5 Fun facts about geophysics

So I've recently had a few questions about archaeological geophysics (or geofizz in Time Team speak) and what it's like to be a geophysicist. So (without trying to break any confidentiality agreements between myself and commercial clients), here are 5 fun facts that you probably didn't know about geophysics! Some of these are more personal observations, some of which my colleagues and peers will agree with, others they won't.

1. As part of the planning process in Britain (where new developments such as roads, buildings and other such things are included), archaeological geophysics makes its money by obtaining data large areas of ground quickly. By not destroying the archaeology(buried walls, ditches, metallic objects, burnt surfaces, etc.) it involves a fraction of time and money compared to excavation. This also allows us to continue preserving archaeology in the ground rather than in a storage facility, which is a major issue (see here for more info on storage of artefacts). For magnetometry (the most common survey method) this also relies on modern metallic features (such as metallic gates, fences, clothing on the user, etc.) being eliminated from the survey area as much as reasonably possible!

No Arnie, you can't do magnetometry because you're completely made of metal (presumably magnetic).

2. Archaeology is protected by differing levels of protection in the UK, depending on their significance. This also affects who and what can do archaeological fieldwork on certain sites. Scheduled Ancient Monuments (or SAMs, for example Stonehenge) have the most legal protection, while English Heritage has categories for "listed buildings", which has 3 levels of non-statutory protection, from I (the most important) to II* and II. SAMs require legal permissions to survey the land, not just the consent of the landowner, which is always requried for any sort of fieldwork. Normally becuase geophysics is a non-destructive technique, it is not a problem to obtain what is known as a section 42 licence. 

These categories reflect the significance of the archaeology and can relate to any building or open space such as a park. However these are non-statutory, although it doesn't mean you can simply bulldoze all these buildings (not least because many have fascinating histories and often are national treasures in themselves, such as Catesby house, where the gunpowder plot was organised (see here). Other protection (statutory or otherwise) includes listed gardens and parks (including large areas around villages with historic and prehistoric significance, including Ashby St.Ledgers), World Heritage Sites (which are listed by UNESCO, not the British Government, although the sites tend to be run by charities or governments). If the listed area has an open space that isn't overlain by modern human activity then the chances are that you can survey it and detect the archaeology underneath.

Google maps is a great tool but sometimes the labels can be a bit unhelpful... this is a map of all of the scheduled monuments in the UK(!) (taken from  http://www.ancientmonuments.info/map).

3. Geophysics is the closest thing we can get to creating a 3-D model of archaeology preserved under the ground! We use software to recreate models using the data from ground penetrating radar (GPR), which then can be shown off, such as this video below (courtesy of GSB Prospection ltd.). It would be possible to do this with other geophysical methods like resistivity (electrical resistance) data, if you could obtain depth and had the relevant software. You could then also have a scale model of the archaeology with the 3-D printer if you want to have a scaled-down model, which would be great for explaining sites to the public.

4. Far from being the University-only subject that it is today, geophysics (in my opinion) could and should be taught in schools that have a science element. My reasoning? All geophysics generally requires from an individual is:

• To be able to walk normally for an extended period of time
• To be able to understand some physical principles about waves, electricity and magnetism (although LIDAR is not quite so simple)
• To be diligent with equipment (its all a bit expensive).

Some schools do A-levels in archaeology where the use of archaeological geophysics is discussed. If you did phyiscs at A-level or even at GCSE then magnetism, radar frequencies and electrical resistance should be all you need to understand for the job (to being with). One could argue that because it could be taught in a school and not a university environment however, it shouldn't need the University degree (from the jobs I've applied to, many ask for at least a postgraduate degree in a trainee position!!). But I feel that archaeological geophysics is a wonderful subject and should be used by kids to inspire them to get involved with archaeology and/or science.

However, on the other side of the coin University departments are really the only ones that can afford the equipment and justify its expenditure because they will adhere to research frameworks or commercial use where geophysics is justified. Furthermore it is easier as a University student to understand the benefits of geophysical survey as part of a holistic (that is a complete) archaeological investigation, which include map regression, historical analysis, field surveys, photogrammetry, excavation/watching briefs and post excavation, etc. However schools shouldn't have to justify themselves in this way and simply say that its for the long term benefit of the children and the world as a whole, especially since geophysics has directly transferable skills to many other subjects.


