Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
3D DIGITIZATION OF MUSEUM ARTEFACTS WITHIN THE INTERREG IRON AGE
DANUBE PROJECT
M. Vuković 1*, J. Balen 2, H. Potrebica 3, M. Mađerić 4, V.Španiček 5
1 Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb - mivukovic@ffzg.hr
2 Archaeological Museum in Zagreb - jbalen@amz.hr
3 Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb - hpotrebi@ffzg.hr
4 Independent researcher, Đakovo, Croatia - marinmadjeric@gmail.com
5 Independent researcher Osijek, Croatia - vspanicek1@gmail.com
KEY WORDS: Image-based modelling, photogrammetry, Agisoft Metashape, digitization, digital heritage
Abstract
Iron Age Danube project dealt with a wide variety of topics and sites dating back to the Iron age along the Danube river. Primary
goals set by the Archaeological museum in Zagreb were the creation of a cultural route for the site of Kaptol, presentation of the site
itself and digitization of artefacts from the necropolis of Kaptol – Čemernica. The latter were a part of the permanent museum
exhibition in the Iron age section at the Archaeological museum in Zagreb. This paper will present the workflow used to generate
image-based 3D models of more than 100 artefacts. The museum itself doesn’t have a digitization laboratory or allocated space, a
problem which was encountered in other cultural heritage digitization projects, which meant that the setup had to be quickly
assembled and disassembled as needed. This paper will present the problems encountered during the entire process, from image
acquisition to data processing, as well as the potential solutions. For the purposes of the project we used Agisofts Metashape
software which at the time required masks for all photographs involved in the image-based modelling process, in a turntable static
camera setup. The newer versions of the software have two additional options one of which ignores the surrounding reference points
and uses the markers generated by Metashape to complete the initial camera alignment. The sheer amount of artefacts we aimed to
digitize meant that we had to streamline the process of acquiring and processing the photographs and their respective masks. This
process was meticulously documented and optimized to take the least possible time while obtaining a satisfactory level of detail on
the resulting 3D model. Although the new versions of the software dispense with the need for masking the photographs, the process
of removing the unwanted points from the point cloud and aligning different chunks can also be time consuming. This paper will
present our results with various photo alignment methods and try to provide an objective comparison. We will also explore the
possibilities of utilizing the finished models in computer generated reconstructions of sites, and their usability in promoting the
museum and potential exhibitions. Finally, the paper will assess the value of digitizing larger parts of museum collections in light of
the recent earthquake in Zagreb which seriously damaged most of the artefacts in the museum.
* Corresponding author
1. INTRODUCTION
The Archaeological Museum in Zagreb is the most prominent
archaeological museum institution in Croatia. The museum’s
collections, today consisting of more than 450,000 various
artefacts and monuments, have been gathered over the years
from many different sources (Solter 2016). As a museum, the
Archaeological Museum in Zagreb is not only involved in
archaeological research and fieldwork but also in the
presentation of cultural heritage through exhibitions and
projects belonging to the domain of public archaeology and
cultural heritage management. The museum also partakes in the
implementation of applied knowledge in the fields of 3D
digitization of artefacts and monuments, computer
visualisations, and virtual reconstructions for specific exhibition
projects, both as part of exhibition multimedia displays and as
web presentations (Solter 2019). The museum also engages in
work on online databases, digital interactive presentations of
archaeological artefacts for the general public, as well as the
development of digital databases for fieldwork documentation
and scientific digital editions of archaeological material.
In recent years, through two Interreg Danube Transnational
Programs, the Iron Age Danube and the Danube archaeological
eLandscapes projects, the museum initiated and played a vital
part in developing new approaches to site presentation of
several archaeological sites.
The project “Monumentalized Early Iron Age Landscapes in the
Danube River Basin (“Iron Age Danube”), an Interreg Danube
Transnational Programme had on board 11 partners and 9
associated partners from 5 countries in the Danube region, and
started its 2.5-year implementation on January 2017. The
project brought together partners from different institutions
dealing with archaeological research, protection and promotion
of cultural heritage. The lead partner was Universalmuseum
Joanneum from Austria (https://www.interreg-
danube.eu/approved-projects/iron-age-danube).
