Five students from Level 6 Photography gave me their work so I could ‘install’ it into my VR student showcase gallery. I put their work in two spaces, A and B. In space A I installed the work at a size comparable to what they would have access to in the real world, and in space B I installed the work at a much greater size. This week, I had the chance present the VR gallery to them and they each spent about five minutes exploring the simulation...
Findings
The focus group was made up of a broad range of ages, sex and backgrounds. They were all level 6 photography students and were recruited because they were accessible and produced artworks (digital photographs) that could easily be modified for use in VR simulations.
In order to set a starting point and benchmark, the focus group was presented with a VR gallery that exhibited artworks, that they had submitted earlier, in two seperate galleries, A and B. In Gallery A the artworks were presented at a size easily accessible and close to the size the students would normally print at and in Gallery B the artworks were presented at a monumental, wall filling size.
There were four things that this initial meeting wanted to address. Firstly, Most of the focus group had never experience VR before, so their initial reaction to the ‘experience’ needed to be gauged. Secondly, their thoughts about the contrast in scale of their work, between the two galleries may help to shape the design and presentation of a VR gallery in future meetings. Thirdly, did they think the experience might influence their future work. And finally, how did they feel the project should proceed for future test subjects, that will give us coherent evidence, conclusions and recommendations.
The students were asked to look around Gallery A first and Gallery B second. They then discussed what they had experienced and were asked for their thoughts on; initial reaction, scale, future possibilities and thought on how the project/research should proceed.
The starting point outside the A and B spaces.
Gallery A
Gallery B
The students comments are recorded under headings/questions...
Initial Reactions
‘Impressive, looks real’
‘Oh, wow!’
‘Amazing’.
‘Cool’.
‘It’s very real, I feel like I am really there'.
Scale
‘Depends on the type of image, as some images are meant to be intimate’.
‘Gives the work authority’ (reference to larger version in space B).
‘The visitor would be in awe if I could print my real work at that size’ (reference to larger version).
‘Notice things you would not normally notice in a gallery’.
‘Puts the main focus on the work’ (reference to larger version).
‘Makes my work look more professional (reference to larger version).
Future Possibilities
‘It would allow us to experiment with size’.
‘Gives us many creative possibilities’.
‘A great way to pre-visualize your work in a gallery space, before putting your work into a real gallery space’.
‘I wonder…. Would my documentary work look more fine art in this gallery… if it was larger, on a gallery wall rather than presented [small] in a book?’.
‘You could pre-curate an exhibition in a VR version of a real gallery’.
‘I don’t see it replacing a real gallery’
Their initial reactions were all very similar: ‘Impressive, looks real’, ‘Oh, wow!’, ‘Amazing’, ‘Cool’ and ‘It’s very real, I feel like I am really there'.
In response to seeing their work presented at two different sizes, the students tended to concentrate their thoughts on the larger works; ‘Gives the work authority’ (reference to larger version in space B), ‘the visitor would be in awe if I could print my real work at that size’ (reference to larger version), ‘you notice things you would not normally notice in a gallery’, ‘it puts the main focus on the work’ (reference to larger version) and ‘it makes my work look more professional (reference to larger version). Only one person gave a considered response about scale - ‘it depends on the type of image, as some images are meant to be intimate’.
When asked about the future possibilities of the technology, the students were far more animated in their replies and included statements of intent, questions and avenues for experimentation; ‘it would allow us to experiment with size’, ‘it gives us many creative possibilities’, ‘a great way to pre-visualise your work in a gallery space, before putting your work into a real gallery space’, ‘I wonder…. Would my documentary work look more fine art in this gallery… if it was larger, on a gallery wall rather than presented [small] in a book?’, ‘You could pre-curate an exhibition in a VR version of a real gallery’ and one opposing view; ‘I don’t see it replacing a real gallery’.
However, when asked about how they saw the project proceeding, the students did not have any solid recommendations at that point. But one can take their responses from the previous discussion point, as a positive way of moving forward.
One point that this meetings seemed to highlight was the the initial immersive ‘wow-factor’ experience. Which leads one to question whether one can get a critical response from people who are in awe of the experience, rather than viewing what has been set before them dispassionately.
Fine Art Students
I demonstrated the photography VR gallery to a couple of fine art students with a view to them producing a piece of art work specifically for the VR environment. They felt that after viewing the gallery, that VR gave them more scope and non of the limits that reality places on them. However, they didn't feel it was going to replace a real gallery, but provide another form of experiencing artworks.
I am looking forward to seeing what they come up with and I find the current reality of producing an artwork digitally, to be viewed digitally, that may never be printed or presented as a physical object, as very interesting.
