2020
DOI: 10.3390/app10217803
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reconstructive Archaeology: In Situ Visualisation of Previously Excavated Finds and Features through an Ongoing Mixed Reality Process

Abstract: Archaeological excavation is a demolishing process. Rather few elements outlast extractive operations. Therefore, it is hard to visualise the precise location of unearthed finds at a previously excavated research area. Here, we present a mixed reality environment that displays in situ 3D models of features that were formerly extracted and recorded with 3D coordinates during unearthing operations. We created a tablet application that allows the user to view the position, orientation and dimensions of every reco… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Studies of other applications for AR and MR, however, hold out the much wider potential of our deployment of large 3D datasets for archaeology-including for data management and research applications. Dilena and Soressi (2020) demonstrated the potential and current limitations of large datasets of precisely positioned excavated artifacts. Although there are challenges due to memory and sensor constraints, they proposed using phone-based AR to place artifacts in the correct position at the real site, hovering above the ground where they were originally excavated-which we agree is one of the most powerful potential uses of AR and, eventually, full immersive MR. Barbier and colleagues (2017) developed an annotation system to allow archaeologists to examine megalithic cave artwork remotely from the office or classroom.…”
Section: Digital Reviewmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Studies of other applications for AR and MR, however, hold out the much wider potential of our deployment of large 3D datasets for archaeology-including for data management and research applications. Dilena and Soressi (2020) demonstrated the potential and current limitations of large datasets of precisely positioned excavated artifacts. Although there are challenges due to memory and sensor constraints, they proposed using phone-based AR to place artifacts in the correct position at the real site, hovering above the ground where they were originally excavated-which we agree is one of the most powerful potential uses of AR and, eventually, full immersive MR. Barbier and colleagues (2017) developed an annotation system to allow archaeologists to examine megalithic cave artwork remotely from the office or classroom.…”
Section: Digital Reviewmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In this context, new digital tools such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS), 3D geovisualization and photogrammetry hold a prominent place, given their increasing utility and ability to extract, study, and characterize the spatial dimension of archeological data (e.g. 3D models), especially on an intra-site scale (Discamps et al 2016;Dilena & Soressi 2020). Such tools can be applied to archival documentation (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the widely recognized capabilities of interactive 3D graphics and virtual environments in archaeology, the use of these tools in educational environments is still limited, while it is overused in other environments [24][25][26][27][28][29].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%