Processing Three-Dimensional Models of Archaeological Artifacts
https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2021-20-7-48-61
Abstract
This article provides a detailed account of the process of scanning, post-processing and further manipulation of threedimensional models obtained with structured light scanners.
Purpose. The purpose of the study is determined by the need for national archaeologists to learn the methods of threedimensional modeling for the implementation of scientific research corresponding to international standards. Unfortunately, this direction in national archaeology began to develop in a relatively recent time and there is a lag in the application of three-dimensional modeling of national archaeology compared to the world level.
Results. Any archaeological, experimental or ethnographic artifact can be used for three-dimensional scanning. To perform post-processing of three-dimensional models it is necessary to carry out primary scanning of an artifact by one of the existing algorithms. The algorithm for creating models, their positioning, simplification, saving in various formats and export is described. The main sequence of 3D models post-processing includes: processing of groups of scanned projections (their cleaning and alignment), creation of artifact model and processing/rectification of the resulting model using special software.
Conclusion. As a result of correct implementation of the algorithm, the researcher receives a scaled model completely corresponding to the original artifact. Obtaining a scalable, texture-free three-dimensional model of the artifact, which fully corresponds to the original and exceeds a photograph in the quality of detail transfer, allows a scientist to conduct precise metric measurements and any procedures of non-invasive manipulation of the models. The ability to access a database of three-dimensional models of archaeological collections greatly simplifies the work of archaeologists, especially in situations when country borders are closed.
Supporting agencies: This study was performed as part of R&D Project No. 0264-2019-0009 “Digital Technologies in Reconstruction of Subsistence Strategies of the Ancient Eurasian Population”
About the Authors
P. V. Chistyakov
Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography SB RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Pavel V. Chistyakov, Junior Researcher
Novosibirsk
E. N. Bocharova
Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography SB RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina N. Bocharova, Junior Researcher
Novosibirsk
K. A. Kolobova
Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography SB RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ksenia A. Kolobova, Major Researcher
Novosibirsk
References
1. Abouaf J. The Florentine Pietà: Can Visualization Solve the 450-Year-Old Mystery? IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 1999, vol. 19 (1), p. 6–10. DOI 10.1109/38.736462
2. Archer W., Djakovich I., Brenet M., Bourguignon L., Presnyakova D., Schlager S., Soressi M., McPherron Sh. P. Quantifying differences in hominin flaking technologies with 3D shape analysis. Journal of Human Evolution, 2021, vol. 150, p. 102912. DOI 10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102912
3. Archer W., Pop C. M., Rezek Z., Schlager S., Lin S. C., Weiss M., Dogandžić T., Desta D., McPherron Sh. P. A geometric morphometric relationship predicts stone flake shape and size variability. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 1991–2003, 2018, vol. 10. DOI 10.1007/s12520-017-0517-2
4. Arnold D., Kaminsky J. 3D scanning and presentation of ethnographic collections – potentials and challenges. Journal of Museum Ethnography, 2014, vol. 27, p. 78–97.
5. Arriaza M. C., Yravedra J., Domínguez-Rodrigo M., Mate-González M. A., García Vargas E., Palomeque-González J. F., Aramendi J., González-Aguilera D., Baquedano E. On applications of microphotogrammetry and geometric morphometrics to studies of tooth mark morphology: the modern Olduvai carnivore site (Tanzania). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 2017, vol. 488, p. 103–112. DOI 10.1016/j.palaeo.2017.01.036
6. Beraldin J. A., Blais F., Cournoyer L., Rioux M., El-Hakim S. H., Rodella R., Bernier F., Harrison N. Digital 3D Imaging System for Rapid Response on Remote Sites. In: Proc. of the 2nd International Conference on 3D Digital Imaging and Modeling (Ottawa, Canada). Ottawa, 1999, p. 34–43.
