27th April 2012, 11:57 AM
(This post was last modified: 27th April 2012, 12:02 PM by overseas.)
Hi
Sorry, I know you've moved far away from planning issues, but I have to come back really strongly and support Chiz's comments on the problem of de-skilling through over-reliance on technology. Its not just that people lose the quality manual skills, it also contributes to the alienation process that turns individuals from highly motivated "archaeologists" to disillusioned "diggers". Disconnection from the process is...from my observation and personal experience... one of the most damaging aspects of modern archaeology : watching colleagues..highly intelligent and well-educated..gradually atrophying towards brain-death because they can't "tune in" to the potential interest of what they are doing is something I have seen over and over in twenty-five years on site.The more hands-on skills that are in your own hands, the more opportunity you have to "tune-in".
And, with one major exception, I have yet to see technology really gaining time and quality over hand-drawing, scanning and illustrator digitizing : rather, I have seen a lot of time lost - undoubtedly due to poor process rather than an innate flaw, but it keeps happening. Management also tend to under-budget the real post-ex costs of digitising fom rectified photography, behaving as if the "technology" has already solved the problem - as if by magic - on site.
The major exception is professional rectified photography for mosaics - and they still have to be re-digitized in post-ex, but maybe the programmes for conversion exist : we had n't budgetted for it, so I didnt ask. In addition, the skilled professionals who undertook this reckoned they could record the whole site (walls and all) in 3D in about 5 days (7000m2 of buildings). In spite of my above comments, I might be interested to see that done... on the other hand the drawing would then only be a "picture", not an interpreted representation : I suspect the overall quality of site recording and understanding would go down. However, I would still be interested to see the results of recording this way, my above comments on possession of process notwithstanding.
Finally...if you know you will hand-plan, and the team are good at it, overall it can work out faster than laying-out and post-ex rectifying photographs : the post-ex work can after all be done by anyone who can use illustrator rather than having to wait for the skilled surveyor/illustrator using a more complex and slower process.
I have nt seen/used the joys of pen-map et al, but apart from the above exception, I still find hand-drawings (to be inserted into an EDM or GPS general plan obviously) the best and most efficient way to obtain detailed representation of many, many walls (if they still have to be stone-to stone drawings). (I would acquiese to RP for the cobbled surface probably). And, for the reasons stated above, I would much rather work with a team still capable of doing this, than one that has delegated their once-cherised skills to machines - I believe they will better archaeologists doing better archaeology. Its not just nostalgia.
There is a lot more to said on this subject, but I wont...here and now.
Sorry, I know you've moved far away from planning issues, but I have to come back really strongly and support Chiz's comments on the problem of de-skilling through over-reliance on technology. Its not just that people lose the quality manual skills, it also contributes to the alienation process that turns individuals from highly motivated "archaeologists" to disillusioned "diggers". Disconnection from the process is...from my observation and personal experience... one of the most damaging aspects of modern archaeology : watching colleagues..highly intelligent and well-educated..gradually atrophying towards brain-death because they can't "tune in" to the potential interest of what they are doing is something I have seen over and over in twenty-five years on site.The more hands-on skills that are in your own hands, the more opportunity you have to "tune-in".
And, with one major exception, I have yet to see technology really gaining time and quality over hand-drawing, scanning and illustrator digitizing : rather, I have seen a lot of time lost - undoubtedly due to poor process rather than an innate flaw, but it keeps happening. Management also tend to under-budget the real post-ex costs of digitising fom rectified photography, behaving as if the "technology" has already solved the problem - as if by magic - on site.
The major exception is professional rectified photography for mosaics - and they still have to be re-digitized in post-ex, but maybe the programmes for conversion exist : we had n't budgetted for it, so I didnt ask. In addition, the skilled professionals who undertook this reckoned they could record the whole site (walls and all) in 3D in about 5 days (7000m2 of buildings). In spite of my above comments, I might be interested to see that done... on the other hand the drawing would then only be a "picture", not an interpreted representation : I suspect the overall quality of site recording and understanding would go down. However, I would still be interested to see the results of recording this way, my above comments on possession of process notwithstanding.
Finally...if you know you will hand-plan, and the team are good at it, overall it can work out faster than laying-out and post-ex rectifying photographs : the post-ex work can after all be done by anyone who can use illustrator rather than having to wait for the skilled surveyor/illustrator using a more complex and slower process.
I have nt seen/used the joys of pen-map et al, but apart from the above exception, I still find hand-drawings (to be inserted into an EDM or GPS general plan obviously) the best and most efficient way to obtain detailed representation of many, many walls (if they still have to be stone-to stone drawings). (I would acquiese to RP for the cobbled surface probably). And, for the reasons stated above, I would much rather work with a team still capable of doing this, than one that has delegated their once-cherised skills to machines - I believe they will better archaeologists doing better archaeology. Its not just nostalgia.
There is a lot more to said on this subject, but I wont...here and now.