The Iron Age Danube project was focused on monumental
archaeological landscapes of the Early Iron Age, characterized
by fortified hilltop settlements and large tumulus cemeteries,
from the era between roughly the 9th–4th century BC (Hallstatt
period).
The project partnership major goal was the development of joint
approaches for researching and managing complex (pre)historic
landscapes and their integration into sustainable tourism.
Activities on the project were as follows:
• Archaeological research of landscapes during
international research camps
• Development of new digital and analogue tools
for tourism use in selected micro-regions
• Development of a digital research database
The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XLIII-B2-2022
XXIV ISPRS Congress (2022 edition), 6–11 June 2022, Nice, France
This contribution has been peer-reviewed.
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-1159-2022 | © Author(s) 2022. CC BY 4.0 License.
1159
• Revitalization of archaeological parks and
educational trails
• Creating new museum programs for visitors
• International promotion of the most important
landscapes from the Early Iron Age
• Development of strategies for the preservation,
research and sustainable development of
archaeological landscapes at the regional level
This paper will focus on presenting our workflow for the
digitization of Iron Age artefacts, discuss specific methods
within the scope of the software we used, and finally comment
on the utilization of the generated 3D content.
Based on previous experiences with different types of laser
scanners and some limited practice with structured light
scanners we settled for the image-based approach to 3D
digitization of artefacts. Image-based modelling was used as the
most optimal method for this purpose in various digitization
projects in other museums as well (Barsanti & Guidi, 2013;
Emmitt et. al. 2021)
2. DATA ACQUISITION
In our digitization efforts we aimed to get the best possible
results with regards to our equipment and time constraints of the
project. A small separate room section on one of the museum
floors was set up which was inaccessible to the public and
provided us with space to work without interruptions. The room
was equipped with a simple table for artefacts, a standing box
for the turntable and the standard neutral white backdrop. We
also used three photo studio diffuse light sources to illuminate
the objects with a 5000K light. The artefacts were brought up to
the room from the museum depo or were taken out for a short
time from their respective exhibitions. The digitization process
was done in baches of up to 10 artefacts and since some of them
are similar in shape, colour and size we had to keep a
meticulous list of finished items with their respective inventory
numbers assigned to them by the museum. To keep up with our
work we used simple codes P1, P2, P3, etc. for each individual
vessel and we simply noted the museum inventory number next
to our name codes on a separate list. This simplified the folder
structure and the file naming of our finished artefacts which
proved to be important when dealing with a large number of
photographs and 3D models.
One of the issues we encountered, was dealing with multiple
orientations of the same object in a single dataset. Some of the
artefacts have distinct shapes which are sometimes impossible
to turn upside down because of the potential damage it could do
to the artefact itself. This is mainly a problem with large iron
age vessels, usually more than 50cm in diameter. Because of
their size and weight, the stress level that would have been
exerted on the rim of the vessel, had they been turned upside
down, would have surely resulted in compromising the integrity
of the artefact. Other objects that fall in this category are the
ones with complex ornamentations such as the askos vessel
(P98_inv11549). Our goal was to get a digital representation of
the artefacts which would be as complete as possible, for this
reason most of the objects were photographed twice, once in
their normal orientation, and once upside down. Additionally,
the pots that have narrow necks but a wide diameter in the body
were also photographed with a mobile phone camera in an
attempt to reproduce the surface inside the vessel as well as the
outside. Turning the pots upside down was not done solely for
the purpose of reconstructing the base of the vessel, some of the
artefacts are very large and their bottom halves break at steep
angles which we found are extremely hard to photograph
properly without turning the artefact itself.
2.1 Hardware
As was previously mentioned our setup included 5000K diffuse
studio lights, a turntable on a box and a uniform backdrop. The
turntable was a sturdy wooden one fitted with a white cover
which made the turntable surface less slippery. Agisoft
Metashape markers were printed and fixed on the turntable
surface. A Nikon D7100 mounted with a 18-35mm Sigma lens
was used for image acquisition along with a tripod, a remote
control for the shutter release and a tape measurer for
determining the distance from the object. All photographs were
taken in maximum quality .jpg with 6000x4000pix. The f/stop
value varied from artefact to artefact but was mostly kept in the
f/8 to f/10 range, ISO value vas set at 100, and with a few
exceptions the lens was fixed with a tape at 18mm. Since some
of the artefacts were coated with a glossy finish during the
conservational process, a polarization filter was used on a
limited number of objects. This proved to be essential as the
light sources, although diffused, were visible on the glossy
surface coating of the vessels. When these images were fed into
the pipeline the cameras failed to align because of the static
points the lights made on the artefact.
