Our group chose to model a pot with swirls painted on it. It was different from viewing it in an exhibition because it was much more methodical and planned than recreational. When you are viewing it in a museum, no one puts thought into getting all the angles right. When you are modeling it by taking photos, you have to make sure no one’s in the background and that there isn’t too much lens flare. The process made us focus on details that we would have overlooked, like getting multiple angles of the small handles on the outside of the pot. Those handles were crucial to the overall render. There was another part of the pot that had three spurs jutting out, and the model turned out phenomenally, even though we didn’t get quite enough angles of it. The program composited it flawlessly.
Engaging with the pot truly allowed us to think about the artistic choices that we wanted to highlight with the model, especially capturing texture details due to the art on the upper half of the pot. We wanted to make sure that was easily visible, as it was the most prominent part of the artifact. This paint feature allowed us to think of the pot more artistically than scientifically, which helped us balance the process between technology and critical thinking.
Actively modeling the piece made me think about how we can engage the public and encourage them to use technology in ways like these and truly emphasize the importance of photos. All we did was take photos and we created a 3D model of this artifact complete with textures. Technology is powerful, and this project made me think about some of the ways we can engage the public through talks and live exhibitions of technology such as this.
4 thoughts on “Reflection on Photogrammetry”
Comments are closed.
I agree with you that the process of displaying an artifact puts a lot of responsibility on the presenter. We are now responsible for choosing what is shown and emphasizing specific details; in a way, we have to think about what the creator wanted to show and make artistic intent more present to the viewer than possible in a museum setting.
I love the object yall chose! I can see how taking many angles of the handles made the model better. I agree that taking photos forces you to inspect every aspect of an object compared to just breezing by it in a museum. I would love to see how the 3d model did with the blemishes on the outside of the pot.
I totally agree that photographing the objects was totally different than looking at them in the museum. Especially to get everything to work with ReCap, you have to be meticulous in how you take the photos, especially when trying to control shadows and stuff in the background. However, it was super cool to get to know the objects better and create something that can show the finer details in a digital format!
I also found that engaging with the object in this way furthered my understanding and engagement with it, and that it made me think more critically about its creation and representation. I do wonder how this engagement through creation can become more widespread, given the difficulties in having a process like this be repeated, and the fact that museums may not wish to open this process up to members of the public.