Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 9

Close Range Photogrammetry vs.

3D Scanning for Archaeological Documentation


BY JASON C !RC ON NO"#$B#R %& '()' * ' CO$$#N+S * ,N ARC #O-O.Y / CO--#C+,ONS& D,.,+A- DOC!$#N+A+,ON & $A+#R,A-S CONS#R"A+,ON

This lecture was presented at the 3D Digital Documentation Summit held July 10-12, 2012 at the Presidio, San Francisco, ! Close Range Photogrammetry vs. 3D Scanning for Archaeological Documentation The proli"eration o" terrestrial laser scanners on the mar#et o$er the past "ew years has %een accompanied %y a rapid adoption o" the technology %y archaeologists& This increased archaeological use has come with growing num%er o" arguments against the use o" 3D scanning as a practical means o" documentation %y archaeologists, preser$ationists, conser$ators and architects& 'ore recently the introduction o" se$eral a""orda%le and(or "ree close-range photogrammetric so"tware pac#ages that re)uire minimal processing la%or has generated much discussion regarding how use"ul such a cheap and easy 3D capture solution is "or archaeologists& *hen con"ronted with multiple options "or 3D documentation, se$eral )uestions arise+ ,ow much can %e gained "rom using a -1.0,000 laser scanner o$er photogrammetry with a digital camera and "ree processing so"tware when documenting an e/ca$ation or ceramic $essel0 an a mid-range scanner capture su""icient detail on roc# art "or general documentation0 ,ow does the accuracy and repeata%ility o" these newer close-range photogrammetry options compare with 3D scanning0 'any "actors can in"luence which technology is most appropriate "or a gi$en application and when a com%ined approach may %e more producti$e& This presentation addresses these )uestions and compares and contrasts data collection and processing "or photogrammetry and 3D scanning documentation in archaeology "or %oth site and o%1ect scale case e/amples&

! $ariety o" non-metric, close-range photogrammetric data capture methods 2e&g& cali%rated $s& non-cali%rated, wide-angle $s& normal lens, etc&3 will %e re$iewed through a comparison o" at least three photogrammetric so"tware pac#ages including 4os Systems5 Photo'odeler Scanner, !utoDes#5s 123D and !giSo"t5s PhotoScan& The resulting data sets will %e compared to scan atch

data o" the same o%1ects as captured %y a 6eica 10 mid-range laser scanner and the 7reuc#mann SmartScan ,4 close-range scanner& Test data will include roc# art and architecture "rom 8nowth, 9reland: De"iance ,ouse ;uin, <nited States: architectural sculptures "rom 4l =ot>, ?uatemala: as well as controlled la% tests& 9n addition, these 3D documentation methods will %e compared to traditional documentation in terms o" cost and potential products(deli$era%les and also consider the ad$antages and draw%ac#s o" the data produced %y the two methods& *hile 3D data sets are o" course $astly richer than line drawings or photographs, the sheer immensity o" a "ull-resolution point cloud is %urdensome to process and manipulate, and includes e/traneous in"ormation which can o%scure, rather than clari"y, the most important "eatures in a line drawing& Thus, $ector e/traction techni)ues "or the rapid creation o" digital line drawings "rom large point clouds will %e discussed& *e will close with a summary o" 3D scanning and photogrammetry metadata standards as de$eloped %y the enter "or !d$anced Spatial Technologies "or the Digital !rchaeological ;ecord 2tD!;3 and the !rchaeological Data Ser$ice 2!DS3& Transcript 95m in a"ternoon& 95m on the east coast or actually central time& *e5ll %e tal#ing a%out close range photogrametry $ersus 3-D scanning "or archeological documentation& The paper is %y 8atie Simon %ut she could not %e here today and Fred 6imp will %e presenting the paper "or her&

