costumers to sense, feel, think, act, relate to your company and brands. The Free Press.

Wang, X., Schnabel, M., A., 2009. Mixed Reality in Architecture, Design and Construction. Springer Science + Business Media B.V.

Waterworth, J., A., Lund, A., and Modjeska, D., 2003. Experiential Design of Shared Information Spaces. Published in Hook, K., Benyon, D., and Munro, A., J., 2003. Designing Information Spaces: The social navigation Approach. Springer Science + Business Media B.V.

Wolf, M. J., 1999. The Entertainment Economy: How Mega-Media Forces Are Transforming Our Lives. Times Books, 1st edition.

Young, J., Sharlin, E., Igarashi, T., 2011. What is Mixed Reality, Anyway? Considering the Bounda-ries of Mixed Reality in the Context of Robots. Published in Wang, X., 2011. Mixed Reality and Human-Robot Interaction. Springer Science + Business Media B.V.

Journals

Azuma, R., Bailot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., Maclntyre, B. (2001). Recent Advances In Augmented Reality. Magazine: Computer Graphics And Applications. Volume: 21 Issue: 6 (Nov/Dec 2001)

Billinghurst, M., Hirozaku, K.,(2002). Collaborative Augmented Reality. Magazine: Communications Of The Acm - How The Virtual Inspires The Real. Volume: 45, Issue: 7 (July 2002).

Falk, J., Redström , J., Björk, S. (1999). Amplifying reality. 1st International Symposium on Handheld and Ubiquitous Computing, Springer, Karlsruhe, Germany.

Forlizzi, J. And Battarbee, K. (2004). Understanding Experience In Interactive Systems. Conference Proceedings, Cambridge, Ma, (August 2004).

Hendrickson, C., Rehak, D., R. (1993). The potential of a ‘Virtual’ construction site for automation planning analysis. Proceeding of the 10th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC) conference, Houston, Texas

Jääskö, V. And Mattelmäki, T. (2003). Observing And Probing. Proceedings Of The DPPI03 Confer-ence.

Manovich, L. (2006). The Poetics of Augmented Space. Magazine: Visual Communication. Volume: 5, Issue: 2, (219-240: 2006).

Milgram, P., and Colquhoun, H. (1999). A framework for relating Head-Mounted Displays to Mixed Reality Displays. Proceedings Of The Human Factors And Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting.

Nogueira, K. J And Aline, M. M. and Magalhaes, L. S. And Botelho, J.M and Henrique, P., M. (2008)

Experience Economy. IV Congresso Nacional De Excelencia Em Gestao, (31st July - 2nd August 2008).

Schnabel, M., A., Wang, X., Seichter, H., Kvan, T.(2007). From virtuality to reality and back, Proceed-ings of the 12th International Association of Societies of Design Research (IASDR),Hong Kong.

Starner T, Mann S, Rhodes B, Levine J, Healey J, Kirsch D, Picard R, Pentland A. (1997). Augmented Reality Through Wearable Computing. Magazine: Presence Teleoperators And Virtual Environ-ments Volume: 6, Issue: 4, Publisher: Citeseer,

Woo, H. R. (2007). A Holistic Approach To Design Innovation. Proceedings Of International Design Conference, International Association Of Societies Of Design Research.

Web-sites

Becker, G. ‘Gene Talks AR Experience Design to AR Design Students’ (video). URL: http://site.layar.com/company/blog/gene-talks-ar-experi-ence-design-to-ar-design-students/ [accessed 09 July 2011]

Jones, R. ‘Konstfack Vårutställning 2008’. URL: http://varutstallning08.konstfack.se/interdisciplinary-studies/ronald-jones.html [accessed 28 May 2011]

Mann, S. ‘Mediated Reality with implementations for everyday life - 2002’. URL: http://wearcam.org/presence-connect/ [accessed 17 July 2011]

Woohookitty,: ‘Experience Design’. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_design [accessed 03 July 2011]

List of illustrations

fig. 1photomontage created by the author

fig. 2 - snapshots taken from the video: “Microstoft Vision Office Labs 2019”.Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ff7SzP4gfg>[retrieved 9/10/11]

fig. 3 - snapshots taken from the video: “Microstoft Vision Productivity 2019”.Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6cNdhOKwi0>[retrieved 9/10/11]

fig. 4 - Tron Legacy. City concept.

Shelest (2009)Available at:<http://shelest.deviantart.com/art/Tron-Legacy-City-concept-132466614[retrieved 7/10/11]

fig. 5 - Guggenheim Museum BilbaoAvailable at: <http://worldtravel212.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/foto_post-al_031.jpg> [retrieved 04/02/12]

fig. 10 - Augmented Reality iPhone application

Available at: <http://www.cleartag.com/blog/category/augmented-reality/>[retrieved 16/02/12]

fig. 9 - Augmented Reality iPhone application - Grocery

Available at: <http://www.qrcodepress.com/the-value-of-augmented-reality-is-uncertain-market-research-shows/852760/>[retrieved 16/02/12]

fig. 8- BMW AR mechanic assistant

Available at: <http://www.bmwblog.com/wp-content/uploads/mechanic-augumented-reality-01.jpg> [retrieved 17/03/12]

fig. 7 - BMW AR drivining assistant

Available at: <http://www.bmwblog.com/wp-content/uploads/head-up-display-augument-ed-reality-06.jpg> [retrieved 17/03/12]

fig. 6 - B.I.M.

