New PTM techniques (image enhancement) from HP etc. applied to archaeological objects
Here is a quote from a post on IntINF:
.... Here is a link to the technique used by USC to generate these superior images of papyrus documents: Polynomial texture mapping (PTM) imagery. This article originates from Hewlett Packard, the source of the technology employed by USC.
Here is a slightly more elaborate explanation from USC, including photographs of the imaging device itself.
This article explains how the PTM technique is applied in some other archaeology related situations.
This links are quite educational.
Peace,
Nazaroo
__________________ "Neither do I judge thee. Sin no more." (Jn 8:11)
it is interesting yet it is strange that they would use such a device on ancient artifacts. for decades archaeologists, museums and scholars have told everyone that light flashes from cameras were harmful to the ancient discoveries and now they have come up with a device which uses electronic flash as their main tool to deep photograph the objects.
not just 1 but 50 of them atthe same time or close to it.
I agree, from my classes in archeology I was instructed that manuscripts should not be flash photoed as it could cause damage.
I wonder how they prevent damage with this method?
__________________
"You ask, will the heterodox be saved... Why do you worry about them? They have a Saviour Who desires the salvation of every human being. He will take care of them. You and I should not be burdened with such a concern. Study yourself and your own sins..." (St. Theophan)
St. Isaac of Syria (7th century): "Someone who is considered among men to be zealous for truth has not yet learnt what truth is really like: once he has truly learnt it, he will cease from zealousness on its behalf."
On the one hand, many objects will not be significantly damaged by "camera flashes" from ordinary cameras, such as stone carvings etc.
In any event, significant exposure to UV or other dangerous light can be scientifically controlled, both by the 'temperature' (frequency) of the light, and by exposure times, which in modern equipment can be extremely short, in the order of nano-seconds. Finally, the quantity of instantaneous light can be minimized and digital recording techniques used to maximize sensitivity to reflected images.
On the other, many objects are deteriorating continuously, even in ideal storage conditions. These need to be photographed, and their key information preserved, before it is lost forever.
Also to be considered is that it is simply not cost effective to store all archaeological fragments under the extremely expensive conditions that for instance a multi-million dollar object like Codex Sinaiticus is stored.
So in many cases, an inexpensive process for preserving the INFORMATION is far more important and has a greater priority than attempting to provide expensive and often ineffective solutions to preserve the object itself.
Finally, preservation of an object in a museum makes it for practical purposes inaccessable to the public. It becomes an elitist fetish, and more importantly, the information is kept away from those who could intelligently use it. In many ways, the 'museum' mentality and philosophy is extremely anti-democratic in result, even though it is nominally 'democratic' in principle and appearance.
Information is more important than idolatry.
peace,
Nazaroo
__________________ "Neither do I judge thee. Sin no more." (Jn 8:11)
On the other, many objects are deteriorating continuously, even in ideal storage conditions. These need to be photographed, and their key information preserved, before it is lost forever.
Also to be considered is that it is simply not cost effective to store all archaeological fragments under the extremely expensive conditions that for instance a multi-million dollar object like Codex Sinaiticus is stored.
So in many cases, an inexpensive process for preserving the INFORMATION is far more important and has a greater priority than attempting to provide expensive and often ineffective solutions to preserve the object itself.
i understand the concern just questioning the logic behnd it.
preservation of an object in a museum makes it for practical purposes inaccessable to the public. It becomes an elitist fetish, and more importantly, the information is kept away from those who could intelligently use it. In many ways, the 'museum' mentality and philosophy is extremely anti-democratic in result, even though it is nominally 'democratic' in principle and appearance.
i will disagree in part on this as all that is needed to change are accessibility rules. i do not forsee archaeologists advocating the destruction of artifacts they have spent their lives searching for.
Linear Mode