5. It really works the muscles! The equipment used in geophysics is varied but they all share one thing in common- the need to move equipment around. Often it's quite manageable but it doesn't mean that it's easy work to begin with. Even as an healthy individual my body took a few days to get used to the aches from a full day of geophysics.

Back when I wasn't getting paid to walk in fields with expenive equipment...(lifted from one of my earliest blog posts , see here!)

This blog post is a tribute to Joe Raine, as recommended by a certain individual (you know who you are).

Should you do an Archaeology degree in Britain?

Since tuition fees rose a couple of years ago from a flat rate of just over £3,000/year (I was one of the lucky ones, having graduated last year) to £6,000-£9,000 a year, meaning that a 3 year degree will set you back a minimum of £20,000 before including accomodation etc., and often over £40-50,000 with all expenses thrown in, should a student who is looking to do Archaeology study a degree in Archaeology in Britain?

Let's clarify that a bit more. This post is meant for British students. As many foreign students know (looking over the Atlantic here), sometimes it can be a much better deal for students to come to the UK to get a degree, even if they have been paying the full nine thousand simoleons for quite some time. Also Scottish and Welsh students pay less in their respective countries so I guess this really applies to students born south of Berwick and Carlisle and east of Chepstow and Offa's Dyke (but also west of Dogger Bank and north of Land's End, just to make sure). Also not forgetting the Isles of Wight and Man who laugh at the English pain, since they've been on international fee rates since the tuition fee business began too. 


One of the most pressing issues to many people is whether a degree in Archaeology will get you enough money to pay back the loans. It is important to make the distinction between a degree in archaeology and a job in archaeology, as one does not necessarily lead to the other. While the former gives you a huge range of transferable skills, so does a job in archaeology. These transferable skills however are very different. The former however is very expensive, while the latter may not be quite so expensive! An archaeology career is often poorly paid (but don't let that put you off if you enjoy the subject!), with most starting salaries at the £17,000 mark, and professionals/specialists only a few thousand pounds better off, if they're lucky. So it's going to be a while before you pay off your degree, if at all!

But this is a bit of a moot point as after 30 years, your student loan is written off, so don't panic about it. Just don't go into your overdraft if you can help it! Many archaeology graduates end up in all sorts of varied and interesting professions (I have a friend who is doing a law conversion course, for example), and people do archaeology without looking to archaeology, history or heritage as a first career, so do what you want to do at University, Archaeology is a beautiful and diverse subject that can open many doors.

The potential rewards of archaeology! This is a villa in Tuscany (see my other blog posts).

The next question is what sort of courses are there? A lot of undergraduate courses are available, and at the last count a few months ago it was 46 Universities doing some form of degree, plus an extra 2 doing postgraduate only courses. However, if you aren't convinced by any of the courses, or don't feel that Universities are the way forward, fear not. Now there are MOOCs (massive open online courses) which are free but require time and an internet connection. They currently focus on aspects on archaeology, but see below for a few example MOOCs you can have a look at yourself.

On the other side of the coin, I've spoken to people who've gone straight into the world of work but now have hit a ceiling whereby they require a degree to continue progressing up the ladder, even though they have the vocational experience to progress their careers by themselves. This can be infuriating but sometimes I do feel envious towards these guys and dolls who have made that decision, not least because they don't have the financial burden and they have a head start in their career in terms of real world experience. However, archaeology is now an extremely well qualified profession, and some jobs will want both the experience and the degree, trying to get the best out of both worlds. A qualification is also much easier to use as evidence of having skills in an interview.

So if you don't want to spend all that money but want to do archaeology, what can you do? Many years ago, there used to be a body called the Manpower Services Commission (MSC, not to be confused with the postgraduate qualification postscript for Master of Science), who often particiapted in excavating things. and that means EVERYTHING; for roads, buildings, major public works, archaeology etc. If the government needed it being done, the MSC were their go-to guys. Essentially a government-run body to get unemployed people into work, many archaeologists (who are far older than this author!) have forged sucessful careers from starting out in the MSC. 

