Login    |    Register

connect and contribute... Click here for further options

 
·  Contribute · Archaeology Forums

Online Archaeology Forums

UnansweredActive TopicsForumsSearch
Forums >Archaeology >GIS and Archaeology
Laser Scanning or Photogrammetry?
Last Post 04 Aug 2007 02:12 AM by Gazz. 2 Replies.
AddThis - Bookmarking and Sharing ButtonPrinter Friendly
Sort:
PrevPrevNextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
AuthorMessages
GazzUser is Offline
New Member
New Member
Send Private Message
Posts:0
Avatar

--
04 Aug 2007 02:12 AM
I've just returned from the Computers and Archaeological Applications (CAA)in Berlin and they had all the high tech laser scanning technology on show but there were many papers on Photogrametry - which is best suited to archaeology?
SteveWUser is Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Send Private Message
Posts:662
Avatar

--
10 Aug 2007 12:42 PM
Gary - Have you seen this new site, looks pretty useful: http://www.laserscanning.org.uk Steve White
AntArchUser is Offline
New Member
New Member
Send Private Message
Posts:19
Avatar

--
25 Apr 2008 09:02 PM
Depends on what you want it for. Laserscanning produces a large amount of accurate data very quickly. It does, however, require lots of post-processing to generate a useable model. I would argue that you should use laser scanning for either of the following: Heritage that has structural issues (i.e. monitoring). Artefacts with subtle markings (rock art etc) or on an airborne platform (ALS). Michael Doneus has done some very interesting work using laser scanning during excavation http://www.ascona2005.ethz.ch/ Photogrammetry, produces similar data. Some of the photogrammetric postprocessing platforms are very expensive (socket set etc) some are cheap. There is quite a bit of work in Computer Vision to generate 2.5/3d models from stereo pairs in a black box way. So in essence photogrammetry can produce low-medium quality models cheaply or high res models for a fair bit more cash. Luc Van Gool has done some interesting stuff on Computer Vision and photogrammetry (see above link) As I say the issue here is what do you want to use it for. Many of the 3d models are generally static . It would be good to see something bridging the gap between 3d recording and interpretation. For example a system which uses a number of different architectural primitives which can be changed in a variety of different ways quite flexibly (i.e. dimensions/colours etc). this would allow people to generate different interpretations of sites in a more flexible way. For example a medieval church with it's medieval colour scheme rather than a modern representation of the 3d relief. Ant
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Forums >Archaeology >GIS and Archaeology

Active Forums 4.1

Go to email Go to delicious.com Go to digg Go to technorati Go to reddit Go to stumbleupon Go to facebook Go to newsvine Go to simpy Go to google bookmarks Go to yahoo bookmarks Go to yahoo myweb Go to ask Go to slashdot Go to rawsugar Go to mister-wong Go to backflip Go to diigo Go to tailrank Go to live Go to twitter Go to fark Go to blogmarks Go to linkagogo Go to wink Go to ma.gnolia Go to bluedot Go to netvouz Go to blinklist Go to sphinn

Section Content

 
Home · Connect · Contribute
Copyright 2006 - 2008 Online Archaeology   |   Terms of Use   |   Privacy Statement