Constructing accurate digital models of archaeological sites using computer graphics has been a goal of many archaeologists since the genesis of computing. One early example in 1984 focused on creating an educational game called Mound Dig aimed at 11 to 14-year-olds to educate them about Viking history and archaeological methodology (Dean and Nichol 1984). Though the game lacked sophisticated graphics, this early educational interface worked on an
interactive turn-base system, similar to the classic Oregon Trail. Computer graphics swiftly improved through the 1980s, propelled by the early video game systems, such as Atari, and increased demand for CAD (computer aided drafting) software for the architecture and design industries. Though the creation of digital terrain modeling has its roots in the late 1970s, it was not until the mid-1980s that the computing technology allowed for more detailed 3D
reconstructions of sites based on these data (Eisler et al. 1988:109-111; Reilly 1991). Early creation and use of these models required a great deal of specialized knowledge in low-level computer programming and database management, though Eisler et al. (1988) point to the benefits of this emerging form of visualization through their work in Egypt, in part to create a series of reconstructions showing the Mortuary Temple of Raneferef through various stages of construction (Figure 2-9). The list of benefits for this form of visualization includes “the
flexibility and modifiability of the model and its individual parts”, “the capability of constructing very extensive models at a considerable degree of detail”, “the capability of making use of different graphic outputs based on a single set of data and a single model”, and “the suitability of the model as a base of a topological component of a database of archaeological excavation information”, among others (Eisler et al. 1988:121).
Figure 2-9: Digital reconstruction of the Mortuary Temple of Raneferef, 1988 From final construction phase (Image from Eisler et al. 1988:125)
Paul Reilly refers to these digital model reconstructions as ‘solid modelling’ and points to their use in animated tours and museum exhibits as early as 1985 “enable[ing] people to fully appreciate the scale and relationship of elements within a limited number of archaeological remains” (Reilly 1991:2). “Impressive though such enormous projects are,” Reilly (1991:2) cautions, “a gap still remains between the interpretation and the original data. It is not readily apparent how one gets from the dig to the interpretation”. As with the work of Proskouriakoff, Reilly emphasizes the importance of in-situ and interpretive demarcation.
Third party game engines like Unity or Unreal have been used in forms of archaeological display since they became commercially available in the 1990s; prior to this, most high-quality computer graphics rendering was either proprietary to a game console or prohibitively expensive (Kantner 2000). As the medium began to require less specialized knowledge and expense, digital modeling and visualization became more accessible to archaeologists as tools for both presentation and enhanced inquiry. Through the intersections of GIS, advanced computer processing and graphics, questions began to be asked regarding space that were previously unable to be addressed quantifiably, such as those examined in Michael Anderson’s (2004) work using digital model-based visibility analysis (along with the Unreal game engine) to understand use and privacy within a Pompeii residence (Figure 2-10). Though the use of the media became more common, the issues of accuracy and interpretation remained at the forefront of academic discussions regarding digital visualization. In John Kantner’s work of reconstructing the kivas of Chaco Canyon, he and his team of advanced students focused intently on the compromises and inferences made by the modeler, as much of the relevant data is always lacking to produce complete accuracy (Kantner 2000).
Figure 2-10: Digital model used in viewshed interpretation
Casa di Trebius Valens in Pompeii. (Left) residence floorplan, (Right) viewshed analysis (Image from Anderson 2004:185-186)
During the last decade, advancements in laser scanning, both airborne and terrestrial, have allowed for the digital reconstruction of highly accurate models of features, artifacts, and landscapes through point-cloud generation. Many modern techniques for digital modeling of archaeological sites rely on generating point-clouds through laser scanning or photogrammetric software, though the earlier methods of building digital models on geographical information systems (GIS) data still remains a common practice (as seen in this very project). Point-clouds are collections of individual points within three-dimensional space that record visual and locational data. Dense point-clouds can be indistinguishable from photos until manipulated in 3D space. Point-clouds, along with advancements in computer imaging software, game design, GIS, and remote sensing, have opened new techniques for archaeological investigation and
presentation in the form of accurate immersive environments with details recorded earnestly and accurately at the time of the data collection.
Constructing and navigating space is an experiential process, most accurately represented through full sensory immersion. Though technology has not yet brought us a form of full
sensory immersion, it allows VR and AR users to engage more organically with the items and places. However, this technology is often used as an entertaining experience for the public, and is created in consultation with historians and archaeologists, though not under their direct control. Museums have contracted with technological visualization studios to create many experiences that seem more akin to amusement park rides than the VR and AR systems that are available on the commercial market (Figure 2-11). However, we are experiencing a rise in the commercial availability of VR and AR platforms, broadening opportunities for both use and program development by making it easier to access and learn these technologies. Some
archeologists have extended their research into virtual reconstructions, both for public education and as interpretive frameworks, as will be explored further in the following case studies.
Figure 2-11: Educational VR examples
(Left) StonehengeVR by Voyager VR, currently featured at the Pacific Coast Science Center in Seattle, WA. From https://i.ytimg.com/vi/M1er49GWjA8/maxresdefault.jpg. (Right) Pulseworks VR Transporter at the Georgia Aquarium. (Image