Where are we? Reviewing the Integration of Complex Spatial Data in Current Field Archaeology

This article examines the background and current challenges of integrating spatial data in field archaeology, particularly in the light of ongoing technological advances. This is done through a brief comparative overview of the development of field recording principles in the UK and Denmark. Archaeo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Peter Jensen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of York 2017-06-01
Series:Internet Archaeology
Subjects:
3D
GIS
UK
Online Access:http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue44/8/index.html
id doaj-926d3520a1a34182a7af04af81695bc2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-926d3520a1a34182a7af04af81695bc22020-11-24T21:53:40ZengUniversity of YorkInternet Archaeology1363-53872017-06-014410.11141/ia.44.8Where are we? Reviewing the Integration of Complex Spatial Data in Current Field ArchaeologyPeter Jensen0Aarhus UniversityThis article examines the background and current challenges of integrating spatial data in field archaeology, particularly in the light of ongoing technological advances. This is done through a brief comparative overview of the development of field recording principles in the UK and Denmark. Archaeology in the two countries historically represents two different standpoints of methodological traditions and corresponding ideals of documentation. The question is, if technological developments – and not least the limitations of the applied digital frameworks – have been an important defining factor and continue to affect the reconditions of the methodological development when it comes to spatial data recording and the advent of more complex spatial data. This article demonstrates that 3D documentation techniques are indeed increasingly accepted and applied despite the limitations of technical frameworks such as GIS or CAD. Even more interesting is the potential of Structure from Motion and similar techniques for archaeological field recording as it may constitute a new methodological framework, bridging the gap between different field archaeological traditions; a middle ground of documentation principles, where single context planning and strict stratigraphical approaches meet the arbitrary, pragmatic geometric sectioning of features. Although different methodological approaches clearly relate to an ideal with consequences for our archaeological praxis, excavation and documentation methodologies are not necessarily restricted or determined by the available technology. Modern archaeology tends to be sufficiently open-minded and in support of continued experimentation, which is required to manage new and different methods of data acquisition and spatial documentation and representation.http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue44/8/index.htmlarchaeologyfield recordingspatial data3DGISDenmarkUKsingle context'schnitt'
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Peter Jensen
spellingShingle Peter Jensen
Where are we? Reviewing the Integration of Complex Spatial Data in Current Field Archaeology
Internet Archaeology
archaeology
field recording
spatial data
3D
GIS
Denmark
UK
single context
'schnitt'
author_facet Peter Jensen
author_sort Peter Jensen
title Where are we? Reviewing the Integration of Complex Spatial Data in Current Field Archaeology
title_short Where are we? Reviewing the Integration of Complex Spatial Data in Current Field Archaeology
title_full Where are we? Reviewing the Integration of Complex Spatial Data in Current Field Archaeology
title_fullStr Where are we? Reviewing the Integration of Complex Spatial Data in Current Field Archaeology
title_full_unstemmed Where are we? Reviewing the Integration of Complex Spatial Data in Current Field Archaeology
title_sort where are we? reviewing the integration of complex spatial data in current field archaeology
publisher University of York
series Internet Archaeology
issn 1363-5387
publishDate 2017-06-01
description This article examines the background and current challenges of integrating spatial data in field archaeology, particularly in the light of ongoing technological advances. This is done through a brief comparative overview of the development of field recording principles in the UK and Denmark. Archaeology in the two countries historically represents two different standpoints of methodological traditions and corresponding ideals of documentation. The question is, if technological developments – and not least the limitations of the applied digital frameworks – have been an important defining factor and continue to affect the reconditions of the methodological development when it comes to spatial data recording and the advent of more complex spatial data. This article demonstrates that 3D documentation techniques are indeed increasingly accepted and applied despite the limitations of technical frameworks such as GIS or CAD. Even more interesting is the potential of Structure from Motion and similar techniques for archaeological field recording as it may constitute a new methodological framework, bridging the gap between different field archaeological traditions; a middle ground of documentation principles, where single context planning and strict stratigraphical approaches meet the arbitrary, pragmatic geometric sectioning of features. Although different methodological approaches clearly relate to an ideal with consequences for our archaeological praxis, excavation and documentation methodologies are not necessarily restricted or determined by the available technology. Modern archaeology tends to be sufficiently open-minded and in support of continued experimentation, which is required to manage new and different methods of data acquisition and spatial documentation and representation.
topic archaeology
field recording
spatial data
3D
GIS
Denmark
UK
single context
'schnitt'
url http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue44/8/index.html
work_keys_str_mv AT peterjensen wherearewereviewingtheintegrationofcomplexspatialdataincurrentfieldarchaeology
_version_ 1725870715231535104