Re: [CODE4LIB] Experience with VR in libraries

[Dan Scott]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016, 11:09 Edward Iglesias 
wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> I am in the midst of putting together a proposal to try out some VR gear in
> our library with the thought of eventually providing some student space to
> support it.  Any reccomendations on equipment or things to looks out for.
> So far we are looking at a couple of Oculus Rifts and perhaps an HTC Vive.
>

We have a game design specialization as part of our uni's Computer Science
program, and one of the tools students have been using is Unity to create
2D and 3D games. It so happens that there is a Unity SDK for Google
Cardboard, and is (reportedly) straightforward to integrate, but although
many people have heard of Cardboard, few have tried it despite its low cost.

So I picked up a few Cardboard-compatible Mattel ViewMasters at $30 each on
my professional development budget and added them to our tech lending
program just last week. The ViewMasters are plastic, so they're durable and
they can be cleaned (yay) and while I certainly hope their availability
helps the game design folks (the lead Prof is excited about it, for one), I
also hope that it serves as a gentle first step into the VR experience for
those who have a phone and have heard about this VR thing but don't have
the budget to try out a higher end experience.

Re: [CODE4LIB] Experience with VR in libraries

[BWS Johnson]

Salvete!


> We too see VR as an 
> opportunity to pilot communities but we're not waiting to see if there is a 
> justifiable need, 


 Not waiting until one is a proven dinosaur ++

Cheers,
Brooke

Re: [CODE4LIB] reearch project about feeling stupid in professional communication

[Carol Bean]

Um, yeah.  I gotta side with Brooke's point here about our tendency to
forget about the smaller, especially rural, libraries. And I would extend
it to include special libraries, which are usually also smaller with less
resources.

Carol

Carol Bean
beanwo...@gmail.com

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:22 AM, BWS Johnson 
wrote:

> Salvete!
>
> *lights match, positions gin based cocktail, and preps for incoming hate
> mail*
>
>
>
>  With all due respect Mr. Morgan, I wholeheartedly disagree.
>
>  Most Public Libraries are Rural Public Libraries. [IMLS 2013] Most
> Academics are also small by FTE enrolment [ies of NCES 2012] So "we are the
> little folk we". We might not actually have different fancy pants
> departments. I will cede the gentleman his perception amongst those
> Academic Ivory Behemoths that possess battleship turning or are eligible
> for ASERL membership.
>
>  I would also further venture that anecdotally, folks in settings
> similar to the ones I've chosen are less likely to have a Master's degree
> period, much less a Master's degree from a prestigious Institution.
> (Please, not in the face! I hate the paper standard, but it is there.) This
> lack of paper could well lead to someone being made to feel inferior. How
> many times have we heard in passing that so and so is not a "real"
> Librarian since they do not possess their $50k+ piece of paper?
>
> Your most humble and obedient servant,
> Brooke
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: Eric Lease Morgan 
> > To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 6:54 AM
> > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] reearch project about feeling stupid in
> professional communication
> >
> > In my humble opinion, what we have here is a failure to communicate. [1]
> >
> > Libraries, especially larger libraries, are increasingly made up of many
> > different departments, including but not limited to departments such as:
> > cataloging, public services, collections, preservation, archives, and
> now-a-days
> > departments of computer staff. From my point of view, these various
> departments
> > fail to see the similarities between themselves, and instead focus on
> their
> > differences. This focus on the differences is amplified by the use of
> dissimilar
> > vocabularies and subdiscipline-specific jargon. This use of dissimilar
> > vocabularies causes a communications gap and left unresolved ultimately
> creates
> > animosity between groups. I believe this is especially true between the
> more
> > traditional library departments and the computer staff. This
> communications gap
> > is an impediment to when it comes to achieving the goals of
> librarianship, and
> > any library — whether it be big or small — needs to address these issues
> lest it
> > wastes both its time and money.
> >
> > For example, the definitions of things like MARC, databases & indexes,
> > collections, and services are not shared across (especially larger)
> library
> > departments.
> >
> > What is the solution to these problems? In my opinion, there are many
> > possibilities, but the solution ultimately rests with individuals
> willing to
> > take the time to learn from their co-workers. It rests in the ability to
> respect
> > — not merely tolerate — another point of view. It requires time,
> listening,
> > discussion, reflection, and repetition. It requires getting to know
> other people
> > on a personal level. It requires learning what others like and dislike.
> It
> > requires comparing & contrasting points of view. It demands “walking a
> mile
> > in the other person’s shoes”, and can be accomplished by things such as
> the
> > physical intermingling of departments, cross-training, and simply by
> going to
> > coffee on a regular basis.
> >
> > Again, all of us working in libraries have more similarities than
> differences.
> > Learn to appreciate the similarities, and the differences will become
> > insignificant. The consequence will be a more holistic set of library
> > collections and services.
> >
> > [1] I have elaborated on these ideas in a blog posting -
> http://bit.ly/1LDpXkc
> >
> > —
> > Eric Lease Morgan
> >
>