Digital data preservation is complex and multi-layered. The digital humanities brings unique challenges and opportunities to "keeping data alive" that are leading to innovative cross- disciplinary solutions. Data preservation involves standards, guidelines, open-source vs. proprietary software, accessibility, and much more. While establishing best practices, cultivating a community of experts, and developing infrastructure for 3D data used in cultural heritage has been the focus of several coordinated efforts in Europe over the past decade (Campana and Remondino 2014; Fresa and Prandoni 2015; Vecchio et al. 2015), efforts have been less systematic in the United States. Recently, however, digital humanities practitioners have spearheaded 3D data preservation and sharing in the United States.
While scholars working with 3D data must deal with management and sustainability issues (Galeazzi 2016; Richards-Rissetto and von Schwerin 2017), endeavors are typically tailored to individual projects. To broaden and coordinate efforts, the Community Standards for 3D Data Preservation (CS3DP) project is bringing together librarians, curators, technical specialists, and scholars to begin the process of developing standards for preservation and sharing of digital 3D data. While long-term archival of these data, for example, in a dark archive, is integral to our research (Koller et al. 2010), the MayaCityBuilder project is contributing to “keeping data alive” by developing workflows to supporting reuse and repurposing of procedurally-generated 3D data in the humanities.
While many types of 3D models are being used in humanities scholarship, the case study focuses on 3D models of ancient Maya architecture generated from multiple data sources including architectural drawings, excavation reports, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and airborne LiDAR. To contribute to 3D data preservation efforts, while maintaining realistic goals, the MayaCityBuilder Project focuses on procedural modeling—rapid prototyping of 3D models from a set of rules. Procedural modeling is ideally suited for the development of 3D modeling standards that promote data interoperability, dissemination, and reuse because they bring with them the underlying metadata, paradata (information about modeling choices) (Bentkowska-Kafel et al. 2016), and descriptive data (e.g., data sources, textures, building type).
Within these circumstances, the two objectives of the “keeping data alive” component of the MayaCityBuilder Project, supported by a Tier I Research and Development Grant from the Division of Preservation and Access of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), are to develop
workflows: (1) to generate, store, and make accessible 3D models of ancient architecture in open-source and proprietary software to foster data (re)use and (2) to host, deliver, and visualize these 3D models, linked to metadata, paradata, and descriptive data, in 3D visualization environments. These objectives are part of a larger goal to contribute to
innovative methods of materials analysis and new modes of discourse using interactive 3D web visualizations. To achieve this goal requires not only data accessibility but also data compatibility—scholars must also be able to combine and recombine data for reuse and repurposing.
The ability to efficiently generate, store, deliver, and visualize models in an interactive 3D web- based environment will help keep data alive by fostering collaborative and comparative humanities research. We focus on procedural models because they can be quickly generated and are directly linked to metadata and paradata. 3D models allow scholars to test architectural reconstructions and situate them within landscapes to investigate spatial relationships at multiple scales while providing a sense of embodiment (Barcelo et al. 2000; Dylla et al. 2010; Frischer and Dakouri-Hild 2008; Richards-Rissetto and Plessing 2015; Saldana 2015). However, the diversity of 3D data types, tools, and technologies in combination with a lack of standards requires workflows to promote reuse and repurposing of 3D data to contribute to long-term access and preservation of 3D data.
3D Heritage Online Presenter (3DHOP).
http://vcg.isti.cnr.it/3dhop/index.php; last accessed on 04/24/18
Barcelo, J., M. Forte, and D. Sanders. (2000). Virtual Reality in Archaeology. BAR Int. Series 843.
Bentkowska-Kafel, A., Denard, H., Baker, D. (Eds.), (2016). Paradata and Transparency in Virtual Heritage – Digital Research in the Arts and Humanities Series. Routledge Taylor & Francis, London.
Campana, S., & Remondino, F. (2014). 3D modelling in archaeology and cultural heritage: theory and best practice. BAR Int. Series 2598.
Dylla, K., B. Frischer, P. Mueller, A. Ulmer, and S. Haegler. (2009). Rome Reborn 2.0: A Case Study of Virtual City Reconstruction Using Procedural Modeling Techniques. In Making History Interactive, pp. 62-66. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Fresa, A., Justrell, B., & Prandoni, C. (2015). Digital curation and quality standards for memory institutions: PREFORMA research project. Archival Science, 15(2), 191-216.
Frischer, B. and A. Dakouri-Hild (eds). (2008). Beyond illustration: 2d and 3d digital technologies as tools for discover in archaeology. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Galeazzi, F, M. Callieri, M. Dellepiane, M. Charno, J. Richards, R. Scopigno. (2016). Web-based visualization for 3D data in archaeology: The ADS 3D viewer. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 9: 1-11.
Galeazzi, F. (2016). Towards the definition of best 3D practices in archaeology: Assessing 3D documentation techniques for intra-site data recording. Journal of Cultural heritage 17: 159-169.
Koller, D., Frischer, B. and G. Humphreys. (2010). Research challenges for digital archives of 3D cultural heritage models. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 2(3):7:1-7:17.
Opitz, R., Marcello Mogetta, and Nicola Terrenato. (2016). A Mid-Republican House from Gabii. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Richards-Rissetto, H. and R. Plessing. (2015). “Procedural Modeling for Ancient Maya Cityscapes: Initial Methodological Challenges and Solutions.” 2015 Digital Heritage International Congress, Volume 2: 85-
88. IEEE Conference Publications.
Richards-Rissetto, H. and J. von Schwerin. (2017). A Catch 22 of 3D Data Sustainability: Lessons in 3D Archaeological Data Management & Accessibility. Journal of Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage. 6: 38-48.
Saldana, M. (2015). An Integrated Approach to the Procedural Modeling of Ancient Cities and Buildings. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, Volume 30, Issue suppl_1, 1 December 2015, Pages i148–i163,
Vecchio, P., Mele, F., De Paolis, L. T., Epicoco, I., Mancini, M., & Aloisio, G. (2015). Cloud Computing and Augmented Reality for Cultural Heritage. In Augmented and Virtual Reality (pp. 51-60). Springer International Publishing.
von Schwerin, J. , H. Richards-Rissetto, F. Remondino, and G. Agugiaro. (2013). “The MayaArch3D Project: A 3D WebGIS for Analyzing Ancient Maya Architecture and Landscapes at Copan, Honduras.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 28(4):736-753.
If this content appears in violation of your intellectual property rights, or you see errors or omissions, please reach out to Scott B. Weingart to discuss removing or amending the materials.
Hosted at El Colegio de México, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) (National Autonomous University of Mexico)
Mexico City, Mexico
June 26, 2018 - June 29, 2018
340 works by 859 authors indexed
Conference website: https://dh2018.adho.org/