27th April 2012, 05:10 PM
Jack Wrote:Nah....its debatable. Depends on time, weather conditions and definitely the skills of those doing the drawing...........but in my opinion, given the practicalities of time, weather, available staff and parallax, rectified photography will ALWAYS be more accurate (if done correctly). Its just you can't check a hand drawn plan of cobbles as accurately as a rectified/digitised plan.
But I do agree that rectification/digitising is not always the answer and can have hidden pitfalls.
By all accounts the current project with the Roman road that needs recording that you mentioned a few posts back was under flowing water/mud yesterday - not a problem for hand-planning (have had to plan by feel plenty of times in the past, planning that sort of thing's one of those 'save it for a wet day' jobs) but I suspect your photographic approach would be a bit of a non-starter under those conditions? And suspect a photogrammetric rig might be a good start? Last bit of site 'plan by photographs' I was involved in all the survey markers kept blowing away mid-shoot, so took an hour to photo something that would have taken about 5 minutes to draw conventionally... }
