Graphics and Archaeology: Interpreting the Past

Snowbird, Utah
20-23 May 2000

 

Presentation:

Computer Graphics and Archaeology: Realism and Symbiosis

Presenters:

  • David Arnold

Presentation Resources:

Summary:

The motivation for these projects were the interesting combination of virtual heritage and computer graphics as an application. The presentation viewed a range of collaborations, including their most current project, and some market factors for Virtual Heritage all based upon their UK experience.

Potential collaborations involve real archaeological and heritage data that stretch the limits of computing. Such work can bring heritage to life for wider audiences. Examples included testing image-to-model algorithms (photo/film archives being a large source of uncalibrated data), analyzing multi-site data collections, and looking at intractable problems (such as Fresco reconstructions of many disparate parts).

History of recent interest was the focus of recent projects. This included Norwich's bid for a UK Millennium Landmark project (1995-present). Although it was not funded soon enough for completion by the Millennium, work continues on a Norwich Virtual City (collaboration with Televirtual). This later became a focus for a 5th Framework European Union proposal to reconstruct 9 square kilometers of the city centre of this historic city.

Source information for this project includes aerial photographs dating back to the 1890s. There is much of the city walls left from their erection in 1334. Calibration of many photographs is possible due to the high number of landmarks that still remain in the area.

Tourism was a key element of this project to its independent investors. Unfortunately, the attraction designers seemed unable to envisage an appropriate paradigm for VR interaction. Technical, political, and economic flaws emerged. New plans to replace the VR approach with a cylindrical projection system are under way.

Virtual heritage in practice is growing. Multimedia CD-ROMs exist for many sites are available. Improvements continue for the ditigization of museum collections. Current efforts lack scenes populated with people an d vegetation, although that will change with time.

The potentials for virtual heritage include:

  • opening up access while preserving the original site
  • archiving and providing some alternative study medium
  • web-based tourism and e-visiting
  • enabling multi-collection searching and correlation
  • enabling alternative edutainment applications
  • helping society to value its heritage
  • providing a revenue stream to meet heritage needs

Current barriers to advancement include sterile environments (details such as people and vegetation), lack of engaging storylines, and sufficient networking distribution and control. Sponsors fail to understand their audiences and can, at times, be confused about the mixing of purpose (serious study versus game entertainment). Furthermore, certain scenarios can exclude certain groups [age, height, sensitivity to motion sickness, etc].

While there still remains some serious economic challenges to projects like these (David's presentation detailed many examples from the UK perspective), the technology and audience potential continue to grow and improve.

Conclusions / Issues:

  • Technological improvements continue at a rapid pace:
    • Image-to-Model conversion techniques (e.g., Berkeley, Oxford groups)
    • large scale fast model building possible (e.g., Rennes)
    • personal avatar capture, representation, and articulation possible (e.g., Dome Avatar-Me project - in 4 months, over 100,000 avatars created for Millennium Dome).
    • Text-to-Speech conversion possible
    • alternative formats and web distribution possible
    • improved algorithms for rendering urban models
    • multi-user online games stretch user-interface issues (e.g., Ultima)
  • Volume markets are essential, but they require a low cost solution and pooled project resources (that may prove that best practices/data can be leveraged)
  • Need to further consider conflicts of use:
    • needs of serious study and academic research
      • access, IPR, data resolution
    • entertainment versus edutainment
      • interpret versus mis-represent - entertainment value is essential, but at what cost?
    • issues of brute force versus improved data entry techniques

 

[ Previous ] [ Index ] [ Next ]