Fred is the 6eica and ?S Systems hair and uni$ersity pro"essor at the <ni$ersity o" !r#ansas& ,e is the Director 4meritus "or the enter "or !d$anced Spatial Technology and is currently ser$ing as the President o" the Society "or !merican !rcheology& 6imp+ *ell good a"ternoon and %oth 8atie is in ypress on a pro1ect and ;achel is in 9taly on a

pro1ect, and so 95m here with you today loo#ing "orward to re$iewing with you some o" the really interesting&&9 ha$e no idea what5s happened& @#ay, we are tal#ing today a%out a $ariety o" di""erent methodologies and as was pointed out yesterday )uite appropriately, it5s 1ust a tool& 7ut remem%er i" you ha$e tools, i" you ha$e a hammer e$erything loo#s li#e a nail, and so one o" the )uestions that we need to as# is which tool and when do we use it and how do 9 perhaps, as a person not intimately in$ol$ed with the technology, understand which selections to ma#e& *hat we need, 9 would suggest, is the whole 3-D catalogue& 9t seems since 9 happen to %e here in San Francisco, that5s a good analogy with my apologies to Stuart 7randon& Some o" you may #now what that means and some o" you may not #now what that means& 9n any e$ent what 95m a%out to tal# a%out here ne/t is a little %it o" a start towards that& 7e"ore we get into it, 1ust to gi$e you a little %it o" our %ona"ide so that you ha$e a sense o" whether or not we actually #now what we5re tal#ing a%out, the group that 95m representing, that 8atie and ;achel are part o", is a research unit at the <ni$ersity o" !r#ansas& *e primarily "ocus on geoin"omatics, geomatics, computational sciences, heritage applications are a portion o" our interest, pro%a%ly a%out a "i"th, something li#e that& *e also loo#ed at issues o" inner opera%ility archi$e and what ha$e you and we ha$e a reasona%ly si>a%le sta"" loo#ing at that& 9 was going %ac# to a little %it o" our %ac#ground in photogrametry and 9 reali>ed in 1AAB, we recei$ed an C PTT grant to do close range photogrametry, which %ac# then was not )uite the easy tas# that it is today and we actually were modi"ying a 6eica 2then =eist3 image station which was used "or aerial photogrametry "or close range photogrametry& 7y the way the report is still there& 9n terms o" our scanning %ac#ground, our "irst instrument that we purchased was in 2003 not terri%ly long ago, was an @pte# illrus which %y the way i" you were interested in large things, the @pte# remains today one o" the %est long range terrestrial systems that actually goes out to easily D00 meters and can do a #ilometer to a #ilometer and hal" in good conditions& *e5$e added then a num%er o" other systems to that& *e wor# with a %road range o" so"tware, o%$iously yclone %ut also ;apid Form @pti#at poly wor#s, a $ariety o" the others& ! lot o" open source mesh la% and others as well and there5s one little thing 9 put at the %ottom, a #ey part o", in my opinion when we are loo#ing with structural laser scanning and photogrametry, is control&

