While each method of 3D data acquisition and modeling has advantages in terms of accuracy and precision, other factors such as data collection and processing times must be considered when deciding on the most suitable. The differences between methods are evaluated and assessed in relation to analyzing artifact densities within deposits. Point clouds created with data collected by total station, photogrammetry, and terrestrial LiDAR using simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) are compared, as well as different methods for generating surface area and volumes with triangulated meshes and convex hulls. We evaluate 3D construction processes using data from Waitetoke, Ahuahu Great Mercury Island, Ao-tearoa, New Zealand. The construction of these volumes presents challenges that originate in computer-aided design (CAD) but have implications for how data are used in archaeological analysis. Simple analysis of 3D data includes calculating the volumes of bound entities, such as deposits and features, and determining the spatial relationships of arti-facts within these. Three-dimensional data are often recorded during archaeological excavations, with the provenience of deposits, features, and artefacts documented by a variety of methods. Traditionally, the focus of these data has been visualization as opposed to analysis. This work presents an innovative solution applicable to other pieces of cultural heritage and has high significance for promotion.Ĭollection of 3D data in archaeology is a long-standing practice. At the same time, we also conducted preliminary performance tests on the 3D printing material of the prosthesis, and the results showed that the material has excellent mechanical properties and stain resistance, contributing to the long-term, stable preservation of the artifact. While completing the physical/aesthetic restoration of the artifact, the conservation–restoration principles of the integrity and authenticity of cultural heritage, minimal intervention and reversibility were followed to the utmost extent. In this paper, we applied a combination of digital acquisition, virtual anastylosis, virtual reconstruction, and 3D printing of a transparent reversible prosthesis with slots for the restoration of a gold foil decorated Black Ding bowl collected by the Chifeng Museum of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. However, in the majority of cases, researchers have mainly relied on 3D technologies to assist the conventional conservation–restoration process, and its advantages have not truly been exploited. In recent years, 3D technology has been widely used in various aspects of the entire workflow of conservation–restoration. A prototype implementation of ARtefact will be validated in pilot studies conducted in an active archeological excavation site and an archeological museum in Greece.KeywordsArchaeologyExcavationConservationArtefactDigital documentationMetadataKnowledge managementSemantic linkingMobile applicationAuthoring toolAugmented realityVirtual reality ARtefact accounts for several end-products: a mobile digital documentation application (executed on mobile devices with built-in depth sensors) which addresses the needs of all stakeholders involved in the documentation of the excavation process and its findings (mainly field archeologists and conservators) a web-based knowledge management tool which enables archaeologists to specify semantic relationships between digital resources authoring tools used by curators and archaeologists without any technical expertise to create custom AR/VR applications which allow users to retrieve and interact with the ARtefact digital resources, thus enhancing the experience of -physical and virtual- visits in archaeological sites and museum exhibitions. Herein, we propose ARtefact, a conceptual framework which encompasses an integrated technological toolset supporting the digital documentation, knowledge management and interactive presentation of digital resources produced throughout the archaeological excavation and the study/conservation of Artefacts. Currently available technological aids in the broader area of digital archaeology are limited in scope, while most are not interoperable. The information management of archaeological excavations (and the follow-up conservation and restoration of excavated objects) is complex, time consuming and laborious in practice.

Project multipatch