Fracturing artefacts into 3D printable puzzles to enhance audience engagement with heritage collections

Three-dimensional (3D) puzzles of heritage artefacts are typically used to engage audiences in the interpretation of archaeological objects in a museum gallery. The reason for this is that a puzzle can be seen as an enjoyable educational activity in the form of a game but also as a complex activity that archaeologists undertake when re-assembling fragments, for instance, of broken pottery. Until now the creation of this type of experiences is mostly a manual process and the artefacts used rarely reflect those in the collection due to the complex nature of the process. The contribution of this article is a novel digital worfklow for the design and fabrication of 3D puzzles that overcomes these limitations. The input to the workflow is an authentic artefact from a heritage collection, which is then digitised using technologies such as 3D scanning and 3D modelling. Thereafter, a puzzle generator system produces the puzzle pieces using a cell fracture algorithm and generates a set of puzzle pieces (female) and a single core piece (male) for fabrication. Finally, the pieces are fabricated using 3D printing technology and post-processed to facilitate the puzzle assembly. To demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed novel workflow, we deployed it to create a puzzle activity of the Saltdean urn, which is exhibited at the Archaeology Gallery of the Brighton Museum and Art Gallery. The workflow is also used with further artefacts to demonstrate its applicability to other shapes. The significance of this research is that it eases the task of creating puzzle-like activities and maintaining them in the long term within a busy public space such as a museum gallery

Virtual Heritage

Virtual heritage has been explained as virtual reality applied to cultural heritage, but this definition only scratches the surface of the fascinating applications, tools and challenges of this fast-changing interdisciplinary field. This book provides an accessible but concise edited coverage of the main topics, tools and issues in virtual heritage. Leading international scholars have provided chapters to explain current issues in accuracy and precision; challenges in adopting advanced animation techniques; shows how archaeological learning can be developed in Minecraft; they propose mixed reality is conceptual rather than just technical; they explore how useful Linked Open Data can be for art history; explain how accessible photogrammetry can be but also ethical and practical issues for applying at scale; provide insight into how to provide interaction in museums involving the wider public; and describe issues in evaluating virtual heritage projects not often addressed even in scholarly papers. The book will be of particular interest to students and scholars in museum studies, digital archaeology, heritage studies, architectural history and modelling, virtual environments

Virtual Heritage

Virtual heritage has been explained as virtual reality applied to cultural heritage, but this definition only scratches the surface of the fascinating applications, tools and challenges of this fast-changing interdisciplinary field. This book provides an accessible but concise edited coverage of the main topics, tools and issues in virtual heritage. Leading international scholars have provided chapters to explain current issues in accuracy and precision; challenges in adopting advanced animation techniques; shows how archaeological learning can be developed in Minecraft; they propose mixed reality is conceptual rather than just technical; they explore how useful Linked Open Data can be for art history; explain how accessible photogrammetry can be but also ethical and practical issues for applying at scale; provide insight into how to provide interaction in museums involving the wider public; and describe issues in evaluating virtual heritage projects not often addressed even in scholarly papers. The book will be of particular interest to students and scholars in museum studies, digital archaeology, heritage studies, architectural history and modelling, virtual environments

Rethinking the role of ICTs - Digital transformation and Culture enjoyment continuity

This document will analyse recent trends and evolution of the use of ICTs in the field of cultural heritage from a different standpoint, the service provision in the age of digital transition and pandemic. The initial focus is on the usual approach in the field of goods, proper design to elicit a positive feeling by potential customers. Recently a new type of good has been identified, service. Services grown up incredibly in the pandemic, goods delivery, food delivery, and more. So, thinking at services like a good we must design them to better the appreciation by customers as since the early XX century the people did with objects and merchandise. Appling the same approach to digital services a design phase is required together with all the different components that will provide a positive feedback from the user, this means to deal with interaction design, user centred approach, usability guidelines and the overall concept of positive user experience. Recent trends and reborn technologies like the path from edutainment to serious games and gamification, the new approach to immersive interactive technologies in a nonintrusive format. Last but relevant the need to take the momentum to ensure the culture enjoyment continuity in case of crisis

