Advertisement

SfM Techniques Applied in Bad Lighting and Reflection Conditions: The Case of a Museum Artwork

  • Laura InzerilloEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 943)

Abstract

In recent years, SfM techniques have been widely used especially in the field of Cultural Heritage. Some applications, however, remain undefined in cases where the boundary conditions are not suitable for the technique. Examples of this are instances where there are poor lighting conditions and the presence of glass and reflective surfaces. This paper presents a case study where SfM is applied, using a DSLR camera (Nikon D5200), to the “Head of Hades” inside a glass theca and under a large number of light sources at different distances and of different intensities and sizes. The geometric evaluation has been made comparing the DSLR camera model against the 3D data acquired with structured light systems.

Keywords

Photogrammetry Museum 3D model 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This research has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Programme, SMARTI ETN, under the Marie Curie-Skłodowska actions for research, technological development and demonstration, under grant agreement number 721493.

References

  1. 1.
    Santagati, C., Inzerillo, L., Di Paola, F.: Image-based modeling techniques for architectural heritage 3D digitalization: limits and potentialities. In: International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, vol. XL-5(W2), pp. 550–560 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Inzerillo, L.: Smart SfM: salinas archaeological museum. In: International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Science, vol. XLII-2/W5, pp. 369–374 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W5-369-2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Scopigno, R., et al.: Digital fabrication techniques for cultural heritage: a survey. Comput. Graph. Forum 36(1), 6–21 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garstki, K.: Virtual representation: the production of 3D digital artifacts. J. Archaeol. Method Theory 24(3), 726–750 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gonizzi Barsanti, S., Guidi, G.: 3D digitization of museum content within the 3D icons project. ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. II-5/W1, 151–156 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wachowiak, M.J., Karas, B.V.: 3D scanning and replication for museum and cultural heritage applications. J. Am. Inst. Conserv. 48(2), 141–158 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Inzerillo, L., Di Paola, F.: From SfM to 3D print: automated workflow addressed to practitioner aimed at the conservation and restoration. In: International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Science, vol. XLII-2/W5, pp. 375–382 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W5-375-2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barsanti, S.G., Remondino, F., Visintini, D.: Photogrammetry and laser scanning for archaeological site 3D modeling–some critical issues. In: Roberto, V., Fozzati, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on The New Technologies for Aquileia, pp. 1–10 (2012). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-948/paper2.pdf
  9. 9.
    Mikhail, E.M., Bethel, J.S., Mcglone, C.: Introduction to Modern Photogrammetry. Wiley, Hoboken (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Remondino, F., Fraser, C.: Digital camera calibration methods: considerations and comparisons. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 36(5), 266–272 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schonberger, J.L., Frahm, J.-M.: Structure-from-Motion Revisited. In: Proceedings of CVPR (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Menna, F., et al.: 3D digitization of an heritage masterpiece - a critical analysis on quality assessment. In: International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences - ISPRS Archives, vol. 41, pp. 675–683, February 2016.  https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-xli-b5-675-2016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gaiani, M., Remondino, F., Apollonio, F.I., Ballabeni, A.: An advanced pre-processing pipeline to improve automated photogrammetric reconstructions of architectural scenes. Remote Sens. 8(3), 178 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Di Paola, F., Milazzo, G., Spatafora, F.: Computer aided restoration tools to assist the conservation of an ancient sculpture. In: The colossal Statue of Zeus enthroned, International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, vol. XLII-2/W5, pp. 177–184 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W5-177-2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Georgopoulos, A., Ioannidis, C. Valanis, A.: Assessing the performance of a structured light scanner. In: Commission V Symposium on International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, vol. 38(5). Citeseer (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Compare, Cloud. CloudCompare (version 2.8)[GPL software]. (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of PalermoPalermoItaly

Personalised recommendations