7. Bretzke K., Conard N. J. Evaluating morphological variability in lithic assemblages using 3D models of stone artifacts. The Journal of Archaeological Science, 2012, vol. 39, p. 3741–3749. DOI 10.1016/j.jas.2012.06.039
8. Brunoa F., Brunoa S., De Sensib G., Luchi M.-L., Mancusoc S., Muzzupappaa M. From 3D reconstruction to virtual reality: A complete methodology for digital archaeological exhibition. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2010, vol. 11, iss. 1, p. 42–49. DOI 10.1016/j.culher.2009.02.006
9. Chistyakov P. V., Kovalev V. S., Kolobova K. A., Shalagina A. V., Krivoshapkin A. I. 3D modelirovanie arkheologicheskikh artefaktov pri pomoshchi skanerov strukturirovannogo podsveta [3D Modeling of Archaeological Artifacts by Structured Light Scanner]. Teoriya i praktika arkheologicheskikh issledovanii [Theory and Practice of Archaeological Research], 2019, vol. 27, no. 3, p. 35–39. (in Russ.) DOI 10.14258/tpai(2019)3(27).-07
10. De Reu J., De Smedt P., Herremans D., Van Meirvenne M., Laloo P., De Clercq W. On introducing an image-based 3D reconstruction method in archaeological excavation practice. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2014, vol. 41, p. 251–262. DOI 10.1016/j.jas.2013.08.020
11. Grosman L., Ovadia A., Bogdanovsky A. Neolithic masks in a digital world. In: Face to Face. The Oldest Masks in the World. Jerusalem, The Israel Museum, 2014, p. 54–59.
12. Grosman L., Smikt O., Smilansky U. On the application of 3-D scanning technology for the documentation and typology of lithic artifacts. The Journal of Archaeological Science, 2008, vol. 35 (12), p. 3101–3110. DOI 10.1016/j.jas.2008.06.011
13. Harush O., Glauber N., Zora A., Grosman L. On quantifying and visualizing the potter’s personal style. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2019, vol. 108. DOI 10.1016/j.jas.2019.104973
14. Harush O., Roux V., Karasik A., Grosman L. Social signatures in standardized ceramic production – A 3-D approach to ethnographic data. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 2020, vol. 60. DOI 10.1016/j.jaa.2020.101208
15. Karasik A., Smilansky U. 3D scanning technology as a standard archaeological tool for pottery analysis: practice and theory. The Journal of Archaeological Science, 2008, vol. 35, p. 1148– 1168. DOI 10.1016/j.jas.2007.08.008
16. Kolobova K. A., Zotkina L. V., Markin S. V., Vasilev S. K., Chistyakov P. V., Bocharova E. N., Kharevich A. V. Kompleksnoe izuchenie personal’nogo ukrasheniya iz reztsa surka v rannegolotsenovom komplekse peshchery Kaminnaya (Rossiiskii Altai) [Complex study of a personal ornament made on a marmot incisor from the Early Holocene complex of Kaminnaya Cave (Russian Altai)]. Stratum plus: Arkheologiya i kul’turnaya antropologiya [Stratum plus: Archaeology and Cultural Anthropology], 2021, no. 1, p. 319–335. (in Russ.)
17. Kolobova K. A., Fedorchenko A. Y., Basova N. V., Postnov A. V., Kovalev V. S., Chistyakov P. V., Molodin V. I. The Use of 3D-Modeling for Reconstructing the Appearance and Function of Non-Utilitarian Items (the Case of Anthropomorphic Figurines from Tourist-2). Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, 2019, no. 4 (47), p. 66–76. DOI 10.17746/1563-0102.2019.47.4.066-076
18. Kovarovic K., Aiello L. C., Cardini A., Lockwood C. A. Discriminant function analyses in archaeology: Are classification rates too good to be true? Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011, vol. 38, iss. 11, p. 3006–3018. DOI 10.1016/j.jas.2011.06.028
19. Li H., Lei L., Li D., Lotter M. G., Kuman K. Characterizing the shape of Large Cutting Tools from the Baise Basin (South China) using a 3D geometric morphometric approach. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 2021, vol. 36. DOI 10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102820
20. Magnani M., Guttorm A., Magnani N. Three-dimensional, community-based heritage management of indigenous museum collections: Archaeological ethnography, revitalization and repatriation at the Sámi Museum Siida. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2018, vol. 31, p. 162–169. DOI 10.1016/j.culher.2017.12.001
21. Morales J. I., Lorenzo C., Vergès J. M. Measuring Retouch Intensity in Lithic Tools: A New Proposal Using 3D Scan Data. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2015. vol. 22, p. 543–55. DOI 10.1007/s10816-013-9189-0
22. Porter S., Roussel M., Soressi М. A Comparison of Châtelperronian and Protoaurignacian core technology using data derived from 3D models. Journal of computer applications in archaeology, 2016, no. 2 (1), p. 41–55. DOI 10.5334/jcaa.17
23. Shalagina A. V., Kharevich V. M., Maury S., Baumann M., Krivoshapkin A. I., Kolobova K. A. Rekonstruktsiya tekhnologicheskikh tsepochek proizvodstva bifasial’nykh orudii v industrii Chagyrskoi peshchery [Reconstruction of the bifacial technological sequence in Chagyrskaya Cave assemblage]. Sibirskie istoricheskie issledovaniya [Siberian Historical Research], 2020, vol. 3, p. 130–151. (in Russ.) DOI 10.17223/2312461X/29/9
24. Valletta F., Smilanski U., Goring-Morris N. A., Grosman L. On measuring the mean cuttingedge angle of lithic tools based on 3-D models – a case study from the Southern Levantine Epipaleolithic. Archaeological Anthropological Sciences, 2020. vol. 12. DOI 10.1007/s12520-019-00954-w
25. Vavulin M. V. Tekhnologii trekhmernoi otsifrovki krupnykh avtonomnykh arkheologicheskikh ob”ektov [3D digitizing of large separate artifacts]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Tomsk State University Journal], 2016, iss. 407, p. 55–60. (in Russ.) DOI 10.17223/15617793/407/9
26. Vavulin M. V., Zaitseva O. V., Pushkarev A. A. Metodika i praktika 3D skanirovaniya raznotipnykh arkheologicheskikh artefaktov [3D Scanning Techniques and Practices used for Different Types of Archaeological Artifacts]. Sibirskie istoricheskie issledovaniya [Siberian Historical Research], 2014, no. 4, p. 21–37. (in Russ.)
27. Vavulin M. V., Zaitseva O. V., Pushkarev A. A. Trekhmernoe skanirovanie i modelirovanie korabel’nykh detalei kocha [3D scanning and modeling of ship parts of the koch]. In: Virtual’naya arkheologiya (effektivnost’ metodov) [Virtual Archaeology (the effectiveness of methods)]. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference. 1–3 June 2015. State Hermitage Museum. St. Petersburg, 2015, p. 234–239. (in Russ.)
28. Zaitseva O. V. “3D revolyutsiya” v arkheologicheskoi fiksatsii v rossiiskoi perspektive [“3D revolution” in archaeological recording in Russian perspective]. Sibirskie istoricheskie issledovaniya [Siberian Historical Research], 2014, no. 4, p. 10–20. (in Russ.)
29. Zotkina L. V., Kovalev V. S., Shalagina A. V. Vozmozhnosti i perspektivy primeneniya trekhmernoi vizualizatsii kak instrumenta analiza v arkheologii [Opportunities and Prospects for the Use of Three-Dimensional Visualization as an Analysis Tool in Archaeology]. Nauchnaya vizualizatsiya [Scientific Visualization], 2018, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 172–190. (in Russ.) DOI 10.26583/sv.10.5.11
Review
For citations:
Chistyakov P.V., Bocharova E.N., Kolobova K.A. Processing Three-Dimensional Models of Archaeological Artifacts. Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology. 2021;20(7):48-61. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2021-20-7-48-61
Views:
218
Email this article 