Additionally, a Samsung S9 mobile phone was used to gather as
much data as possible for the interior on some of the artefacts.
The S9 produced images also in .jpeg format with the resolution
of 3264x1836pix. The phone was chosen as a quick and easy
solution for this task as most of the vessels couldn’t fit a larger
camera inside. By the end of our photography sessions, we had
24 848 photographs of artefacts, with an average of 120 to 150
photographs per artefact. On average the image acquisition
phase for each artefact took between 30min – 45min.
2.2 Software
The tape measurer was used in tandem with a DoF Droid
mobile app to help determine the best setup with regards to the
depth of field and the sharpness of each image. Adequate depth
of field (DoF) is specific to each artefact in respect to their size,
and has to be calculated by taking into account the distance
between the artefacts centre point and the sensor. The Depth of
Field (DoF) is defined as the range of distances in which the
object appears acceptably sharp in a photograph (Verhoeven
2018). If properly set up the resulting images should have no
blurred areas which considerably affect the image-based
modelling process and often result in noisy 3D reconstructions
(Farella et al. 2022). Good data organization was necessary to
successfully complete the goals of the digitization project. All
artefacts were assigned with a “P” number, which was also the
name of the folders. The folders contained images from the
DSLR and images from the phone camera, masks for DSLR
photographs, Metashape save files in .psx format, exported 3D
models and their respective texture maps in .obj and .tiff
formats. Adobe Photoshop CS6 was used to generate masks for
all the photographs. Although masking tools are available in
Agisoft Metashape, we opted out for Photoshop as a quicker
solution for the large amount of masks necessary for our
project.
The process of 3D model generation through Agisoft
Metashape, or as it was earlier called Agisoft Photoscan, has
already been proven to produce adequately precise and detailed
models for the purposes of museum artefact digitization.
(Barsanti & Guidi, 2013; Emmitt et. al. 2021) The software
The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XLIII-B2-2022
XXIV ISPRS Congress (2022 edition), 6–11 June 2022, Nice, France
This contribution has been peer-reviewed.
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-1159-2022 | © Author(s) 2022. CC BY 4.0 License.
1160
works with SfM and dense multi-view stereo-matching
algorithms (Barsanti & Guidi, 2013). It is semi-automatic in
nature, but allows the user to tweak the settings for alignment
accuracy, implement reference and control points, utilize masks,
and influence the final polygon count, as well as the resolution
of the texture. By the end of the data processing phase, we had
123 complete 3D models of iron age artefacts.
3. DATA PROCESSING
3.1 Masking
Once we ascertained that most of the artefacts will have to have
at least two positions, and sometimes three, we quickly realized
that we need an efficient way for the separate sets of data to
merge into one. There are two options available, the processing
of different artefact orientations in separate chunks and then
aligning them separately, or masking everything but the artefact
and the turntable and then processing the images jointly (Farella
et al. 2022). The masking option was chosen as the preferred
method, because it reduces the time of processing the 3D model,
and with it we avoid the problems with image orientation. Still
given the final number of photographs the masking option
represented a daunting task. The masking process in Adobe
Photoshop has been used in other digitization projects (Marziali
& Dionisio 2017), and the following workflow represents our
version of the procedure.
The masks were created by a simple and quick workflow which
utilizes the “curves” adjustment to overexpose the white
background and enhance the contrast between the artefact and
the background. After that, a simple stroke with a “quick
selection tool” and a right click of the mouse enable us to fill
the first portion of the image with a completely white color. An
inverse selection tool gives us the option of selecting the
background and filling it with a completely black color. The file
is then saved as a .png with the extension of “_mask” after the
photograph name/number (Figure 1). Eg. DSC_2582_mask.png.
Using various shortcuts and with a lot of practice we managed
to streamline the process down to 25sec per mask.