Sadly there is no direct equivalent in modern times, although whether a similar body would be able to pass on the same skill set in today's commercial world is in the realm of the hypothetical. My point is that the best way to get a job in archaeology is to volunteer.  Unfortunately, opportunities for people between the ages of 16-18 to get into archaeology are rarely advertised, if at all. I was lucky that my local city council advertised in my school about a survey project, and that ultimately got me offers from Universities. Even if you do a degree, employers will look for experience in the field, particularly commercial experience. There are some online courses that can teach you archaeology, but nothing beats standing next to a castle with some tape, string, some 2H pencils and some permitrace. Sadly, no two Universities seem capable of agreeing on what constitutes a good length of fieldwork experience for an archaeology graduate, and this is one of the reasons why some archaeologists will not consider training excavations as "experience". Some training excavations are barely a few weeks long, others can last months, and some courses can offer up to a year's worth of practical experience! So what is the best "compromise" of studying the subject and actually practising what you preach, especially as most archaeology firms don't have a budget that can allow for student travelling expenses?

This is where an internship comes in handy. Some of these are paid, and I am fortunate in that I have just completed a paid one that paid above minimum wage in a museum. Again these are difficult to find, but can be found in the strangest of places; my internship was advertised through the University's careers job service! It was a thoroughly excellent experience, updating the museum's database and helping to update their collection, while getting involved in the museum's day to day activities. Some other internships are available, but ones relating to archaeology (especially digging in the field) are about as rare as hen's teeth.

Of course, archaeology firms are willing to take on volunteers (who isn't?). This is how I got into Archaeology, with a week in an office and in the field with a regional firm when I was 16, as my school made us do work experience, although that said my parents did far more than the school ever did in making the opportunity happen! 

If your heart is truly set in archaeology, then ask around for the best courses in archaeology, sources of funding, etc. because they do exist. I was lucky, and unfortunately you do need some to get you into archaeology, but once you're there, and you enjoy it, you won't care for the poor pay and the prospect of a massive loan over your head. Experience can be found, so long as you are willing to search high and low. Find popular archaeologists and see if they're giving talks at local places. Much of what I have stated is also applicable to a number of other careers as well, so don't feel pressured into doing something you don't want to do.

Some good websites for students looking to do archaeology are:

http://www.archaeologyuk.org/education - The Council for British Archaeology's information for prospective students.

http://www.grampusheritage.co.uk/ - placements in European archaeological digs. You have to apply for these!

http://www.bajr.org/ - free sources of information for excavation skills (makes more sense when you're doing an archaeology degree) and employment opportunities.

https://www.mooc-list.com/tags/archaeology - a list of MOOCs that you can have a look at.

Archaeological Techniques for the 21st century, part 2

This time, I will list a number of various technologies that are being used around the world by archaeologists to help with recording and interpretation! Thanks to the University of Swansea for the information from their department of Engineering and their Egyptology museum. The museum is free to visit and the website is here.


The U-CAT underwater camera

This underwater robot called the U-CAT , built at the Tallinn centre for Biorobotics, Finland, will help us to access shipwrecks! It looks like a small fish or submarine, it moves just like a sea turtle and it is only a few centimetres across. It carries It will be able to get into small cracks in submerged wrecks and buildings which would normally be inaccessible or unsafe for human exploration. It is also mounted with a camera, so a live feed could be accessed, and/or a digital reconstruction of the shipwreck can be created from the footage. The cost is not yet known, but surely the small size of the U-CAT means that it will be reasonably cheap to buy? As there are hundreds of submerged wrecks in the Solent channel alone, this could be a very useful resource to record and inform us about shipwrecks and submerged buildings and landscape in years to come.


Digitally recording archaeology on the cheap?

In archaeology, we can now create models in a number of situations, using cameras (for photogrammetric), laser scans (see previous post about laser scanning here), and even CAD (conmputer aided design) models! With companies like Agisoft and SketchUp providing the software to create models, he range of capabilites are vast. Currently some Universities are using SketchUp to archaeology students to improve the (digital) arcaheological record and the awareness in what software is available to arcaheologists.

www.sketchfab.com is a brilliant free service that allows you to publish 3D models, based on virtual reconstructions, which allows your work to be advertised to a wide audience. So long as you have access to the internet, you can then publish these models! If you upload your model into the SketchUp domain, then you can georeference your model to the real world!

