Scientific rigour of online platforms for 3D visualization of heritage
Scientific rigour of online platforms for 3D visualization of heritage
复制标题
遗产 3D 可视化在线平台的科学严谨性
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Nataska Statham
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nataska Statham
3D可视化-包括3D扫描和3D重建-设计为更大的考古学的一部分，历史或文化遗产项目通常通过在线平台与公众分享，这些平台不一定是为遗产展示而设计的，而且往往无法将其置于背景中。本文旨在评估五个在线平台是否目前，在国际古迹遗址理事会（ICOMOS）和联合国教育、科学及文化组织（UNESCO）的指导方针基础上，通常用于分享遗产3D可视化的工具（Google Arts & Culture、CyArk、3DHOP、Sketchfab和游戏引擎）提供了促进其科学严谨性和社区参与的功能。作者首先总结了与遗产3D可视化相关的32项国际准则的建议，并将其浓缩为9项关键标准：多学科团队，目标驱动的方法和工具，仔细的文件，重建类型和确定性，真实性，替代假设，多个历史时期，尊重使用遗产和社区参与。作者继续审查上述平台，将其功能与这九项建议进行比较，并得出结论，虽然目前有可用的功能可以帮助提升3D可视化的科学严谨性及其对公众的情境化，它们不是强制性的，很少使用。本文最后建议使用一个信息包，以支持遗产的3D可视化，公共在线平台。亮点：遗产3D可视化在线平台未能披露其重建类型及其确定性水平，难以平衡社区参与与其内容的科学严谨性。ICOMOS和联合国教科文组织关于遗产的建议在审查的平台上得到松散的遵循，并且通常缺乏支持文件。这些平台上的科学严谨性可以通过支持文本字段来提升，以披露有关每个可视化的进一步信息。
3D visualisations –including 3D scans and 3D reconstructions–designed as part of larger archaeology, history or cultural heritage projects are commonly shared with the public through online platforms that were not necessarily designed to host heritage representations and often fail to contextualize them. This paper seeks to evaluate whether five online platforms commonly used today to share 3D visualisations of heritage (Google Arts & Culture, CyArk, 3DHOP, Sketchfab and game engines) offer features that facilitate their scientific rigour and community participation, based on guidelines from International Council on Monuments and Sites(ICOMOS)and United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization(UNESCO). The author starts by summarizing recommendations from 32 international guidelines that are relevant to the 3D visualization of heritage, condensing them into nine key criteria: multi-disciplinary teams, objective-driven methodology and tools, careful documentation, type of reconstruction and level of certainty, authenticity, alternative hypotheses, multiple historical periods, respectful use of the heritage, and community engagement. The author proceeds to review the platforms above comparing their features with these nine recommendations and concludes that, while there are currently available features that could help to elevate the scientific rigour of the 3D visualisations and their contextualization to the public, they are not mandatory and are seldom used. The paper finishes with a recommendation for an information package to support3D visualisations of heritage on public online platforms.Highlights:Online platforms for the 3D visualization of heritage fail to disclose what type of reconstruction it is and its level of certainty, struggling to balance community engagement vs scientific rigour of their contents.ICOMOS and UNESCO recommendations regarding heritage are loosely followed on the reviewed platforms, and supporting documentation is often lacking.Scientific rigour on these platforms could be elevated with supporting textual fields to disclose further information about each visualisation.