Available at: <http://www.scia-online.com/eNews/Images/revit.jpg> [retrieved 17/03/12]

fig. 11 - SixthSense

Available at: <http://www.cleartag.com/blog/cat-egory/augmented-reality/>[retreived 21/04/12]

fig. 12 - Augmented Reality Google Glasses

Available at: <http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/5/2928444/googles-augmented-reality-random-thoughts-on-project-glass>[retrieved 16/04/12]

fig. 13 - Augmented Reality Google GlassesAvailable at: <http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/5/2928444/googles-augmented-reality-glasses>[retrieved 16/04/12]

fig. 14 - Adidas Augmented RealityAvailable at: <http://cdn1.lostateminor.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/adidas.jpg>[retrieved 09/10/11]

fig. 15 - Esquire Magazine

AR issue November 2009Available at: < http://www.keeyool.com/2009/11/esquires_augmented_reality_iss.php>[retreived 09/10/11]

fig. 20 - Experience Design diagram

Available at: <http://mootee.typepad.com/innovation_playground/2007/05/random_thoughts.html>[retrieved 16/04/12]

fig. 19 - The four realms of an experience Pine II, B. J. and Gilmore, J. H. (1999)

fig. 18 - Augmented Reality iPhone Historical applicationAvailable at: <http://www.softwarebazar.com/upload/13172264380792746662.jpg>[retrieved 16/02/12]

fig. 17 - AR application in Architecture

Available at:< http://www.exploreengage.com/>[retreived 17/10/11]

fig. 16 - Wallpaper Magazine

AR issue December 2009


fig. 21- Mixed Reality ContinuumSchnabel et al. (2007)

fig. 22 - earthmine Amplified RealityAvailable at: <http://www.wired.com/epicenter/tag/mobile-app/>[retreived 16/03/12]

fig. 23 - National Geographic AR installation

fig. 24 - Adidas AR

http://cdn1.lostateminor.com/wp-con-tent/uploads/2010/02/adidas.jpg

fig. 25a - Virtualised Reality

fig. 25b -Virtualised Reality

fig. 25c - Virtualised Reality

fig. 29 - Mixed Reality and Experien-tial design.by the author

fig. 28 - Virtualised RealityAvailable at: <http://users.tamuk.edu/kssm034/img/virtual-reality03.jpg>[retreived 19/03/12]

fig. 27 - Virtualised RealityAvailable at:<http://users.tamuk.edu/kssm034/img/virtual-reality11.jpg>[retreived 19/03/12]

fig. 26 - Virtualised RealityAvailable at<:http://www.experimentation-online.co.uk/imgs/virtual_alamri_apr12_1.jpg>[retreived 19/03/12]

fig. 30 - Disorder in a Dining table Wigglesworth, S., Till, J., (2010)Available at: <http://roomthily.tumblr.com/post/397904666/dining-disorder-increasing-disorder-on-a-dining>[retreived 09/04/12]

fig. 31 - Horizontal field of vision

fig. 32 - Vertical field of vision

fig. 33 - Oxford University Museum elevation created by the author

fig. 36 - Oxford map 1900

Ordinance Survey. 1900. scale 1:500. EDINA Digimap [online] Available through: Oxord Brookes University online Library [Accessed 13/02/12]

fig. 37 - Oxford map 2012

Ordinance Survey. 2012. scale 1:500. EDINA Digimap [online] Available through: Oxord Brookes University online Library [Accessed 13/02/12]

fig. 35 - location

Google maps. 2012

fig. 34Photographs of Oxford University Museum.Taken and edited by the author


fig. 38 - Photomontage created by the author

fig. 39 - Task 1Photomontage created by the author



fig. 42 - The observatory (eye level perspective from 1st floor)3D model + Photograph from 1st floor

- Photomontage created by the author

fig. 47 - Plan of the observatoryscale 1:50created by the author

fig. 46 - Woehburk WhiteLine

Available at:< http://images-en.busytrade.com/116992800/Holoscreen-transparent-Projection-Screen-semi-transparent.jpg > [retrieved 16/03/12]

fig. 45 - Section 10-10’scale 1:50created by the author

fig. 44 - Section 10-10’scale 1:100created by the author

fig. 43 - The obervatory (view 2) 3D model + Photograph from ground floor - Photomontage created by the Author

fig. 48a3D model created by the author

fig. 48b3D model created by the author

fig. 48c3D model created by the author

fig. 49a3D model created by the author

fig. 49b3D model created by the author

fig. 52 - Architectural Mixed Realityby the author

fig. 533D model created by the author

fig. 51 - FRP Join

fig. 50

fig. 49d3D model created by the author

fig. 49c3D model created by the author

Nearchou George

Documents

Transcript of Nearchou George