www.artnews.com: Blockbuster art exhibitions were once largely the province of museums. Crowds now flock to popular immersive exhibitions—where all you see is a part of the artwork—in a new breed of art venue. Last year, some 2.4 million people paid approximately $25 each to experience teamLab’s Planets exhibition in Tokyo, racking up ticket sales on a par with box office revenues at the Met or the Tate.
14 comments:
I remember one of my favorite museums as a kid was called the Discovery Cube, and it was an entire museum dedicated to and geared toward curiosity and discovery. It was four floors of immersive exhibits that, with various objects and things to play with, allowed you to figure out scientific concepts for yourself. If you wanted the actual scientific explanation afterwards, you could read plaques and labels that told you about the exhibit and the concepts, or you could simply move on to the next thing that piqued your curiosity. Entirely choose-your-own adventure. In branding, it was a kids museum, but even as I grew older I still loved the hands-on joy of the Discover Cube. Now that was a science museum, but I think the same ideas apply to art museums and are a huge factor as to why immersive art exhibits have become so popular. There is something so beautiful about that kind of childish discovery, and we don’t want to let that go as we become adults.
I think museum exhibits are a prime opportunity for scene shops and production shops to keep the door open during the slow seasons. It is also a new form of design and requires a tighter tolerance due to individuals being right on top of the product produced. But to open up the opportunity for company to grow their product and the content they are able to produce. This is truly right up the ally of what scenery is. I also think there is an opportunity to take these types of events to different museums like a tour around the world.
In 2021 I visited a dozen of so museums with my best friend in Springfield, MO, of these museums the thing that stood out to me all of these years later was an immersive exhibit where you got to step inside a wagon on the organ trail and see the journey through the eyes of the people who experienced it. Although this was a history museum and not an art museum I think the point still stand that the most memorable works you see are the one that surround you and make you feel like you are a part of something bigger than yourself. This article brought up the Van Gogh experience that traveled around the US a could of years ago. I think this tour was one of the first examples of a publicly accessible immersive experience that should be emulated. This type of work is very VMD heavy so I am curious how the rapidly changing VMD world will feed into museums evolving to include more immersive pieces.
Palace costume looks absolutely gorgeous. The pieces that are kept in the archive are pieces of history that are invaluable and incredibly insightful into what the trends and styles were of different times. The fabric samples in the photographs on the website are so vivid and still contain so much life- even though they were relevant in the 60s. Learning about the different shows and movies that the costume studio has worked on was super interesting, and I loved glancing at the photo samples. The shoe shots were some of my favorites- the photography of this article is just so stunning. The idea that one of the costumes could walk in with a memorable costume piece from a beloved movie or show on any given day is so funny to me. My personal favorite shot in the article is from La La Land, with a beloved dress from Palace. I had no idea one of my favorite movies sources from this studio!
The first image of this article is extremely eye catching. “Unconstrained by the limitations of exhibiting unique physical objects, teamLab welcomes visitors to at least ten far-flung satellites” This statement is a huge scale. The budgets for these experiences are insane! The Van Gogh immersive called Van Gogh Alive with the large artworks looks amazing, but also makes me wonder what the “wow” factor is: the art or the technology showcasing it in a new way. I think this article also touches very well on the conversation of what is the true purpose of museums. I like that this exhibition centers artists from around the globe with different backgrounds and stories to tell. The idea that “one size does not fit all” for museums is so true- there are so many different platforms for media that cater to different audiences. I am interested to see what the future of museums looks like.
I love immersive environments and immersive museum displays and all of that, and reading this article was informative and interesting. I like that they split the genre into three segments; projection-based displays that are celebrating the art of a passed artist, projection-based displays that were created by living artists / as an all new art display, and more physically intensive displays. Moving forward, I think that while there are definitely people who disagree with or dislike this direction that some museums are moving in, it will definitely be a good move to get more people into museums as culture shifts away from museums being as popular. I also agree with the point that getting more people in the immersive or newer museums will also bring more people intro traditional museums, since we have been conditioned by the internet to have shorter attention spans and be constantly taking in more stimulus than we used to, which might make young people less likely to go to a traditional museum unless they’ve been to immersive museums and understood the hype of museums in general.
I have absolutely loved every immersive museum experience I've had in the past. They’re always so visually appealing and I definitely think more museums should start incorporating them. Aside from the fact that they can be entertaining for people of all ages, they’re especially great for small kids. Now I love to just wander around art museums observing all of the art, I didn’t always. As a little kid I thought art museums were the most boring thing in the world. However an immersive art piece would’ve absolutely caught my attention at a young age. Even still as an adult I’ve always loved immersive and interactive art exhibits, they’re the exhibits I remember the best. Pieces like “Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) where a pile of candy sat in a museum for people to take piece from representing the body weight of an adult man with AIDS during the AIDS crisis is still a piece I remember when I didn’t even see it in person. While that piece wasn’t exactly immersive, it was still interactive and I hope to see a push towards more interactive and immersive experiences in art exhibitions.