A snapshot (from my postgraduate dissertation) of St. Faith's church in Google Earth, uploaded via SketchUp for free. The colour was added via photographs, except for the hexagonal tower, which has been modelled procedurally (that is, by using settings within the software) to avoid the need to use photographs).

Creating real-life plastic models of archaeology

A number of methods are now available for use for scanning artefacts, particularly X-ray scans. some Universities are pioneering the use of scanning technology for various materials, and then creating real life models out of them! For example, the University of Swansea has combined the use of a CT scanner, 3D visualisation technology and 3-D printers to create a model of a mummified round object from Egypt, about 50cm x 50cm x 60cm. It was assumed to be a baby or a small animal, but it turns out that it was the skeleton of a snake that was 80 cm long! It is difficult to date the snake, or tell what specific species it is based on this model alone, but it tells us that the Egyptians treated many animals with mummification. Why? Turns out that they revered many animals as sacred, not just cats! Many of their gods could metamorphose into animals, which then became sacred to them. This method is also non-destructive, and allows the object to be studied in the future, while the model can be handled by the public. The model on display, despite looking very small, is twice the size of the skeleton! This allows details in the skeleton to be explained to the public more clearly. Other institutions are practicing this too, such as the University of Southampton, who have used graphics software and 3-D printers to recreate the head from a marble statue found at the Roman port of Portus, near to Rome.

My festival of archaeology contribution! Exploring Leigh Park House, Havant in more detail

As part of the Festival of Archaeology (Friday 12th-27th July 2014) I'd thought I'd post about my current research! My project looks at Sir George Staunton's (as opposed to William Stone's) Leigh Park House, Havant, which is a grade II listed Regency and Victorian period mansion (c.1760-1860's), the only remnants of which today are the gothic library (see this post for my laser scans of the gothic library). It was mostly classical in it's architecture, except for the gothic library, which is often confused with a chapel (which is a fair cop). As the focal point of the Leigh Park estate, it was the starting point for any visitor to Leigh Park estate to visit the pleasure grounds which Garrett and Staunton had carefully nurtured over time, which was also the home of the lord of the manor of Havant and Flood. There are paintings of Leigh Park House, displaying its mostly classical character.

One of the drawings of Leigh Park House (courtesy of Chris Bailey)

But I am interested in the individuals who lived there and their reasons for altering the house. Our knowledge of the precise location of the house and its interior is also poor. It has been heavily rebuilt at least once, and the interior at least twice, while the story of its demolition has been given very little recognition to the development of the park. Furthermore, the house has had multiple occupants, but we don't really understand why they bought the property; was it for the views Leigh Park House afforded (as mentioned in poems, memoirs and other historical sources), or for other reasons?

I am currently using a series of geophysical techniques (magnetometry, resisitivity and ground penetrating radar) to investigate the below-ground remains of the house, while I am using a Geographical Information System (GIS) to investigate the buildings that have been claimed to have been seen from the estate. A GIS allows the user to investigate information via the medium of space; it is simply a database where all the information has a spatial component, and all the information is ordered into thematic layers, almost like layers of a cake! Furthermore, using historical sources, I want to reconstruct at least part of the interior of Leigh Park House, so we can better understand the House. These strands of evidence will be analysed to assess the reasons for living at Leigh Park House.

The RM15, a resistivity meter. By creating a circiut with two other probes in the vicinty, the resistance of the ground can be measured at certain points.

Ultimately, the reason for investigating Leigh Park House is to help the Staunton Country Park team take steps to conserve the remains of Leigh Park House and to make the reasons for the purchase of Leigh Park House and its alterations. The views offered from the the remains of Leigh Park House today do not give a lovely view of the sea, but give a view of some trees and some farm animals. My current idea is that there should be some sort of permanent display, detailing the interior of Leigh Park House, the reasons for purchasing it, and finally the views afforded from the house.

A brief introduction to statistics and football

Time for another non-archaeological post!

I've noticed a trend this year, particularly on the BBC, to rely increasingly on "more sophisticated" statistical analyses as part of their commentary. Don't get me wrong, statistics can be useful but never have statistics been so obviously abused. It was about time that the book of "lies, damned lies and statistics" was thrown by the licence fee payer (i.e. you) at the BBC's sport section, and tell them off for making generalisations that either don't exist, or are just plain wrong.

