14th September 2012, 09:08 PM
(This post was last modified: 14th September 2012, 09:24 PM by John Wells.)
John Wells Wrote:Maybe its something for the future when resolution improves and experiments have ironed out issues.
Resolution is not a problem in photography, even when working with a 320x240 pixel thermal imager on a kite.
It is better than the usual 1 pixel equivalent per square metre of geophysical surveys.
[/URL]
Our Group archaeologist Jim mentioned that this statement could be misinterpreted as a criticism of geophysical techniques. I am a physicist by training.
I am not comparing methodologies, I am comparing resolutions. There is a tendency to reject low resolution photography without considering the context. The mention of geophysical techniques is simply to give a frame of reference for acceptable levels of resolution in aerial archaeology.
We have a soil resistance meter and look forward to when we can buy a gradiometer ;o)
Jim is responsible for the geophysics.