Touching the past: developing and evaluating tangible AR interfaces for manipulating virtual representations of historical artefacts

Tangible User Interfaces (TUIs) and Augmented Reality (AR) are two advanced technologies that are becoming highly integrated into the cultural heritage domain, TUIs give physical form to manipulate digital information, while AR allows superimposing virtual objects in the physical environment. The common sign “do not touch” is visible on every museum visit toalert visitors not to touch the collections on display. This practice-led thesis aimed at developing and evaluating ARcheoBox, a walk-up-and-use tangible augmented reality prototype that would ‘bring historical artefacts to life’ using a collection of Bronze Age artefacts from the Northumberland National Park in the North East of England. While tangible interactions became widely and successfully implemented in museums, exhibits are still site-specific and theme-specific, on the other hand, ARcheoBox employs generic physical objects as tangible AR interfaces that offer physical access to otherwise inaccessible artefacts removing any physical barriers encountered using more common touch screen interface. The thesis follows a Research through Design (RtD) methodology; supported by the researcher's reflective practitioner lens and co-designing which involved multiple stakeholders in the design process. The practical contribution of this thesis ‘ARcheoBox’demonstrates the implementation of tangible AR interfaces for manipulating virtual representations and interacting with interpretation of historical artefacts in augmented reality. ARcheoBox was installed as a stand-alone exhibit at The Sill: National Landscape Discovery Centre. The theoretical contribution of this thesis proposes a conceptual framework that contributes original knowledge to the literature on developing and evaluating tangible AR interfaces for manipulating virtual representations of historical artefacts. The conceptual framework presents four core themes: Interactivity, Learning, Engagement, Usability. The core themes encompass four main concepts: Tangible Interfaces, Gesture Interactions, Mapping, andSystem Usability. The four main concepts are aligned to 10 key aspects where each aspect is defined and contributes with design characteristics for ARcheoBox. These key aspects inform the future design space of tangible AR interfaces, and aid to guide the design process of developing and evaluating tangible AR interfaces for manipulating virtual representations of historical artefacts

Rigor científico de las plataformas en línea para la visualización 3D del patrimonio