N.B. I am not a Manchester United, Sunderland, or Chelsea supporter. Make what you will of it, but my good friends will be able to tell you that I support Coventry City Football Club. Having now stated my biases, lets get on with the stats.

So you have always had these fairly "basic" stats in the game, to do with possession, shots, fouls, and so on:



Which are flawed in their own way, but fine, I can live with that. They're the obvious parts of a game. These are only used as a general indicator by most commentators, and don't rely on space as an argument (except for corners).  But now you're seeing this, which is my main concern:





What is wrong with the mean in space (I hear you cry)?

The above map shows the average positions of the Chelsea players (on the left) and Manchester United players (on the right), based on something known as the central mean. the central mean, objectively speaking, is the sum of all of the positions the player was in, in a given space of time (e.g. the full 90 minutes, all the time before they were substituted on 75 minutes etc.), divided by the total number of positions they were in. Confused? Don't panic! Imagine you have a graph of x on the bottom, y on the top, and you work out the mean of the x and y separately (so as not to confuse them) e.g:

So then you reference them on the same map, giving you lines. Then you find where they meet, et voila! The mean centre has been found for that player over the time period. But, what does this actually tell you about each player? Does this mean that they stood rooted to the spot? Of course not (unless they are statues). The next map below illustrates the point about movement better:





This heat map shows every touch made in the game made by two Chelsea players, and where they where as a percentage of the game. Look how dispersed the movement is! It's not just an up/down motion, it's sideways, it's all over the final third. In truth, it's similar to a lot of heat maps that you will come to see of a lot of attacking players in their positions. It would be interesting to see the mean centre of all those passes (and direction), although that would be even less useful than the mean centre of the player.

But where do these passes go? There are also maps to show the short and long passes, and where they were done in relation to the rest of the field. You can even tell which player they passed to the most, and who passes to who the most, and infer the in-field relationships from this.

But, ultimately, none of this actually tells you WHY a goal was scored, or a shot was blocked, and all the other football related reasons for winning or losing a game. Sorry, but there is no magic formula to win a game. Just hard work, being good, eating your vegetables and knowing far more about football than I do. These will all contribute to you scoring more goals than doing statistical analysis of every game and where they went wrong by using statistics alone. Also it will make you feel better that you can get more shots on goal by simply putting the practice in than just computing the most likely outcome.

Coming back to the problem of central mean, why is it a "forced marriage"? Means were not designed for space, only for quantities and other non-spatially defined stats.

Now, let's throw in what Robbie Savage said about the game: "In Ashley Young, Adnan Januzaj, Danny Welbeck and Antonio Valencia, United boss David Moyes picked four fast attacking players to hurt Chelsea at Stamford Bridge. But United could not make that pace count because Chelsea's back four stayed so deep throughout the game."

Using statistics as the crux of his argument, you can see that he was right, but only in some respects, and not really being aided by his own diagrams. Yes, the Chelsea defence are relatively deep. But the statistics also show that Manchester's attack was actually in similar, deep, positions. So does this show that their pace was neutralised? Not really. The statistics show more likely that the offside trap was being used, and this is not a sign of pace, more tactical and player awareness. Furthermore, both sets of players are likely to be running around, for corners, free kicks and so on, so this will "skew" the results, so the mean may not actually reflect the "true" position of the player at all!! To quote Savage from the same article; "United were all over the place positionally for the second goal after clearing Chelsea's initial corner." This will affect the mean, but furthermore this incident that led to a goal is in no way reflected by the central mean. The speed is beneficial if you want to beat the offiside trap, but that's only half the battle.

So part of the problem is trying to use statistics to explain your point, and knowing how to use it. None of these stats can actually depict the game's movements. It is better for the commentator describe to you what caused the goal, or even better, go watch the actual game itself, if you want to know how to win games and have entertaining football!!

Summary

Statistics should only be used to explain the team game; the more components you add to a statistical analysis, the more it relates to the whole, and less to the individual players (if that makes sense). It should be noted that statistics are useful, but not as an argument unto themselves.


All images from League cup semi final between Manchester United and Sunderland, 22/01/2014, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25849087, or from analysis of premier league game between Chelsea and Manchester United, 19/01/2014, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25802415

Creating a 19th century virtual walkthrough of the Gothic Library, part 3: Out of the frying pan and into the fire (more modelling, textures and lighting)

Thanks to Gianna, Grant and Peter for help on this section!!

