Advertisement

Measuring the Face of the Past and Facing the Measurement

  • William Fred LimpEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Quantitative Methods in the Humanities and Social Sciences book series (QMHSS)

Abstract

We are in the midst of major changes in the practice of archaeology and heritage studies. Technologies for high-precision, high-density measurement of objects, sites and landscapes coupled with computer-based methods for the visualization of these data and other (re)creations of the past are growing in use. These approaches have and will continue to fundamentally alter our field. The term “high density survey and measurement” (HDSM) covers methods such as airborne lidar, real time kinematic GNSS/GPS survey, robotic total stations, terrestrial “laser” scanning, structured light scanning and close range photogrammetry (CRP, also known as structure from motion—SfM) and UAV-based SfM/CRP and scanning. The analytical process that characterized our field before HDSM can be (over-) simplified to a sequence of observe, interpret/abstract, measure, record, and analyze. HDSM breaks us out of this process in that it pushes us toward a recursive and reflexive engagement with the data, in which we observe, record, measure, analyze, and abstract/interpret repeatedly, and in various orders. The growth in the use of HDSM methods is paralleled by increasing applications of computer-based visualization. Effective use of both requires attention to a scholarly digital ecosystem that addresses the archive and reuse of these digital objects and includes strategies to reuse these digital objects in other scholarly representations along with the tools for citation and other aspects of scholarly discourse.