*e ha$e had a lot o" discussions a%out pro1ects& 'ost o" those appear to %e in site coordinates %ut things are actually out there in the real world and they are in geodetic space, and 9 would suggest that one o" things we need to thin# a%out is putting in actual geodetic control in our $arious acti$ities& Cow that raises a little %it o" a pro%lem& Some o" the so"tware doesn5t li#e %ig num%ers& For those o" you in$ol$ed in ?9S "or a long time or other things, you #now we always had eight %it data and how did we deal with that& 9t still seems that a lot o" the point cloud so"tware doesn5t li#e %ig long num%ers& So geodetic num%ers can %e a pro%lem %ut ne$ertheless 9 would su%mit that sur$ey control is a #ey aspect o" whether it5s photogrametry or laser scanning& This is sort o" how we loo# at the whole area o" 3-D de$elopment& *e tal# a%out a 3-D ecosystem with a $ariety o" di""erent pieces and parts and 9 want to mention two in particular& *e ha$en5t %een tal#ing much a%out that %ut semantic decomposition, that is the e/traction o" actually use"ul in"ormation out o" these unorgani>ed data sets, is a $ery important tas#& 9t5s really hard& 9t5s a computationally interesting pro%lem and we really need to deal with it& !nd the other one is an archi$e& *e5$e tal#ed a%out that& 9 want to come %ac# to this a little %it later on& *e loo# at sort o" a $ery simpli"ied 3-D data pipeline& *e see that actually laser, and 9 use that term with air )uotes always, laser scanning and photogrametry is actually $ery similar in many respects& !nd it5s to this measure draw $ector analy>ed product that we5re loo#ing at when we5re tal#ing a%out this entire wor# "low, so we5re trying to get somewhere& Cow i" we %rea# that down, this is 1ust an e/ample o" a close range photogrametry wor# "low, there5s an aw"ully lot o", 9 don5t #now i" you can see all the decision points, there5s a lot o" parameters and 9 want to ma#e this point $ery clear& *e5$e tal#ed a%out ac)uisition and o%$iously ac)uisition is $ery important and there are parameters that you set during ac)uisition, %ut there are an enormous num%er o" parameters that are in$ol$ed in these so"tware pac#ages that can alter the results during processing& ,owe$er, we5re luc#y& ?enerally spea#ing, the de"ault in many instances, are ade)uate& So on the other hand, in some instances they aren5t, so we would encourage really thin#ing through the structure o" the $arious parameter selection& Cow with that $ery super"icial %ac#ground how do you decide0 ,ow do you choose which o" the two alternati$es& *ell here are a "ew parameters that you might loo# at& ,ow much does it cost0 ,ow "ar away are you wor#ing0 *hat5s the depth o" the in"ormation you5re trying to capture0 9s it lit0 @%$iously photogrametry doesn5t wor# in the dar#& 6aser scanning in many instances actually does& *hat are the goals though0 The one at the %ottom is really 9 thin#, the #ey essential point and we want to loo# at that as we go "orward& 7ut how do we measure whether or not these particular methods achie$e our goal& So %e"ore 9 actually get into that, 9 want to actually ma#e one point here which 9 "ind #ind o" interesting& *hat you5re seeing here is %asically a semi real time $ector ac)uisition o" a 3-D data set& 9t turns out it5s a structure and de"iance a%e which is actually a Par# Ser$ice data set& *e did a pre and post sta%ili>ation metric analysis and so essentially you can %ring the data %ac#, you can $ectori>e it and then you ha$e 3-D $ectors which are di""erent than 2-D $ectors& Cow o%$iously it5s

possi%le to "latten these into some sort o" planametric data, %ut 9 1ust want to point out that two dimensional data looses it5s three dimensional character and particularly when you5re loo#ing at things li#e sta%ili>ation& 9t may actually %e mo$ement in that sur"ace that actually is the di""erence %etween the two condition states& Something to %e thin#ing a%out as we go "orward& So, here5s the )uestion& 9 ha$e two data sets& 9 ha$e two ways o" accomplishing a particular goal& ,ow do 9 compare those, and we5$e seen one e/cellent e/ample& Tom5s demonstration o" the way in which the metrics o" the two data sets were compared& That5s the traditional geometics sur$eying way to loo# at three dimensional data, we loo# at how "ar apart they are& *ell that5s a per"ectly $alid and a per"ectly use"ul way to go a%out doing it& 7ut in "act, it may o%scure or o$erloo# in"ormation o" signi"icance to a particular disciplinary "ocus& For e/ample, stylistic components in a particular o%1ect may loo# metrically the same in two di""erent data sets %ut may %e )uite di""erent& !nd so we5re "inding that computer $ision and gaming metrics can %e $ery e""ecti$e measures o" is that data good enough, %ecause that5s the "undamental )uestion we5re as#ing& 9s the data that 95m ac)uiring good enough to do E/F0 *ell what is E/F and i" E/F is a stylistic analysis "or e/ample o" particular moti"s or "eatures, ha$e 9 ac)uired the data at that le$el in order to accomplish my goal0 7y the way, ha$e you noticed that we5re all up here tal#ing a%out how computers are going to change our li"e "or the %etter and the pro1ection systems hardly e$er wor#, so 1ust a )uestion& So this is a particular case study& *e cheated here& *e said, what should we really use: a 10 to scan a set o" particular roc# art "eatures at a megalithic site in 9reland or should we use photogrametry& Cow we5re ta#ing the 10 at its a%solute ma/imum e/tent& So we #new the answer to this )uestion %ut ne$ertheless& So here we ha$e a data set& This is the traditional metric comparison& This is the data as ac)uired through processing, through photogrametry and the data as ac)uired "rom the 10 and %asically, a long story short, is there the same& There5s $ery little di""erence e/cept at the margins and that5s not surprising& 7ut, we5re not really interested in sort o" the o$erall physical dimensions o" the roc# art& *e5re actually interested in the moti"s and the particular stylistic components& So here5s two representations& ,ow do you measure, did the stylistic component appear in the data0 ,ow do you do that0 That5s not an easy )uestion& Gou can loo# at it& Gou can say perhaps it does& 7ut one way to do it is to loo# at some saliency metrics coming out o" the computer $ision community& So essentially what you do here is you %uild a colonel& 9n this case the colonel happens to %e se$en millimeters and you pass the colonel across the image and you loo# at the two images& Gou can see the photogrametric deri$ed point cloud& Gou can see the scanning and it5s pretty good& They5re not too %ad& 9" we pass a "i$e millimeter colonel, you can see the di""erences in the data and i" we pass a three millimeter colonel and again, we5re cheating, there5s no way on earth that a 10 goes down to three millimeters& 9 mean you5re %eyond noise %ut the point is that you can see here that we actually ha$e a metric that tells us that i" the o%1ecti$e o" the analysis was to reco$er data at this particular le$el o" )uality, i" you will, we are a%le to do it with method ! and we cannot do it with method 7 and again we can apply the same logic to any sort o" comparati$e