Figure 1: An example of a .png mask created in Adobe
Photoshop
The photographs for each artefact were imported into the
Agisoft Metashape software where masks were applied, and a
quick overview of the masked photographs (in thumbnails
mode) is available in the photos panel. This is a good validation
process, as it can often happen that some of the masks were not
properly saved or have been skipped altogether, and they have
to be reloaded. In the settings for the alignment process the
option “apply masks to key points” should be selected.
The process from this point on was pretty straightforward, for
the purposes of our project we used high settings for the image
alignment phase and the dense point cloud generation, while the
settings for the mesh generation varied between medium and
high depending on the artefact and the details on its surface. All
of the textures were produced in 4096x4096pix resolution.
3.2 Modelling the inside of the large narrow necked vessels
The only exception to the standard workflow, were the large
vessels with narrow necks, where we used the mobile phone
camera to try and capture the inside of the artefact. As
expressed in Farella et al. (2022), all museum digitization
projects should strive to: “a faithful, complete and precise
reconstruction of the object's shape and geometry, limiting
occlusions and avoiding loss of information”. Although mobile
phone cameras were successfully tested in image acquisition for
the purposes of digitization projects in museums (Apollonio et.
al. 2021) this is to our knowledge the first time that DSLR data
sets and mobile phone camera datasets were combined to
document the inside of the artefact with the outside surface to
get a more complete reconstruction of the object (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Aligned mobile phone images on the inside of the
artefact
The process included all of the masking steps for DSLR
photographs outlined in the previous section. After masking and
alignment, the camera calibration data was exported, and then
the process was repeated for the mobile phone data in a separate
project. Once we obtained both calibration files for these two
very different cameras all the photographs were loaded into a
single project, and separate calibration files were applied to
different sets of photographs. Since we weren’t sure how well
the image alignment phase would work, we placed additional
Agisoft markers on the inside of the artefact. An important
distinction was made during the image acquisition process
between the strategy of acquiring the photographs. The DSLR
ones were taken with a tripod and by rotating the turntable with
the artefact, while in the case of the mobile camera the images
were taken from the hand after the first phase of DSLR
photographs, but before rotating the object upside down. The
mobile phone camera photographs were taken with the flash
option turned on, as it was necessary to ensure that the images
weren’t blurred and a light source was needed to cover the
inside of the vessel.
These images were taken by moving the camera over the neck
of the vessel and gradually entering the inside of the vessel,
taking the images all the way in. Once inside the vessel a 360
The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XLIII-B2-2022
XXIV ISPRS Congress (2022 edition), 6–11 June 2022, Nice, France
This contribution has been peer-reviewed.
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-1159-2022 | © Author(s) 2022. CC BY 4.0 License.
1161
degree turn of the camera provided us with a full view of the
inside of the artefact. The only part that was reconstructed
poorly was just below the neck of the vessel where the space is
narrow and the flash from the camera caused parts of images to
become blown-out. It is also crucial to mention that during the
texture generating process the mobile phone images covering
the outside surface of the object should be disabled, because
otherwise they affect the quality of the DSLR texture taken on
the outside. Using this method, we managed to reconstruct most
of the inner surface of the artefact, adding another layer of detail
to our 3D models (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Cross-section of a 3d model of one of the artefacts;
P0_inv19700
3.3 “Apply masks to key points” vs. “new” methods
The data collection and processing took place in 2018, since
then the software was updated and two new options to deal with
photograph alignment in a fixed camera with a turntable
scenario were introduced. We used one of the artefacts from our
digitization project to test and compare various methods of
aligning the photographs on a single dataset. The aim was to
present the most optimal method for proper camera alignment in
cultural heritage artefacts where at least two different
orientations of the object are necessary to reach a satisfactory
level of a faithful, complete and precise digital representation of
the artefact.
3.3.1 “Apply masks to tie points” method
The first new method was “apply masks to tie points” which
enabled suppression of the background related points based only
on one or two masked photographs. It was introduced in the
1.4.1. build in 2018, the software manual states: “Apply mask to
tie points option means that certain tie points are excluded from
alignment procedure. Effectively this implies that if some area
is masked at least on a single photo, relevant key points on the
rest of the photos picturing the same area will be also ignored
during alignment procedure (a tie point is a set of key points
which have been matched as projections of the same 3D point
on different images). This can be useful to be able to suppress
background in turntable shooting scenario with only one mask”
(Agisoft LLC 2021). The method stipulates that a proper
alignment of both orientations of the artefact can be achieved by
masking a single photograph. In our experiment it was shown
that by increasing the number of masked photographs better
alignment results are achieved, and sometimes not even three
masked photographs are enough to produce a correct alignment.