[EN] 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.[ES] Las visualizaciones 3D –incluyendo los escaneados3D y las reconstrucciones 3D–desarrolladas como parte de proyectos más extensos de arqueología, historia o patrimonio cultural, comúnmente se comparten con el público a través de plataformas online que no necesariamente fueron diseñadas para alojar representaciones patrimoniales y que fallan frecuentemente al contextualizarlas. Este artículo busca evaluar si cinco plataformas en línea comúnmente utilizadas hoy para compartir visualizaciones 3D del patrimonio (Google Arts & Culture, CyArk, 3DHOP, Sketchfab y motores de juegos) ofrecen características que facilitan su rigor científico y participación comunitaria, basadas en recomendaciones de las directrices del Consejo Internacional de Monumentos y Sitios (ICOMOS)y de la Organización para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (UNESCO).La autora comienza resumiendo las recomendaciones de 32 directrices internacionales que son relevantes para la visualización 3D del patrimonio, agrupándolas en nueve criterios clave: equipos multidisciplinares, metodología basada en objetivos, documentación cuidadosa, tipo de reconstrucción y nivel de certeza, autenticidad, hipótesis alternativas, múltiples períodos históricos, uso respetuoso del patrimonio, y participación comunitaria. La autora procede a revisar las plataformas comparando sus características con estas nueve recomendaciones y concluye que si bien existen características actualmente disponibles que podrían ayudar a elevar el rigor científico de las visualizaciones 3D y contextualizarlas al público, tales no son obligatorias y rara vez se usan. El documento finaliza con recomendaciones que podrían acompañar las visualizaciones 3D del patrimonio en plataformas públicas en la red.Statham, N. (2019). Scientific rigour of online platforms for 3D visualization of heritage. Virtual Archaeology Review. 10(20):1-16. https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2019.9715SWORD1161020DHOP(2018). 3DHOP: 3D Heritage Online Presenter. Retrieved September20,2018 from: http://3DHOP.net/contacts.phpAdams, E.(2010).Fundamentals of Game Design.2nded.Berkeley, USA: New Riders.Brunetaud, X., De Luca, L., Janvier-Badosa, S., Beck, K.,& Al-Mukhtar ,M.(2012).Application of digital techniques in monument preservation. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering,16(5), 543-556. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2012.676365Caro, J.L., &Hansen, S. (2015).From photogrammetry to the dissemination of archaeological heritage using game engines: Menga case study. Virtual Archaeology Review,6(12), 58-68.doi:https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2015.4159Denard, Hugh (Ed.) (2009).The London Charter for the Computer-Based Visualisation of Cultural Heritage. London, UK: King's College London.Epic Games (2018). Unreal Engine [Computer software].Cary, North Carolina, USA: Epic Games.Esclapés, J., Tejerina, D., Esquembre, M. A., & Bolufer, J. (2013).Methodological proposal to generate interactive virtual walkthrough. Virtual Archaeology Review, 4(9), 212-222.doi:https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2013.4276Figueiredo, C. (2014). Escala de Evidência Histórica/Arqueológica. Retrieved December 5, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2CGJey3Grau, O.,& De Gruyter, W.(2017).Museum and Archive on the Move: Changing Cultural Institutions in the Digital Era(pp. 216-231).Berlin: GmbH & Co KG. Gravitate (2017). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110529630Gravitate: Geometric Reconstruction And noVel semantIc reunificaTion of culturAl heriTage objEcts. Retrieved December 3, 2017, fromhttp://gravitate-project.euGrosman, L. (2016). Reaching the point of no return: The computational revolution in archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 45, 129-145. doi:https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102215-095946ICOMOS (1964). International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (The Venice Charter 1964).Second International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic Monuments. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from http://bit.ly/1UcG8YGICOMOS (1982). The Florence Charter 1981.Florence International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). Retrieved December 10, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2mfzTXUICOMOS (1982a). Declaration of Dresden on the "Reconstruction of Monuments Destroyed by War". ICOMOS. Retrieved December 17, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2m9gSpaICOMOS (1987).Charter for the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas (Washington Charter 1987). Washington DC International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). Retrieved December 17, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2EowdtDICOMOS (1990). Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage. Lausanne International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2CU45lJICOMOS(1994). The Nara Document on Authenticity. Nara International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). Retrieved December 3, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2CWyzCCICOMOS (1996). Charter on the Protection and Management of Underwater Cultural Heritage. Sofia 11th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2AKiKdqICOMOS (1996a). Principles for the recording of monuments, groups of buildings and sites. Sofia 11th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2AKiKdqICOMOS (1998). Declaration of ICOMOS Marking the 50th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. ICOMOS. Retrieved December 17, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2FjyyXYICOMOS (1999). International Cultural Tourism Charter: Managing Tourism at Places of Heritage Significance. Mexico 12th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2AKixa8ICOMOS (1999a).Charter on the Built Vernacular Heritage.Mexico 12th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved 10 