processes& The point we5re trying to ma#e here is pu%lished num%ers, you #now the unit wor#s at si/ millimeters or what ha$e you, or the pi/el si>e is &02, that5s o#ay& There5s nothing wrong with that %ut ultimately is the in"ormation content o" the data meeting, the o%1ecti$es and goals, that we5re loo#ing at and there are ways to measure that& Cow here5s another way& So here we ha$e a case o" photogrametry scanning& Photogrametry is the desired goal& So now we5re going to compare structured light scanning to a $ariety o" photogrametric methods and as e$ery%ody5s %een tal#ing a%out, there5s a %unch o" them out there, 1, 2, 3 -D atch, Photoscan, Photomodeler and so on and so "orth& !nd so what we5re doing in the ne/t process is we5re loo#ing at how these two compare& !gain, we5re %ac# to a traditional sur$eying or geomatics measurement& *e5re loo#ing at ,ausdor" distance which is not 1ust e/actly how "ar things are apart, it5s a %it more complicated than that& 7ut essentially it5s a metric that5s well understood that will tell you whether two data sets are ali#e or di""erent& 6ong story short, they5re are pretty much similar& There5s a $ariation here %ut it pro%a%ly has to do with 1ust the way the things wor#& @ne o" the data sets is "rom the 7roi#man& The 7roi#man is a $ery high end structured light scanner and the other is a Photoscan& 7y the way the camera was a anon .D 'ar#2 with a 21 point megapi/el "ull "rame sensor, all processed through a $ariety o" di""erent so"tware5s& So, here5s another way to loo# at it the same way& 9n other words, are these two the same0 ,a$e they measured the same in"ormation0 So we loo#ed at the traditional metric analysis and we said well, yeah, they5re pretty similar& 7ut let5s loo# at it again using some o" these computer $ision methods& *hat we5re loo#ing at here is a photoscan and there5s some parameters that you can set at Photoscan as we5$e tal#ed a little %it a%out& So there5s what5s called a lower power smooth, a high power smooth, and what ha$e you and then in the, 9 guess it5s your right, is the actual 7roi#man data, and again the image 9 thin# tells you the story and that is that the 7roi#man is o%$iously co$ering #ey in"ormation content that we need "or the particular analysis that we5re in$ol$ed with& *e can )uanti"y that %ut the pictures tell a thousand words essentially& So again, we ha$e a particular computational method that allows us to say ! not 7& ,ere5s another e/ample and this is particularly signi"icant& ! lot o" photogrametric methods when you5re loo#ing at uni"orm materials, you5$e got metal, you5$e got some other things that ha$e specular characteristics, sometimes the automated point matching systems ha$e a lot o" trou%le "inding #ey points whereas a structured light system in this case o%$iously is applying a pattern to the sur"ace& So in particular material cases, system ! may %e %etter than system 7& !gain, 9 won5t %ore you with the math, %ut there are actual metrics that we can say, well in "act this is %etter than that "or the "ollowing metric reason& !nother e/ample here& These are some an"ora stamps& *e5$e actually %een loo#ing at an"ora stamp erosion as an"ora were stamped, and as you get "urther along the stamps actually wear out so you need to ha$e a lot o" detail& So here5s the photographic data is the same as %e"ore& ,ere5s the data in