Keywords

Digital Object Visual Memory Digital Archive Inattentional Blindness Digital Product 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Ackoff, Russell L. 1989. “From Data to Wisdom: Presidential Address to ISGSR, June 1988.” Journal of Applied Systems Analysis 16 (1): 3–9.Google Scholar
  2. Anon. 2001. “In Memoriam: Dr. Joffre Lanning Coe.” Common Ground: A Publication of the Coe Foundation for Archaeological Reserch 13 (1): 1–3.Google Scholar
  3. Barceló, Juan A. 2010. “Computational Intelligence in Archaeology.” In EUROGRAPHICS Workshops on Graphics and Cultural Heritage, preprint. BAR International Series S2079. Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  4. Barnes, Adam. 2009. “Close-Range Photogrammetry A Guide to Good Practice#.” ADS Guides to Good Practice. http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2gp/Photogram_Toc.
  5. Bellinger, Gene, Durval Castro, and Anthony Mills. 2004. Data, Information, Knowledge, and Wisdom. http://geoffreyanderson.net/capstone/export/37/trunk/research/ackoffDiscussion.pdf.
  6. Bentkowska-Kafel, Anna, Hugh Denard, and Drew Baker, eds. 2012. Paradata and Transparency in Virtual Heritage. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.Google Scholar
  7. Bergland, Richard. 1986. The Fabric of Mind. Viking.Google Scholar
  8. Bewley, Robert, Danny O’Donoghue, Vince Gaffney, Martijn van Leusen, and Alicia Wise. 1998. “Archiving Aerial Photography and Remote Sensing Data: A Guide to Good Practice.” http://www.narcis.nl/publication/RecordID/oai:pure.rug.nl:publications%2Ff2e07245-a095-4014-ac9c-93679668098c.
  9. Brück, Joanna. 2005. “Experiencing the Past? The Development of a Phenomenological Archaeology in British Prehistory.” Archaeological Dialogues 12 (01): 45–72. doi: 10.1017/S1380203805001583.
  10. Chan, Leslie. 2004. “Supporting and Enhancing Scholarship in the Digital Age: The Role of Open Access Institutional Repository.” Canadian Journal of Communication 29 (3). http://cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/1455.
  11. Cochrane, Andrew, and Ian Russell. 2007. “Visualizing Archaeologies: A Manifesto.” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 17 (01): 3–19. doi: 10.1017/S0959774307000029.
  12. Corsi, Cristina, Božidar Slapšak, and Frank Vermeulen, eds. 2013. Good Practice in Archaeological Diagnostics. Natural Science in Archaeology. Cham: Springer International Publishing. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-01784-6.
  13. da Vinci, Leonard. 1906. Thoughts on Art and Life. Translated by Maurice Baring. Whitefish (Mont.): Kessinger Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Edwards, Betty. 1979. Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain. Fontana/Collins.Google Scholar
  15. Fernie, Kate, and Julian Richards. 2002. “Creating and Using Virtual Reality: A Guide for the Arts and Humaities.” http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2gp/Vr_Toc.
  16. Forte, M., 2014, 3D Archaeology. New Perspectives and Challenges. The example of Çatalhöyük, in Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology, Vol. 2, n. 1, 2014.Google Scholar
  17. M. Forte, N. Dell’Unto, K. N. Lercari, K.Jonsson, 2015 “3D and Archaeological Interpretation at Catalhuyuk”, in Assembling Çatalhöyük, ed. By I. Hodder and A. Marciniak, Maney Publishing,Google Scholar
  18. Forte, M., Dell’Unto, N., Issavi, J., Onsurez, L. & Lercari, N. 2012. “3D Archaeology at Çatalhöyük.” International Journal of Heritage in the Digital Era, 1: 351–378.Google Scholar
  19. Gaines, Sylvia W., ed. 1981. Data Bank Applications in Archaeology. Tuscon, AZ: Univ of Arizona Pr.Google Scholar
  20. Gilboa, Ayelet, Ayellet Tal, Ilan Shimshoni, and Michael Kolomenkin. 2013. “Computer-Based, Automatic Recording and Illustration of Complex Archaeological Artifacts.” Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2): 1329–39. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2012.09.018.
  21. Griffin, John W., and Patricia C. Griffin. 1996. Fifty Years of Southeastern Archaeology: Selected Works of John W. Griffin. University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
  22. Hanes, David. 2013. “Review of ‘An Illuminated iDentity’ an Art Exhibit at the Ontario College of Art and Design.” http://xpace.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Main-Space_iDentity_2013.pdf.
  23. Kansa, Eric. 2005. “A Community Approach to Data Integration: Authorship and Building Meaningful Links across Diverse Archaeological Data Sets.” Geosphere 1 (2): 97–109.Google Scholar
  24. Koutsoudis, Anestis, and Christodoulos Chamzas. 2010. “3D Pottery Shape Similarity Matching Based on Digital Signatures.” In Making History Interactive: Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA) ; Proceedings of the 37th International Conference, Williamsburg, Virginia, United States of America, March 22–26, 2009, edited by Bernard Frischer, 2079:166–71. BAR International Series. Oxford. Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  25. Koutsoudis, Anestis, and Christodoulos Chamzas. 2011. “3D Pottery Shape Matching Using Depth Map Images.” Journal of Cultural Heritage 12 (2): 128–33. doi: 10.1016/j.culher.2010.12.003.
