Talk at Rochester 3d symposium 4 December 2013

2,123 views
2,036 views

Published on

Details of symposium:

http://www.rochester.edu/College/humanities/projects/index.php?digitalarchaeology&symposia

Related blog post:

http://acrg.soton.ac.uk/blog/3612/

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,123
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1,611
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Talk at Rochester 3d symposium 4 December 2013

  1. 1. Contemporary Themes in 3D Archaeological Computing: Thoughts (mostly) from Portus, Italy Graeme Earl 3D Digital Archaeology: Reconstruction, Analysis, and Conservation of Cultural Heritage, University of Rochester, 4 December 2013
  2. 2. Archaeology and “3D” Data • Acquisition • Integration • Visualisation • Iteration Produced by BBC in collaboration with Portus Project http://www.portusproject.org/blog/2012/11/rome-whatlies-beneath/
  3. 3. Portus Project
  4. 4. http://binged.it/1cbBGOz
  5. 5. Big questions: Scale and Character : Function : Chronology
  6. 6. Big digital questions: Blending Digital and Physical : Integration : Simulation Big Data/ Archiving Management : Communication https://twitter.com/GCBeale
  7. 7. Aquisition • Photographic e.g. photometric stereo • RTI – Reflectance Transformation Imaging https://twitter.com/HemboPagi
  8. 8. Aquisition • E.g. mini dome; Giga-RTI • Potential of light field e.g. Lytro?
  9. 9. Aquisition • E.g. multispectral (RTI) http://soton.academia.edu/EleniKotoula http://lbi.academia.edu/GeertVerhoeven
  10. 10. Aquisition • E.g. gigapixel survey and excavation photogrammetry • E.g. crowd and cloud photogrammetry http://gigapan.com/cms/create-make
  11. 11. Aquisition • E.g. drone and object photogrammetry https://twitter.com/stephenjohnkay/
  12. 12. Aquisition • E.g. object photogrammetry https://twitter.com/James_E_Miles http://www.portusproject.org/blog/2013/11/photogrammetry/
  13. 13. Aquisition • E.g. LiDAR
  14. 14. Aquisition • E.g. laser scanning
  15. 15. Automated and semi-automated approaches for extracting key components for finite element analysis ? Automated and semi-automated methods for producing plans and elevations ? https://twitter.com/James_E_Miles
  16. 16. Aquisition • Lightweight scanning at Portus using Kinect https://twitter.com/Peter__Wheeler Kinect scanner developed as part of RCUK PATINA project https://twitter.com/jmknibbe
  17. 17. Aquisition • Micro Computed Tomography X-ray source within the micro CT chamber at Southampton
  18. 18. Aquisition • Micro-CT • e.g. Roman cremations See: http://digitalhumanities.soton.ac.uk/projects/hoard-imaging Voxel data derived from micro CT
  19. 19. Aquisition • Micro-CT • e.g. Roman cremations A cremation urn containing nine coins, dating from AD282, found in the Cotswolds. This item in particular would take months to excavate – with archaeologists needing to carefully examine bone fragments and remains to extract more information about its past. Claudius II and Tetricus I coins discovered solely virtually
  20. 20. Beau Street (Bath) hoard http://blog.britishmuseum.org/category/conservation2/beau-street-hoard/ c. 18,000 Roman coins discovered in Bath under the floor of a Roman building, dating to around AD270 and concreted together in a large block weighing over 100 kilograms
  21. 21. Box vs bags ?
  22. 22. Selby hoard A small pot dating to the 2nd century found in the Selby area, East Riding of Yorkshire
  23. 23. https://twitter.com/James_E_Miles
  24. 24. https://vimeo.com/45452797
  25. 25. Antoninus Pius (138 to 161) coin
  26. 26. Marcus Aurelius (161 to 180) coin
  27. 27. Presenting the hoard http://acrg.soton.ac.uk/blog/1148/
  28. 28. Material Analysis http://www.staffordshirehoard.org.uk/staritems/petctoral-cross https://twitter.com/gbjc105
  29. 29. Challenges and potential • Material analysis of CT finds data • Automated classification e.g. bulk object imaging • Use of CT methods in voxel analysis • Potential of ultrasound research to inform geophysics • Non-linear analyses of remote sensed 3d data
  30. 30. Digital Simulation Agents: Access : Record: Structure: Probability: Fidelity https://twitter.com/gbjc105
  31. 31. https://twitter.com/jessogden
  32. 32. https://twitter.com/James_E_Miles Funded by RCUK Parnassus Project
  33. 33. https://twitter.com/James_E_Miles Displacement contours and principal stresses – hypothesis one
  34. 34. https://twitter.com/James_E_Miles Deflected shape and principal stresses – hypothesis three
  35. 35. Parameter Value Source Building Width 60.1m Excavation, Geophysical, Standing Remains Narrow Nave Width 3.74m Excavation Wide Nave Width 11.38m Excavation Inter-pier Distance (N-S) 5.34m Excavation Infilling wall width 0.58m Excavation Pylon Buttress Length 0.20m Excavation Pylon Buttress Width 1.06m Excavation Brick Width (Arches) 0.4m Excavation, Structural Constraints Brick Thickness 0.05m Excavation, Structural Constraints Vault Height (Narrow Nave) If cross vaulted: Wide nave width x 0.25 If barrel vaulted: Narrow Nave Width x 0.5 Parallels, Structural Constraints Vault Height (Wide Nave) If cross vaulted & depressed: Inter-pier distance N-S x 0.5 Otherwise: Wide nave width x 0.5 Parallels, Structural Constraints https://twitter.com/MattJ_Harrison
  36. 36. Parameter Value Source Building Length 180-220m Excavation, Geophysical, Standing Remains Pier Height 7-10m Excavation, Structural Constraints Roof Offset 0.4-0.6m Parallels, Structural Constraints Roof Pitch Angle 18-23° Parallels, Structural Constraints Gutter Depth 0.5-0.7m Parallels, Structural Constraints Gutter Width 0.4-0.6m Parallels Corbelling Depth 0.3-0.5m Parallels Corbel Height 0.28-0.32m Parallels Corbel Width 0.18-0.22m Parallels Inter-corbel Distance 0.5-1.0m Parallels Tie beam thickness 0.30-0.40m Parallels, Structural Constraints Primary Rafter Thickness 0.30-0.40m Parallels, Structural Constraints Secondary Rafter Thickness 0.17-0.22m Parallels, Structural Constraints Perlin Thickness 0.18-0.20m Parallels, Structural Constraints Roof Planking Width 0.25-0.35m Parallels, Structural Constraints Inter-truss Distance (roof) 2.00-4.00m Parallels, Structural Constraints Inter-perlin Distance 0.90-1.10m Parallels, Structural Constraints https://twitter.com/MattJ_Harrison
  37. 37. Parameter Value Source Foundation Slope 0.5 : 0 0.5: 9.16-10.83% 0.25: true 0.75: false 0.499: Barrel Vault 0.499: Intersecting/Cross Vault 0.002: Depressed Cross Vault If Barrel Vaulted: 0.69: Pitched (N-S) 0.25: Exposed Vaults 0.15: Pitched (E-W) 0.03: Flat Roof Parallels Vaulting Presence Vaulting Type Roof Type Structural Constraints, Excavation Structural Constraints, Parallels Artistic Sources, Structural Constraints, Parallels, If Cross Vaulted: 0.82: Pitched (N-S) 0.15: Pitched (E-W) 0.03: Flat Roof Roof of Narrow Naves Waterspout Presence Corbelled Roof Corbel Material Impost Corbelling Roof Tile Width If Not Vaulted: 0.97: Pitched (N-S) 0.03: Flat Roof 0.6: Separate roof 0.4: Roofed with adjacent nave If Pitched N-S Roof: 0.99: true 0.01: false Otherwise: False 0.9: true 0.1: false 0.45: Brick 0.45: Moulded Brick 0.1: Travertine 0.5: true 0.5: false 0.5: 1.0m 0.5: 0.4m https://twitter.com/MattJ_Harrison Structural Constraints Artistic Sources, Parallels Artistic Sources, Parallels Artistic Sources, Parallels, Excavation Artistic Sources, Parallels Structural Constraints, Parallels
  38. 38. Generative Modelling • GML http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_Modelling_Lang uage • Grass Hopper • http://www.grasshopper3d.com/ • City Engine • http://www.esri.com/software/cityengine https://twitter.com/MattJ_Harrison explores these in CAA2012 proceedings
  39. 39. Visibility and Accessibility UCL Depthmap Earl, Graeme, Porcelli, Vito, Papadopoulos, Constantinos, Beale, Gareth, Harrison, Matthew, Pagi, Hembo and Keay, Simon (2013) Formal and informal analysis of rendered space: the basilica Portuense. In, Bevan, Andrew and Lake, Mark (eds.) Computational Approaches to Archaeological Spaces. Walnut Creek, US, Left Coast Press, 265-305..
  40. 40. Interim reconstruction by https://twitter.com/gbjc105 Development still ongoing of this model – see Portus Project website for updates
  41. 41. Next steps? Predictive Rendering ? Believable representation of light in a scene Vs Prediction of light interaction ? http://soton.academia.edu/E leniKotoula (left) https://twitter.com/Papad opoulos_C (above) https://twitter.com/GCBeale (right)
  42. 42. Next steps? Acoustic Rendering ? https://twitter.com/CatrionaCooper
  43. 43. Next steps? Integration • Combining Lines, Surfaces, Point Clouds, Volumes and Voxels • Access to raw data from within single interface • Capture workflows
  44. 44. Communicating Portus in 3D ?
  45. 45. Portus Documentary http://www.portusproject.org/blogs/2012/12/reconstructing-portus/ Exploring possibilities of “second screening” for future broadcast work
  46. 46. Portus Tour • AR ? • Location ? • Social ? • Co-creation?
  47. 47. Exhibitions and Outreach
  48. 48. Virtual Fieldwork Project Disability solutions identified: • Panoramas, Video Panoramas and Panorama Tours • Wearable cameras Potential for social annotation of resources e.g. gigapan, photosynth; ongoing work by https://twitter.com/Peter__Wheeler
  49. 49. @PortusMOOC • http://www.portusproject.org/education/portus-mooc/
  50. 50. Thanks http://digitalhumanities.soton.ac.uk http://www.portusproject.org/education/portus-summer-field-school/ http://www.portusproject.org/education/portus-mooc/ http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/News-and-Events/Image-Gallery/Pages/PortusProject.aspx Tweet archive from today #UoR3darch @GraemeEarl

×