Re: Rock art recording using 3D laserscanning

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 23:21:00 +0100, "Peter Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxxx>
wrote:

>Eric Stevens wrote: 7he3r1thv4l6pij4bmkpptftckchpn25kj@xxxxxxx,
>
>> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 00:46:40 GMT, "JerryT" <not@xxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Peter Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
>>> news:43b083b3$1$75720$dbd45001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Eric Stevens wrote: pnu0r1tpol6qhrcngtsv6rb3ba74n74kmu@xxxxxxx,
>>>>> "Peter Alaca" wrote:
>>>>>> Eric Stevens wrote:
>>>>>>> "Peter Alaca wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> M. Díaz-Andreu 2005
>>>>>>>> LONG MEG: ROCK ART RECORDING
>>>>>>>> USING 3D LASERSCANNING
>>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dp8ql
>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> 3D laser scan has been used in industry for several years and can
>>>>>>> generate accurate computer models of the object being scanned.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Come to think of it, wasn't this done to the KRS in Denmark?
>>>>>>> What happened to that?
>>>>
>>>>>> Oh? The other day you mentioned a report in
>>>>>> your possession. I thought that was the one.
>>>>
>>>>> I'm afraid not. Its a copy of Scott Wolter's original petrographic
>>>>> report on the 'Geology of the Kensington Runestone'. The 3D laser
>>>>> scan work was mentioned bby someone in the last few days but
>>>>> beyond the fact that it was supposed to be being done by someone
>>>>> in Denmark (?) I know nothing about it.
>>>>
>>>> The work of a Danish team (or a team in Denmark)
>>>> is mentioned here more than once.
>>>> I think Doug or Alan knows a little bit more about it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The scan was dony by a Swedish company.
>>>
>>> http://www.metimur.se/
>>>
>>> The scientific evaluation will be done by Laila Kitzler-Åhfeldt.
>>>
>>> http://www.archaeology.su.se/arklab/pers.htm
>>>
>>> The result should have been published here a long time ago.
>>>
>>> http://www.raa.se/kvhaab/fornvann/e-index.htm
>>>
>>> It seems to be a low priority project.
>>>
>>
>> My understanding is that Scott Wolter's understanding is that the scan
>> was undertaken but in the end the people concerned concluded the
>> available resolution/precision was insufficient for the purpose. That
>> may be why nothing was published.
>
>Or does it mean that Wolter did not use the results
>because the resolution was insufficent to see what
>he saw?

As far as I know, Wolter never saw the results and was waiting for
Lofvendahl to report upon them. Lovendahl said nothing and later
confirmed to Wolter that the technology was not sufficiently sensitive
to enable any reasonable conclusion to be reached about the
weathering.

Wolter had earlier looked at the same technology but decided that it
would not do what he wanted. Once the Swedes started talking about it
he hoped/assumed that they had newer and better technology than that
which had seen. Apparently they did not.



Eric Stevens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: KRS book: Geology
    ... >> In the softcover edition of 2000, the treatment of the KRS ... >> I see no mention of Wolter or Ojakangas in that edition. ... > personal communiction to Scott Wolter. ... > Eric Stevens ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: The language of the KRS
    ... >>> on the basis of an interview with Wolter. ... >> where he published his post-book discoveries, ... >> about unpublished new evidence may be the part of the newspaper ... Eric Stevens ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Question to Inger about Mid-June KRS information
    ... >>documentation referred to is the detailed report by Scott Wolter on his ... >>carving by hypothetical forgers) which Eric Stevens tried to obtain some ... Any luck yet Eric? ...
    (sci.archaeology)