  26. Limp, Fred, Angelia Payne, Katie Simon, Snow Winters, and Jackson Cothren. 2011. “Developing a 3-D Digital Heritage Ecosystem: From Object to Representation and the Role of a Virtual Museum in the 21st Century.” Internet Archaeology, no. 30. intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue30/limp_toc.html.
  27. Limp, Fred. 1978a. The Oracle System Survey Manual. Research Report 3. Bloomington IN: Glenn Black Laboratory of Archaeology.Google Scholar
  28. Limp, Fred. 1978b. The Oracle Systems User’s Manual. Research Report 2. Bloomington, IN: Glenn Black Laboratory of Archaeology.Google Scholar
  29. Limp, Fred, and Adam Barnes. 2014. “Solving the Grid-to-Ground Problem When Using High Precision GNSS in Archaeological Mapping.” Advances in Archaeological Practice: A Journal of the Society for American Archaeology 2 (2): 138–43. doi: 10.7183/2326-3768.2.2.138.
  30. Loewen, G. V. 2015. “Thinking the Past Anew: The Prehistory of Non-Linear Digital Systems in Archaeology: 1960–1990.” Accessed June 5. http://irssh.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/6_IRSSH-55-V2N1.51195229.pdf.
  31. Niccolucci, Franco, Sorin Hermon, and Doerr. 2015. “The Formal Logical Foundations of Archaeological Ontologies.” In Mathematics and Archaeology, edited by Juan A. Barcelo and Igor Bogdanovic, 86–99. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  32. Olson, Brandon R., Jody M. Gordon, Curtis Runnels, and Steve Chomyszak. 2014. “Experimental Three-Dimensional Printing of a Lower Palaeolithic Handaxe: An Assessment of the Technology and Analytical Value.” Lithic Technology 39 (3): 162–72.Google Scholar
  33. Opitz, Rachel, and Fred Limp. 2015. “Recent Developments in HDSM for Archaeology: Implications for Practice and Theory.” Annual Review of Anthropology 44 (1). doi: 10.1146/annurev-anthro-102214-013845.
  34. Payne, Angelia. 2011. “Laser Scanning for Archaeology: A Guide to Good Practice.” York University: Archeological Data Service. http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2gp/LaserScan_Toc.
  35. Payne, Angelia, and Fred Limp. 2008. “3D Visualizations of the Upper Nodena Site.” http://hampson.cast.uark.edu/nodena_3D.htm.
  36. Petrie, Sir William Matthew Flinders. 1904. Methods & Aims in Archaeology. Macmillan.Google Scholar
  37. Read, Dwight W. 1974. “Some Comments on Typologies in Archaeology and an Outline of a Methodology.” American Antiquity 39 (2): 216–42. doi: 10.2307/279584.
  38. Reilly, Paul, and Gareth Beale. 2014. “Additive Archaeology: Towards a Virtual Archaeology Reprinted?” CAA-GR Conference 2014 (CAA-GR 2014), Rythymnon, GR, 07–08 Mar 2014. 19 pp. http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/364455/.
  39. Remondino, Fabio, and Stefano Campana, eds. 2014. 3D Recording and Modelling in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage: Theory and Best Practices. BAR International Series 2598. Oxford England: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  40. Rockwell, W. Teed. 2005. Neither Brain Nor Ghost: A Nondualist Alternative to the Mind-Brain Identity Theory. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  41. Savelonas, Michalis A., Ioannis Pratikakis, and Konstantinos Sfikas. 2015. “Partial 3D Object Retrieval Combining Local Shape Descriptors with Global Fisher Vectors.” In Eurographics Workshop on 3D Object Retrieval, edited by I. Pratikakis, M. Spagnuolo, T. Theoharis, L. Van Gool, and R. Veltkamp. The Eurographics Association. doi: 10.2312/3dor.20151051.
  42. Scholtz, Sandra, and Robert G. Chenhall. 1976. “Archaeological Data Banks in Theory and Practice.” American Antiquity 41 (1): 89–96.Google Scholar
  43. Sfikas, Konstantinos, Ioannis Pratikakis, Anestis Koutsoudis, Michalis Savelonas, and Theoharis Theoharis. 2013. “3D Object Partial Matching Using Panoramic Views.” In New Trends in Image Analysis and Processing – ICIAP 2013, edited by Alfredo Petrosino, Lucia Maddalena, and Pietro Pala, 169–78. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8158. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-41190-8_19.
  44. Simons, Daniel J., and Christopher F. Chabris. 1999. “Gorillas in Our Midst: Sustained Inattentional Blindness for Dynamic Events.” Perception-London 28 (9): 1059–74.Google Scholar
  45. Spaulding, Albert C. 1960. “The Dimensions of Archaeology.” In Essays in the Science of Culture, 437–56. New York City, New York: Cromwell.Google Scholar
  46. Tanenbaum, Joshua G., Amanda M. Williams, Audrey Desjardins, and Karen Tanenbaum. 2013. “Democratizing Technology: Pleasure, Utility and Expressiveness in DIY and Maker Practice.” In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2603–12. CHI ’13. New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi: 10.1145/2470654.2481360.
  47. Trigger, Bruce G. 1989. A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. West, Thomas G. 2009. In the Mind’s Eye: Creative Visual Thinkers, Gifted Dyslexics, and the Rise of Visual Technologies. Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  49. Willey, Gordon R. 1953. “Archaeological Theories and Interpretation: New World.” Anthropology Today, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 361–85.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeosciencesUniversity of ArkansasFayettevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations