2022
DOI: 10.5194/isprs-archives-xliii-b2-2022-831-2022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Integration of Photogrammetry and Portable Mobile Mapping Technology for 3d Modeling of Cultural Heritage Sites: The Case Study of the Bziza Temple

Abstract: Abstract. In this paper, we present a multi-sensor approach employed to obtain the 3D model of the Roman temple of Bziza (Lebanon) and its surroundings, a work carried out as part of the archaeological Northern Lebanon Project (NoLeP). The integration of photogrammetry and portable mobile mapping technology was tested to overcome the weaknesses of each individual surveying method, with the aim of producing a complete and realistic 3D reconstruction of the whole site, as well as capturing at high-resolution the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Photogrammetry, for example, is being pitched with a "do-it-yourself" level of accessibility, both with cameras and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs, or "drones"; Cerasoni et al 2022;Magnani et al 2020;Marín-Buzón et al 2021;Olson and Rouse 2018; Figure 3). The use of portable mobile mapping systems is garnering particular excitement-what seems simpler and more familiar than just using your phone?-with iPads for photogrammetry and iPhones for lidar (Cohen-Smith et al 2022, Luetzenburg et al 2021Maset et al 2022;Teppatti Losè et al 2022). Yet, the processing decisions-let alone issues with accuracy for the objects of interest, or archiving, or access to the models or their raw data-represent a microcosm of the larger issue(s) that spatial data in archaeology face in the coming decade.…”
Section: Digital Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Photogrammetry, for example, is being pitched with a "do-it-yourself" level of accessibility, both with cameras and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs, or "drones"; Cerasoni et al 2022;Magnani et al 2020;Marín-Buzón et al 2021;Olson and Rouse 2018; Figure 3). The use of portable mobile mapping systems is garnering particular excitement-what seems simpler and more familiar than just using your phone?-with iPads for photogrammetry and iPhones for lidar (Cohen-Smith et al 2022, Luetzenburg et al 2021Maset et al 2022;Teppatti Losè et al 2022). Yet, the processing decisions-let alone issues with accuracy for the objects of interest, or archiving, or access to the models or their raw data-represent a microcosm of the larger issue(s) that spatial data in archaeology face in the coming decade.…”
Section: Digital Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this case, preferable results of 3D model are expected to have higher accuracy and complete 3D models imply that there is no data or data lost in modelling. The works were conducted to gain a more complete 3D model by combining multi-sensor data (Chhatkuli et al, 2015;Zhen et al, 2019;Maset et al, 2022). They produced a 3D model of the entire area including terrain, buildings, and other details.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%