December 2017, from http://bit.ly/2CRYdIZICOMOS (1999b). Principles for the Preservation of Historic Timber Structures. Mexico 12th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved 10 December 2017, from http://bit.ly/2AI9TbOICOMOS (2003). ICOMOS Charter -Principles for the Analysis, Conversation and Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage. Victoria Falls 14th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2CWzAdUICOMOS (2003a). ICOMOS Principles for the Preservation and Conservation-Restoration of Wall Paintings (2003).Victoria Falls: 14th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved November 18, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2mgYUBUICOMOS (2005).Xi'an Declaration on the Conservation of the Setting of Heritage Structures, Sites and Areas. Xi'an 15th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2Dc1sbYICOMOS (2008).The ICOMOS Charter on Cultural Routes. Québec 16th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2qGK6BjICOMOS (2008a). The ICOMOS Charter for the Interpretation and Presentation of Cultural Heritage Sites. Québec 16th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2FgoeQvICOMOS (2008b). Québec Declaration on the Preservation of the Spirit of Place. Québec 16th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2CGxFa1ICOMOS (2011). The Paris Declaration on Heritage as a Driver of Development.Paris 17th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2DbZXdQICOMOS (2011a).Joint ICOMOS-TICCIH Principles for the Conversation of Industrial Heritage Sites, Structures, Areas and Landscapes (The Dublin Principles).Paris 17th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2mg9BVgICOMOS (2011b).The Valletta Principles for the Safeguarding and Management of Historic Cities, Towns and Urban Areas. Valetta 17th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2AHoR21ICOMOS (2014).The Delhi Declaration on Heritage and Democracy. New Delhi 19th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from http://bit.ly/2merZxUICOMOS (2017).The Florence Declaration on Heritage Landscape as Human Values.Florence18th ICOMOS General Assembly. Retrieved December 3, 2017, from https://bit.ly/2MQB1eOINSULA V 1 (2018). INSULA V 1: The Swedish Pompeii Project. Retrieved 20 September 2018 from: http://www.pompejiprojektet.seKacyra, B.(2009). CyArk 500 -3D Documentation of 500 Important Cultural Heritage Sites. Fritsch, D.(Ed.) Photogrammetric Week '09,315-320.Lima Declaration (2010). Lima Declaration for Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage. Lima International Symposium 2010. Retrieved November 18, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2AHx3PKLloyd, J. (2016).Contextualizing 3D Cultural Heritage. Digital Heritage. Progress in Cultural Heritage: Documentation, Preservation, and Protection. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 10058, 859-868. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48496-9_69Lužnik, N.,& Klein, M.(2015).Interdisciplinary Workflow for Virtual Archaeology. 2015 Digital Heritage, 177-180. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2015.7419481Manferdini, A.M., Gasperoni, S., Guidi, F.,& Marchesi, M.(2016). Unveiling Damnatio Memoriae. The use of 3D digital technologies for the virtual reconstruction of archaeological finds and artefacts. Virtual Archaeology Review,7(15), 9-17. doi: https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2016.5871Mccall, J.(2016). Teaching history with digital historical games: an introduction to the field and best practices. Simulation & Gaming, 47(4), 517-542. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878116646693Principles of Seville (2011). International Principles of Virtual Archaeology (Principles of Seville 2011). Seville: INNOVA/SEAV. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2md2NH4Sabina ,J. Á.R., Valle, D.G., Ruiz, C.P., García, J.M.M.,& Laguna, A.G.(2015).Aerial Photogrammetry by drone in archaeological sites with large structures. Methodological approach and practical application in the medieval castles of Campo de Montiel. Virtual Archaeology Review, 6(13), 5-19. doi: https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2015.4366Scopigno, R., Callieri, M., Dellepiane, M., Ponchio, F.,& Potenziani, M. (2017).Delivering and using 3D models on the web: are we ready? Virtual Archaeology Review, 8(17), 1-9.doi:https://doi.org/10.4995/var.2017.6405Schreier, J.(2017). Why Video Games Cost So Much to Make. Kotaku. Retrieved from https://kotaku.com/why-video-games-cost-so-much-to-make-1818508211The Athens Charter (1931). The Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments. First International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic Monuments. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2CWzAdUThe Charter of Krakow (2000). Principles for the Conservation and Restoration of Built Heritage (The Charter of Krakow 2000).International Conference on Conservation "Krakow 2000". Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2mfKbHyUNESCO (1972).Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. UNESCO General Conference, Seventeenth session. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1xBRhFOUNESCO (2002). Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage: 30th Anniversary (1972-2002). World Heritage Committee, Twenty-sixth session. Retrieved 17 December 2017, from http://bit.ly/2mamwHIUNESCO (2008). World Heritage Information Kit. UNESCO & World Heritage Centre. Retrieved 17 December 2017, from http://bit.ly/2EnNva2Unity Technologies (2018). Unity [Computer software]. San Francisco, USA: Unity Technologies.Wilson-Barnao, C. (2017). How algorithmic cultural recommendation influence the marketing of cultural collections. Consumption Markets & Culture, 20(6), 559-574. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10253866.2017.1331910World Heritage Centre (2016).Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention.UNESCO & World Heritage Centre.Retrieved December 17, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2CIdSH