1,2,3-D atch with te/ture& 9t doesn5t loo# to %ad& *ithout te/ture, there5s really no 3-D data there& There5s te/ture data& ,owe$er, with the Photoscan products we do ha$e )uite a %it& ,ere5s another little %it o" an e/ample, long story short, applying the similar metrics that we loo#ed at %e"ore, the 7roi#man and the Photoscan with a standard camera are essentially similar in"ormation content& *hy get -1.0,000 scanner i" the camera will wor#& So we could loo# at these& 95m not going to go through the details& There are pluses and minuses o" these $arious particular strategies and photogrametry "or the sorts o" reasons that you5$e seen& 9 want to 1ump ahead to another point& 9 thin# this is $ery important and that is that e$en though we ha$e a lot o" interesting digital recording methods, we still ha$e silos data type ! as in silo !, data type 7 as in silo 7& They are not in similar coordinate systems, they are not organi>ed, they5re not %rought together& They5re typically loo#ed at %y indi$idual specialists& 9t5s not always that %ad %ut 9 would strongly urge a consideration "or using some integrated management& *hat you5re seeing here %y the way, is our ?9S 10&1& Ges, it doesn5t handle large point clouds that are enormous %ut what you can do is you can put reduced $ersions o" those point clouds in a similar coordinate system into H 0 I which then lin#s %ac# to the "ull resolution products and so on and so "orth& 7ut those o" you in the %uilt en$ironment !utodes# 7entley doing similar sorts o" things, point clouds and re$et and stu"", 9 thin# it is essential that all o" these data are %rought together in a common coordinate and similar so"tware en$ironment& The other thing 9 thin# that5s a%solutely essential and we5$e tal#ed a little %it a%out this, what are we going to do a%out archi$es& !ctually people ha$e already done a great deal a%out archi$es around the world and there are many institutions that ha$e these archi$es& 9 would argue and 9 mean no disrespect to the pri$ate sector, 9 actually wor# there a lot mysel", the pri$ate sector is not particularly a good en$ironment "or long term archi$al purposes& *e need institutions, whether they5re uni$ersities, whether they5re go$ernment agencies and what ha$e you, that create, a trusted repository is a term o" art %y the way, so that has certain characteristics& There are already a num%er o" these that are out there& 9n 4urope, the !DS, here in the <nited States, the digital archeological record, there are others that meet these re)uirements, the 'ellon Foundation is putting a lot o" resources into trusted digital archi$es "or a $ariety o" di""erent domain areas& ! couple o" other things a%out archi$es& 9t is essential in my opinion that the raw, unprocessed data is placed in the archi$e, that the process stac# is placed in the archi$e what did you do to it and not 1ust the "inal digital o%1ects& *e5$e tal#ed a%out ownership and stu""& There5s a solution to that& 9t5s called creati$e comments licensing& There5s creati$e comments one, two, three and so on& !ll o" our data is creati$e comments three unless otherwise speci"ied& 9 also mentioned persistent <;95s& Gou need to %e a%le to get %ac# to digital data& Gou can5t %e mo$ing it around& Gou ha$e to %e a%le to "ind it&

