Abstract
Rapid development of increasingly powerful and accessible computer hardware, processing software, and UAS platforms has fueled a rapid increase in the adoption of UAS-based photogrammetry in archaeology. However, archaeologists still need to critically evaluate the methodology being used before flying photogrammetry missions at archaeological sites. Here, we critique a recent paper by Vilbig and colleagues (2020) which reported on UAS-based photogrammetry of Cahokia’s Grand Plaza. In order to address concerns with their methodology, we conducted our own photogrammetry flight of the same study area, reproducing their methodology as closely as possible. This allows us to make a direct comparison with Vilbig and colleagues’ (2020) results, highlighting key differences after correcting the problems in their methodology. We also discuss several insights of our own analysis, including the identification of potential secondary mounds built atop the platform of Mound 48.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.