Archaeology of Digital Environments: Tools, Methods, and Approaches

Digital archaeologists use digital tools for conducting archaeological work, but their potential also lies in applying archaeological thinking and methods to understanding digital built environments (i.e., software) as contemporary examples of human settlement, use, and abandonment. This thesis argues for digital spaces as archaeological artifacts, sites, and landscapes that can be investigated in both traditional and non-traditional ways. At the core of my research is the fundamental argument that human-occupied digital spaces can be studied archaeologically with existing and modified theory, tools, and methods to reveal that human occupation and use of synthetic worlds is similar to how people behave in the natural world. Working digitally adds new avenues of investigation into human behavior in relation to the things people make, modify, and inhabit. In order to investigate this argument, the thesis focuses on three video game case studies, each using different kinds of archaeology specifically chosen to help understand the software environments being researched: 1) epigraphy, stylometry, and text analysis for the code-artifact of Colossal Cave Adventure; 2) photogrammetry, 3D printing, GIS mapping, phenomenology, and landscape archaeology within the designed, digital heritage virtual reality game-site of Skyrim VR; 3) actual survey and excavation of 30 heritage sites for a community of displaced human players in the synthetic landscape of No Man’s Sky. My conclusions include a blended approach to conducting future archaeological fieldwork in digital built environments, one that modifies traditional approaches to archaeological sites and material in a post/transhuman landscape. As humanity continues trending towards constant digital engagement, archaeologists need to be prepared to study how digital places are settled, used, and abandoned. This thesis takes a step in that direction using the vernacular of games as a starting point

DATAM: Digital Approaches to Teaching the Ancient Mediterranean

DATAM: Digital Approaches to Teaching the Ancient Mediterranean provides a series of new critical studies that explore digital practices for teaching the Ancient Mediterranean world at a wide range of institutions and levels. These practical examples demonstrate how gaming, coding, immersive video, and 3D imaging can bridge the disciplinary and digital divide between the Ancient world and contemporary technology, information literacy, and student engagement. While the articles focus on Classics, Ancient History, and Mediterranean archaeology, the issues and approaches considered throughout this book are relevant for anyone who thinks critically and practically about the use of digital technology in the college level classroom. DATAM features contributions from Sebastian Heath, Lisl Walsh, David Ratzan, Patrick Burns, Sandra Blakely, Eric Poehler, William Caraher, Marie-Claire Beaulieu and Anthony Bucci as well as a critical introduction by Shawn Graham and preface by Society of Classical Studies Executive Director Helen Cullyer.https://commons.und.edu/press-books/1015/thumbnail.jp

The People Inside

Our collection begins with an example of computer vision that cuts through time and bureaucratic opacity to help us meet real people from the past. Buried in thousands of files in the National Archives of Australia is evidence of the exclusionary “White Australia” policies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which were intended to limit and discourage immigration by non-Europeans. Tim Sherratt and Kate Bagnall decided to see what would happen if they used a form of face-detection software made ubiquitous by modern surveillance systems and applied it to a security system of a century ago. What we get is a new way to see the government documents, not as a source of statistics but, Sherratt and Bagnall argue, as powerful evidence of the people affected by racism