I've always loved interactive experiences in museums as they've always made me feel more immersed in the space that I'm in, so i think its great that more places are that leap into utilizing technology to make exhibits more entertaining. As i kid even though i liked normal art installations i always found myself more enthralled with ones more unique visually and ones that used technology to show something new, i think utilizing exhibits like these more will cause more children to be interested in visiting these places. More people visiting these exhibits will create more of an interest in art for future generations. however i still think there is space within art culture for traditional museums and i still believe they can thrive even with the competition of immersive experiences, i think its important to create a space for art of the past, so while i think immersive art should be allowed to grow to its fullest potential i think its important not to completely overshadow traditional museums as they hold a lot of the culture from the past
As a big fan of immersive art and immersive installations, I found this article to be really interesting. What we often don’t consider in the world of immersive installations (at least from an audience member standpoint) is the material and labor cost of installing these exhibits into existing spaces, especially when their technical needs can exceed older infrastructure like museums. I really love immersive installations, and I have spent a decent amount of time at various art installations and interactive museum exhibits, and at least for me personally, I found that the immersivity really deepened my connection to what I was experiencing. I do wonder about what the future holds for traditional museums and how we will continue to consume the art and knowledge that is traditionally housed in the venues themselves. In the end, I think that these immersive experiences and exhibits are worth the investment but time will tell if we have a shift in how these experiences are being funded and placed in places like museums.
This article shows that the rise of immersive art experiences is changing how people interact with art, drawing in large and diverse audiences. Immersive art is appealing because it’s interactive and dramatic, which makes it more accessible and engaging for people who might not usually visit museums. In my opinion, these new elements make museums feel less rigid and boring, offering visitors a more visual and interactive way to learn. However, this shift also challenges traditional museums. As guardians of cultural heritage, they now must decide whether to adapt to the growing popularity of immersive exhibitions or risk becoming irrelevant. At the same time, there’s a concern that the flashy and immersive nature of these experiences might overshadow the actual content, focusing more on form than substance. Museums are at a turning point. While immersive exhibitions require a big investment in space, technology, and new skills, they also present a unique chance to expand their reach and explore different ways of telling stories. I think the challenge for museums is finding a balance between the immersive experience’s sensory appeal and the depth and cultural importance of traditional exhibitions. As immersive art keeps evolving, museums can combine spectacle with meaning, potentially attracting more visitors while still fulfilling their role as cultural institutions.
I believe interactive art has become such a fast spreading world wide phenomenon is people's ability to connect to the artwork. Humans have always been more interested in things that affect them rather than anything that they can neither relate to or understand. Interactive art creates an easy connection between the viewer and the art because they are physically interacting. But as the article said many people still appreciate and connect to fine and more traditional art. The most interesting thing I found in the article relating to the prospect of interactive art was the cost of creating exhibits. The article states that because interactive art needs such a large amount of space to create successful exhibits most of the places in which these pieces are shown off are lower income and more affordable areas. This almost reassures fine art museums that the two mediums will stay somewhat separate.
I have been to many immersive experiences these past couple years and I thoroughly enjoy the experience, but there is something to be said about how museums are also a way to feel immersed, surrounding you with history and information that I have yet to see from an immersive experience. While being surrounded by projections and art can be appealing to many, I feel like what is immerses me the most is interactive exhibits in museums. A combination of typical object and description museum exhibits and immersive and interactive experiences can be used to create an engaging experience. I have seen this done expertly at the sailing museum in Newport Rhode Island, the museum's combination of sailing related games and dioramas with detailed descriptions created a space that was inspiring. I hope more museums will evaluate how the present their works to the public, this being said re evaluation doesn’t necessitate change, it jus means understanding choices made with a lens that considers the current artistic landscape.
Immersive art exhibits are undeniably growing in popularity, but I certainly don’t think that they’re a threat to traditional art museums. Isham’s comment about museums on a spectrum is a fantastic way of explaining the situation. Just because immersive art is popular right now doesn’t mean that art museums should switch to immersive exhibits. That being said, I’m not at all opposing ‘hybrid’ museums – I think that they’re a good way to mix the two forms of art and expose different types of visitors to different types of art. The information that the authors gathered from the database is really interesting. I never thought about the distinct types of immersive art exhibits that the article breaks down. It’s exciting to see that TeamLab, on which there were a lot of articles last year, is still around and is still successful, considering that “new experiences open and close all the time”.
As someone who is predominantly interested in scenic design, I adore immersive art. I have definitely pictured myself entering this specific career at some point in my life. I think it’s very interesting to see museums struggling to make a decision on whether to host these pieces. There’s pros and cons to the decision, of course, but the real factor for them is the space/technology behind it and the art’s “worthiness.” I personally think that if museums don’t supply the space, it will only be better for people who want to start up businesses and spaces dedicated to this craft.
Post a Comment