The other thing that5s important a%out archi$es is metadata, and we5$e tal#ed a%out how do we record it %ut how do we process it& This is a little piece o" our laser scanning wor# "low process metadata structures& So in other words, what do you record when you do this, what do you record& *hat are the meshing parameters that you use0 *hat were the hole "illing algorithms that you used and so on and so "orth as you mo$e "rom one to the other& !t the !rcheological Data Ser$ices and the Data Digital !nti)uity, there is a comprehensi$e document a%out laser scan metadata, all o" the "ield ac)uisition characteristics, the process ac)uisition characteristics& There are similar re)uirements or speci"ications "or close range photogrametry& ! num%er o" "ol#s ha$e %een mentioning that we need to %e thin#ing a%out these& 9 would encourage you to loo# at the !DS we%site, steal it, it5s pu%lic& There5s a great deal o" in"ormation, this is 1ust a little %it o" a piece o" it& So, some conclusions& *ell o%$iously, we5$e tal#ed a lot a%out processing %ut post processing and the modi"ications that you ma#e to the data are essential& ?enerally spea#ing, those process stac# operations are not captured&*e ha$e the results and we5$e e$en said and we understand in the commercial sector, it5s the result that5s the product to %e turned o$er to the client& !%solutely understood, not a pro%lem& *hen heritage recordation o" pu%lic resources that will %e around "or a long time are in$ol$ed, we ha$e a di""erent set o" responsi%ilities and re)uirements 9 would argue and that is that we need to %e a%le to return to original data "rom sometime in the past, compare, loo# at condition changes, loo# at these sorts o" things so that not only the product %ut the actual raw data and the process& So perhaps we twea# parameters& *e can change things& There5s no )uestion that in the appropriate circumstances, 3-D scanning and photogrametry %oth ha$e $ery power"ul and signi"icant goals& *e need to determine what is our metric and it should not %e three millimeters or whate$er& 9t has to %e what5s the in"ormation content that we5re trying to achie$e at the end and oh, %y the way, we need three millimeters to get there& First o" all, it5s essential& 9t is a%solutely re)uired that in the "ield that the appropriate metadata and process metadata are recorded and made part o" the archi$e in"ormation& So, stay hungry, stay "oolish is an o%1ecti$e that we had %ac# then, and 9 thin# it5s still entirely appropriate and one "inal comment 95ll call to your attention& *e5$e %een a%le to de$elop a lot o" these process analyses and the other aspects that 95$e tal#ed a%out here today as a result o" a multiyear "airly su%stantial CSF grant and so there5s ?'J&test& H0I&edu and it5s still under de$elopment& *e5$e got a%out another si/ months %e"ore the money runs out, and o" course we5re trying to get e$erything done in the ne/t si/ months, %ut in any e$ent, you can see wor# "lows& Gou can go in and say 9 ha$e this particular o%1ecti$e, clic# on it, it will ta#e you to a discussion o" a scanner selection criteria, clic# on that, it will ta#e you to what are the parameters that you need to set "or pole "illing and so on and so "orth& !gain, not all there& Please %ear with us %ut 9 do encourage you to $isit the site& Than# you $ery much& Speaker Bio

8atie Simon earned a 'asters o" !rts in !nthropology "rom the <ni$ersity o" !r#ansas "ocusing on computer and remote sensing applications in archaeology including ground-%ased, aerial and satellite methods& This "ollowed se$eral years o" cultural resource management wor# in the !merican southwest "or %oth "ederal agency and pri$ate consulting "irm positions& She has wor#ed "or the enter "or !d$anced Spatial Technologies "or "our years and speciali>es in 3D scanning applications in heritage management including de$elopment o" data collection and processing methodologies and standards& She has "ield e/perience throughout the !mericas, 4urope, the 'iddle 4ast and in !"rica& ;achel @pit> wor#s at the ;esearch !ssociate enter "or !d$anced Spatial Technologies 3K1 J7,T,

<ni$ersity o" !r#ansas& She wor#s with lose-range photogrammetry $s& 3D scanning "or archaeological documentation+ comparing data capture, processing and model generation in the "ield and the la%