3D Modelling For Cultural Heritage

Timetable

Friday 08:30-10:45, Faculty of Archaeology, Collegium Historicum, room 2.129

Classes will start on 10th March 2023

Module aim (aims)

3D  modelling  has  become  a  useful  tool  to  document  and visualise cultural heritage. Its use has accelerated in the second decade of the 21st century. In particular rapid development of low costs and user-friendly computer software made it accessible to a wide range of users. The aim of the course is to provide theoretical and practical background to 3D modelling as  a tool which may enhance understanding of various elements of cultural heritage. It is aimed at a wide range of specialists who are involved in materiality studies (including archaeologists, historians, historians of art, etc.) and may find it useful to study details of all sorts of artifacts (e.g. prehistoric pottery, flint tools, bronze items, iron weapons, glass products, etc.), decipher worn-out inscriptions on tombstones or monuments or understand architectural complexity of a medieval church. While core data sets will be provided as an example of best practice, the course may be adjusted to students’ interests. It will combine field survey during which students will obtain their own datasets and lab works which will guide them through all stages of data processing. As a result students will be able to prepare  a 3D model, use it for analysis and interpretation of material heritage and asset the potential and limitations of 3D modelling in their practice.

Pre-requisites in terms of knowledge, skills and social competences (where relevant)

Syllabus

Week 1: 3D modelling: introduction

Week 2: Point cloud generation (Visual SFM)

Week 3: Modelling and texturing (MeshLab)

Week 4: Visualisation and model analysis

Week 5: Field survey and data acquisition 

Week 6: Data processing

Week 7: Project presentations and discussion + 5 hrs tutorial There will be 3 hrs per meeting in a computer lab plus 6-8 hours field survey (depending on a number of students)

Reading list

Campana S., Bianchi G., Fichera G. A., Lai L., Sordini M. 2012. 3D Recording and Total Archaeology: From Landscapes to Historical Buildings, International Journal of Heritage in the Digital Era 1(3): 443-460. 

Costopoulos, A. 2016. Digital archaeology is here (and has been for a while), Frontiers in Digital Humanities 3: 4. doi: 10.3389/fdigh.2016.00004. 

De Reu, J., Plets, G., Verhoeven, G., De Smedt, P., Bats, M., Cherretté B., DeMaeyer W., Herremans, D., Laloo P., Van Meirvenne, M., and De Clercq, W. 2013. Towards a threedimensional cost-effective registration of the archaeological heritage, Journal of Archaeological Science, 40 (2): 1108–1121. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2012.08.040. 

Earl G., Sly T., Chrysanthi A., Murrieta-Flores P., Papadopoulos C., Romanowska I., Wheatley D. (eds.) 2012. Archaeology in the Digital Era, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University press. 

Forte, M. 2014. 3D archaeology. New perspectives and challenges – the example of Çatalhöyük’, Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies, 2 (1): 1– 29. doi: 10.13140/2.1.3285.0568. 

Opitz, R. 2015. ‘Three dimensional field recording in archaeology: an example from Gabii’, in Olson, B.R. and Caraher, W.R. (eds) Visions of substance. 3D Imaging in Mediterranean archaeology. The Digital Press@The University of North Dakota, 64–73. 

Rączkowski W. 2020. Power and/or Penury of Visualizations: Some Thoughts on Remote Sensing Data and Products in Archaeology, Remote Sensing 12 (18), doi:10.3390/rs12182996 

Remondino  F., Campana S. 2014. 3D Recording and Modelling in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage - Theory and Best Practices, ArchaeoPress BAR International Series 2598.   

Verhoeven, G. 2012. Methods of Visualisation, in Howell, E., Vandenabeele, P. (eds.) Analytical Archaeometry: Selected Topics. Cambridge, London: Royal Society of Chemistry, 3–48. 

Verhoeven G. 2019. Creating a digital future for the past through unanticipated directions, Paris Éditions de la Sorbonne. 

Watterson, A. 2015. Beyond digital dwelling: rethinking interpretive visualisation in archaeology, Open Archaeology 1 (1): 119–130. doi: 10.1515/opar-2015-0006.