Using the “intelligent scissors” tool to mask the photographs (as
suggested by the manual) can be pretty time consuming, so all
the masks were once again created in Adobe Photoshop, and
subsequently imported to Metashape. It seems the best approach
is to make a mask for each single row of photographs, basically
each time a camera changes position with respect to the object.
This significantly reduces the amount of masks needed for a
single artefact from on average 130, to on average 10, while
maximising the possibility of proper alignment (Figure 4). It
should be noted that in some cases and with some artefacts we
weren’t able to get a satisfying alignment even after using 10 or
more masks, so the method has a failure component which
should be taken into account and explored further.
3.3.2 “Exclude stationary tie points” method
The option “exclude stationary tie points” was introduced in
build 1.7.0 in 2021. The option was designed to take advantage
of the fact that if you’re working with reference points on the
turntable you can force the alignment process to calculate the
camera positions by only taking into account the pre-detected
reference points. The software manual states: “Excludes tie
points that remain stationary across multiple different images.
This option enables alignment without masks for datasets with a
static background, e.g. in a case of a turntable with a fixed
camera scenario. Also enabling this option will help to
eliminate false tie points related to the camera sensor or lens
artefacts” (Agisoft LLC 2021). During our experiments with
the new feature, we noticed that while using this option it is
wise to increase the number of reference points and their
visibility in all angles, because sometimes cameras can get
misaligned. Non the less, the process works very well in most
cases and seems to dispense with the need for masking large
batches of photographs. However, the forced camera alignment
also produces a significantly higher amount of noise in the
dense point cloud data. Luckily the noise in the data can be
handled with relative ease by utilizing the option to select and
delete the points by color. The process also demands that
different positions be modelled in separate chunks and aligned
afterward. This doubles the amount of time it takes to process
the data and finish the model, not to mention the fact that it
takes a considerable input from the operator to finalize the
process, whereas in both masked methods (“apply masks to tie
points”, and “apply masks to key points”) once the alignment is
complete and checked all the data is processed in a single
chunk.
Figure 4: A snapshot of properly aligned photographs using the
“apply masks to tie points” method; P45_inv11550
The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XLIII-B2-2022
XXIV ISPRS Congress (2022 edition), 6–11 June 2022, Nice, France
This contribution has been peer-reviewed.
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-1159-2022 | © Author(s) 2022. CC BY 4.0 License.
1162
3.3.3 Conclusions on the best approach to the alignment of
photographs
After assessing the three available methods for processing the
artefacts which require at least two different orientations to be
captured we concluded the following:
Method
Nmr.
of
mas
ks
Single
chunk
or
multiple
chunks
Processing
time
(finished
3D model
Time
engagement
of the user
“Apply masks
to key points”
130
Single
105min
60%
“Apply masks
to tie points”
10
Single
116min
15%
“Exclude
stationary tie
points”
/
Multiple
90min
22%
Table 1: Comparison of different methods for the photo
alignment process
The method of “apply masks to tie points” gives us best results
in the photo alignment phase because the time engagement of
the human processing the data is the smallest. Masking all of the
photographs for each artefact is a tedious task despite the fact
we were able to streamline the process and bring the time of
processing for each mask down to 25 seconds. When we review
the data, we can see that masking all the photos is actually the
quickest method of producing the desired result if we want a
single chunk dataset. But when we consider the amount of
artefacts usually involved in these types of projects the time
engagement of the user becomes the most important column.
The method “exclude stationary tie points” is by far the
quickest, but is still plagued by the fact that different
orientations of the same item have to be processed separately
and subsequently they have to be merged through the chunk
alignment process. The method therefore produces an inferior
model as opposed to the first two methods which integrate all
the photographs from both orientations into the same photo
alignment process.
