Virtual Reality in the Libraries: Augmented Reality
An AR Primer:
The Oxford English Dictionary defines augmented reality (AR) as:
n. the use of technology which allows the perception of the physical world to be enhanced or modified by computer-generated stimuli perceived with the aid of special equipment; reality as perceived in this way.
Some of the more common examples of AR include the defunct hardware Google Glass and the most popular app of 2016 Pokemon Go. These technologies reflect the definition well. In the case of Google Glass, the technology is a pair of smart glasses with a small screen enhancing your field of vision with computer-generated stimuli. In the case of Pokemon Go, the technology is a smartphone with a camera and the physical world is modified with the addition of “pocket monsters.”
Other terms such as mixed reality (MR) or virtual reality (VR) are often surrounding discussions of AR. AR is a form of mixed reality and falls on the Reality-Virtuality Continuum closer to reality, or real environment, than virtual reality, or virtual environment:
Augmented virtuality is the inverse of augmented reality, the use of technology which allows the perception of the virtual world to be enhanced or modified by real world objects.
The AR Devices to Know:
The primary devices for AR that libraries of which libraries need to be aware are smartphones, tablets, computers, and headsets. Smartphones, tablets, and computers are the most common AR-ready devices; they all utilize their cameras to capture reality and use a software application (or app) to overlay computer-generated content onto reality, as experienced through the camera. Headsets tend to be a little bit more complex and expensive but utilize similar hardware and follow the same principles.
Headsets, also known as optical head-mounted displays, differ from the previous devices because it acts as a wearable technology. Where smartphones, tablets, and computers allow you to experience augmented reality, headsets allow the user a more immersive experience as the headsets can be worn in the course of everyday life. The most popular example was problem the now defunct Google Glass. Recently, Microsoft has entered the market with the Hololens, priced at $3000 or $5000 depending whether for development or commercial use. The start-up Meta has entered the market recently as well with a comparable headset priced at $950.
In many ways, the price of AR headsets is a tremendous barrier of adoption for libraries, especially considering practical uses for AR are dubious. However, smartphones and tablets can allow libraries to enter the conversation as curators of content, rather than owners of hardware.
Smartphones, tablets, and computers seem to be the most accessible way for libraries to get involved in AR. Apps like Aurasma and LayAR allow users to create AR experiences at no cost with minimal training. Another avenue for libraries can be curating lists of AR apps. Edshelf is “a socially-curated discovery engine of websites, mobile apps, desktop programs, and electronic products for teaching and learning” that allows users to curate their own lists. See my sample AR edshelf here:
Perhaps the most excitement should be Google’s most recent foray into AR (as of publishing this, it has been 24 hours since this tech was introduced at Google I/O). Google Lens is garnering praise all over:
Google Lens seems less like a tool for libraries and more like a potential sea change for AR. I will reserve my judgement for the release, in which case, I will hope it is iOS friendly.
This work is part of the series “Virtual Reality in the Libraries”.
