Abstract
AbstractNowadays there is a huge proliferation of fully automatic image‐based solutions producing either three‐dimensional (3D) point clouds or 3D models. However, the reliability of the output is not usually reported and clarified. This paper presents a comparison of the 3D modelling results achieved on two rock art shelters at separate archaeological sites using a high‐resolution digital camera. The 3D point clouds were produced using automatic image‐based photogrammetric and computer vision software running either locally (FOTOGIFLE and VisualSFM) or through a web‐based reconstruction service (Autodesk 123D Catch). The first two automatic approaches are compared with a manual bundle block adjustment. Dense image matching was undertaken to densify the point clouds prior to 3D modelling. The derived 3D models are compared with a time‐of‐flight laser scanning dataset that was used as ground truth. Statistical analysis shows significant metric differences on the digital surface models for the different solutions.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call