5. UTILIZATION OF DIGITIZED ARTEFACTS AND
RESULTS OF OUR PROJECT
During the project, the Archaeological Museum in Zagreb
digitized the Early Iron Age artefacts from its collection, with
special emphasis on the Kaptol site. A part of the artefacts from
the old research campaigns is in the Archaeological Museum in
Zagreb, while the artefacts from the contemporary
archaeological excavations is in the City Museum in Požega, the
digitization of the material and its presentation in a virtual
environment enabled a unique presentation of grave units that
are otherwise physically separated and thus inaccessible to
visitors. The final result of our digitization efforts are 123 3D
models of Iron Age artefacts from the museum collection, most
of the artefacts are pottery vessels, with a few bronze objects,
all found within a burial context. For now, a selection of 3D
models is presented at the online sketchfab platform on a public
museum profile, where anyone can view the results of our
digitization efforts (Figure 5).
Figure 5: A 3D model of the askos vessel uploaded on sketchfab
platform; P98_inv11549
The 3D models of artefacts enabled us to create faithful
reconstructions of the funeral custom established by
archaeological research at the Kaptol – Čemernica Iron Age
necropolis. In 2016 a revision excavation was completed on the
site of tumulus IV which revealed additional data on the context
of the finds in the museum, and provided more information on
the structure of the tumulus itself, as well as on the funerary
practices of that period (Potrebica, Rakvin 2019) (Figure 6).
The reconstruction of the funeral custom was completed as a
VR animation in Unity game engine (Unity®), which will at a
later date be incorporated as a part of the museum’s presentation
of the artefacts. This will provide the museum with a chance to
evaluate how the VR content is utilized by the visitors, as
numerous projects in other museums have already begun to do
(Kersten et. al. 2018; Schofield et. al. 2018) The 3D models
were optimized and exported in .obj formats and were
incorporated into the virtual reconstruction of the tumulus.
Figure 6: A still frame from the VR animation of the possible
funerary ritual at Tumul IV on Kaptol-Čemernica site; note the
3D models of artefacts in the foreground of the bonfire
Game engines have a particularly interesting role in the
presentation of cultural heritage digital content. The
applications range from simulating a photo studio for the
presentation of material, to recreating entire scenarios such as
the afore mentioned burial at Kaptol. These visualizations were
developed within the scope of the Danube's archaeological
eLandscapes project, which is a continuation of the previous
Iron-Age-Danube project. Virtual archaeological landscapes of
the Danube region (Danube´s Archaeological eLandscapes) is a
project co-financed by the Interreg Danube Transnational
programme, which lasts from mid-2020 till the end of 2022.
The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XLIII-B2-2022
XXIV ISPRS Congress (2022 edition), 6–11 June 2022, Nice, France
This contribution has been peer-reviewed.
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-1159-2022 | © Author(s) 2022. CC BY 4.0 License.
1163
The project´s major goal is to regionally, nationally and
internationally increase the visibility of the cultural heritage,
and in particular the archaeological landscapes of the Danube
region, making them more attractive for integration into the
region’s tourism offers (Balen et. al. 2021).
6. REMARKS ON ARTEFACT PRESERVATION
THROUGH DIGITIZATION
Apart from the importance of use of 3D models of artefacts in
creating and presenting a faithful way of life in ancient times,
3d models proved to be extremely important for communication
with the public during the Covid-19 pandemic when museums,
including the Archaeological Museum in Zagreb, were closed
(Guberina et. al. 2020). In addition to the pandemic, the
Archaeological Museum in Zagreb was hit by two devastating
earthquakes in 2020, which destroyed not only the building but
also part of the museum artefacts, so the museum is still closed
to visitors.
Figure 7: Earthquake damage in the Prehistoric section of the
museum in 2020
Virtual content has thus become the only way to communicate
with the audience and the general public. The Museum is
currently working on the renovation of the building as well as
on the conservation and reconstruction of the museum artefacts,
which will be followed by the return of the museum's
permanent exhibitions, where special attention will be paid to
better earthquake countermeasures. Until then, the Museum has
an active role in working with the public in various, direct ways,
through workshops and exhibitions in other venues. The
Museum has paid great attention to the creation of
archaeological routes, like Iron Age Danube Cultural Route, but
also various virtual contents accessible through museum web
pages (https://www.amz.hr/hr/virtualni-muzej/).
3D models of museum artefacts have proven to be extremely
important not only as a tool for creating virtual content and for
communication with the public, but also in the restoration and
production of replicas of museum artefacts. Finally, the museum
has included the 3D digitization of its category “A” artefacts
and other valuable objects in its core strategy documents.
