Procedural Modeling for Digital Cultural Heritage
The rapid development of computer graphics and imaging provides the modern archeologist with several tools to realistically model and visualize archeological sites in 3D. This, however, creates a tension between veridical and realistic modeling. Visually compelling models may lead people to falsely...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2009-01-01
|
| Series: | EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2009/852392 |
| _version_ | 1819027146289446912 |
|---|---|
| author | Simon Haegler Luc Van Gool Pascal Müller |
| author_facet | Simon Haegler Luc Van Gool Pascal Müller |
| author_sort | Simon Haegler |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The rapid development of computer graphics and imaging provides the modern archeologist with several tools to realistically model and visualize archeological sites in 3D. This, however, creates a tension between veridical and realistic modeling. Visually compelling models may lead people to falsely believe that there exists very precise knowledge about the past appearance of a site. In order to make the underlying uncertainty visible, it has been proposed to encode this uncertainty with different levels of transparency in the rendering, or of decoloration of the textures. We argue that procedural modeling technology based on shape grammars provides an interesting alternative to such measures, as they tend to spoil the experience for the observer. Both its efficiency and compactness make procedural modeling a tool to produce multiple models, which together sample the space of possibilities. Variations between the different models express levels of uncertainty implicitly, while letting each individual model keeping its realistic appearance. The underlying, structural description makes the uncertainty explicit. Additionally, procedural modeling also yields the flexibility to incorporate changes as knowledge of an archeological site gets refined. Annotations explaining modeling decisions can be included. We demonstrate our procedural modeling implementation with several recent examples. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-21T05:37:50Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4dcea5b4854b4eff911b6ed8e518b52d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1687-5176 1687-5281 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-21T05:37:50Z |
| publishDate | 2009-01-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing |
| spelling | doaj.art-4dcea5b4854b4eff911b6ed8e518b52d2022-12-21T19:14:21ZengSpringerOpenEURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing1687-51761687-52812009-01-01200910.1155/2009/852392Procedural Modeling for Digital Cultural HeritageSimon HaeglerLuc Van GoolPascal MüllerThe rapid development of computer graphics and imaging provides the modern archeologist with several tools to realistically model and visualize archeological sites in 3D. This, however, creates a tension between veridical and realistic modeling. Visually compelling models may lead people to falsely believe that there exists very precise knowledge about the past appearance of a site. In order to make the underlying uncertainty visible, it has been proposed to encode this uncertainty with different levels of transparency in the rendering, or of decoloration of the textures. We argue that procedural modeling technology based on shape grammars provides an interesting alternative to such measures, as they tend to spoil the experience for the observer. Both its efficiency and compactness make procedural modeling a tool to produce multiple models, which together sample the space of possibilities. Variations between the different models express levels of uncertainty implicitly, while letting each individual model keeping its realistic appearance. The underlying, structural description makes the uncertainty explicit. Additionally, procedural modeling also yields the flexibility to incorporate changes as knowledge of an archeological site gets refined. Annotations explaining modeling decisions can be included. We demonstrate our procedural modeling implementation with several recent examples.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2009/852392 |
| spellingShingle | Simon Haegler Luc Van Gool Pascal Müller Procedural Modeling for Digital Cultural Heritage EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing |
| title | Procedural Modeling for Digital Cultural Heritage |
| title_full | Procedural Modeling for Digital Cultural Heritage |
| title_fullStr | Procedural Modeling for Digital Cultural Heritage |
| title_full_unstemmed | Procedural Modeling for Digital Cultural Heritage |
| title_short | Procedural Modeling for Digital Cultural Heritage |
| title_sort | procedural modeling for digital cultural heritage |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2009/852392 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT simonhaegler proceduralmodelingfordigitalculturalheritage AT lucvangool proceduralmodelingfordigitalculturalheritage AT pascalmamp252ller proceduralmodelingfordigitalculturalheritage |