Acknowledgements
The principal author of this paper would like to sincerely thank
Geert Verhoeven for all his lectures and advice on the topics of
photography, image-based modelling and photogrammetry.
References
Agisoft LLC 2021. Agisoft Metashape User Manual,
Professional Edition, Version 1.7.
https://www.agisoft.com/pdf/metashape-pro_1_7_en.pdf (date
of access: 28.03.2022)
Balen, J., Črešnar, M., Dolinar, N., Doneus, M., Fera, M.,
Jancsary, N., Kiszter, S., Mele, M. and Scoppie, S., 2021:
Sustainable touristic value from digitization of archaeological
heritage, Universalmuseum Joanneum for the Danube s
Archaeological eLandscapes partners, Graz, Austria
Barsanti, S.G., Guidi, G., 2013: 3D digitization of museum
content within the 3D-ICONS project. ISPRS Ann.
Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci, II-5 W, 1, 151-156.
Emmitt, J.J., Mackrell, T. and Armstrong, J., 2021: Digital
Modelling in Museum and Private Collections: A Case Study on
Early Italic Armour. Journal of Computer Applications in
Archaeology, 4(1), 63–78. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/jcaa.63
Farella, E.M., Morelli, L., Grilli, E., Rigon, S. and Remondino,
F., 2022: Handling critical aspects in massive photogrammetric
digitization of museum assets, In The International Archives of
Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information
Sciences, 46, 215-222.
Guberina, I., Kocijan, M., Validžija I., Rihtar Jurić, T., 2020:
Prvi rezultati NEMO istraživanja – Utjecaj COVID-19 na
muzeje u Europi i svijetu, Vijesti iz svijeta muzeja, Newsletter,
br 113, 21.04.2020., Muzejski dokumentacijski centar, Zagreb
Kersten, T.P., Tschirschwitz, F., Lindstaedt, M. and Deggim, S.,
2018: The historic wooden model of Solomon’s Temple: 3D
recording, modelling and immersive virtual reality visualisation.
Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable
Development. Vol. 8 No. 4, 448-464.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JCHMSD-09-2017-0067
Marziali, S., Dionisio, G., 2017: Photogrammetry and macro
photography. The experience of the MUSINT II Project in the
3D digitizing process of small size archaeological artifacts.
Studies in Digital Heritage, 1(2), 298–309.
https://doi.org/10.14434/sdh.v1i2.23250
Potrebica, H., i Rakvin, M., 2019: 'Tumul IV na groblju Kaptol-
Čemernica – revizijsko istraživanje', In Vjesnik Arheološkog
muzeja u Zagrebu, 52(1), 31-81. Preuzeto s:
https://hrcak.srce.hr/227901 (date of access: 28.03.2022.)
Solter, A., 2016: Arheološki muzej u Zagrebu - život od 19. do
21. stoljeća. Zagreb, Arheološki muzej u Zagrebu.
Solter, A. 2019: AMZ 3D - digitalizacija fundusa Arheološkog
muzeja u Zagrebu. Muzeologija, (56), 125-137. Preuzeto s
https://hrcak.srce.hr/238449 (date of access: 28.03.2022.)
Schofield, G., Beale, G., Beale, N., Fell, N., Hadley, D., Hook,
J., Murphy D., Richards, J., and Thresh, L., 2018: Viking VR:
Designing a Virtual Reality Experience for a Museum. In
Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems
Conference (DIS '18). Association for Computing Machinery,
New York, NY, USA, 805–815.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3196709.3196714
Verhoeven, G., 2018. Focusing on out-of-focus: assessing
defocus estimation algorithms for the benefit of automated
image masking. International Archives of the Photogrammetry,
The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XLIII-B2-2022
XXIV ISPRS Congress (2022 edition), 6–11 June 2022, Nice, France
This contribution has been peer-reviewed.
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-1159-2022 | © Author(s) 2022. CC BY 4.0 License.
1164
Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 42, 1149-
1156. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-1149-2018
The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XLIII-B2-2022
XXIV ISPRS Congress (2022 edition), 6–11 June 2022, Nice, France
This contribution has been peer-reviewed.
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-1159-2022 | © Author(s) 2022. CC BY 4.0 License.
1165