The last time we left the model, the walls had been constructed, the windows had been given some properties so the impending sunlight would react to it in a physically accurate manner, but the painters and plasterers have not yet been called in. Well, now it's time to break out the Dulux colour charts (or the munsell colour charts, if you're more used to those)!

However, it turns out that my previous creation was very complex to map (more on that below), and it left too many gaps between the areas where the walls meet (for all that AutoCAD and 3DS Max share a lot of features, they are still two very different creatures) so it had to be completely rebuilt! This involved creating a box, splitting it into multiple segments and then model each individual window pane based on this box. Additionally it also turns out that the boolean functions (adding and subtracting surfaces and solids from each other to create new shapes) doesn't work very well in 3DS, in contrast to AutoCAD. I wasted 2 days trying to think of a workaround to this!! on top of the the box was too space intensive so I ignored the thickness of the walls and worked on a plane instead. This meant that I had to create a single shape (i.e. the planes) and effectively have ready-made holes in the shape.
This was repetitive, tedious and dull but it can at least be copied around the building, because the glass is a reasonably uniform shape. The other advantage is that I could import images of the building in question to create the glass panes and iron bars accurately, along with the rest of the model.

The segments and window in perfect harmony.

In 3DS, applying textures is like adding a new layer of wallpaper to a wall. It doesn't matter what the property of the object is, be it bricks, plastic, etc. If it has a surface, you can put a texture to it (and sometimes multiple textures)! These are known as "maps" and in this blog post I will go through my thought process as I show you how I added some more colour to the gothic library. In trying to be historically accurate, some of the photos have been edited to look how they would have done in the early 1830's, when the library had just been built.

I took some photographs of the gothic library (with the kind permission of Chris Bailey and the team at the Sir George Staunton country Park) and proceeded to edit these in Photoshop. In many places the beautiful plaster work had fallen off, and even some of the bricks had fallen out of place! However, I hadn't come to rebuild the library in real life, I've come to model it to see how it would have looked like in the 19th century, so I used some guesswork and historical evidence (see below) to ensure that the plaster was restored in it's virtual environment.

You can clearly see where the plaster should fill around the windows, but it has fallen apart with time.

The most difficult part about applying the photographs to the walls was thinking about how to "wrap" or map the photos around the object. Confused? Think of maps like wrapping a present, except that your present is a wall, and all of the wrapping paper must connect up together. The easiest things to wrap in the real world are those without curves, so the gothic library, if we only focus on the wall and not the windows, is fairly straightforward, especially if we only focus on the interior (i.e. a 2-dimensional surface). See the image of a dice below to see what I mean! Therefore, I changed the boxes that represented the walls into single, 2-dimensional elements by breaking them and then grouping the resulting elements together. A similar texture was used for the roof, which was already in 2- dimensional pieces. The floor, on the other hand, would not require quite as much thought as it was created as just one object. However, to the inexperienced user of 3DS Max, it is a daunting task!

 

Each of these boxes represents a part of the property of the fabric of the building, be it the texture, the colour, glossiness, etc.

This dice is easy to apply to a surface in 3DS because it is geometrically quite straightforward.

As you can see this is one way of applying a photorealistic texture to the building. However, this doesn't cover all of the texturing! The different "maps" don't just cover what you can see on the surface; you can adjust transparency, bumpiness, shadow, photons, etc. Many of these maps are to do with how light reacts with the surface. Unfortunately, I ran out of time to play around with these different maps!

Creating a virtual 19th century walkthrough of the Gothic Library, part two: The creation of the model

The story so far:

I have been assigned the task of creating a virtual model for a TV show about Victorian architects. This will involve using 3DSMax to add textures and show how light entered the building. But first, I have to actually create the model!

One of the problems is that the model needs to be be accurate. Fortunately, I have a point cloud (from a laser scanning device) of the gothic library (see my other blog about how I came into possession of this data), which I can use to create the model. However, a point cloud is computationally very expensive, so it takes a long time to create the model, but more importantly, I can't import the point cloud into 3DSMax as it can't support point clouds (yet!). Therefore, my first problem is finding a software program that I can use to help creating an accurate model of the library. since the point cloud is incomplete as well as not being supported in 3DSMax, I will have to use the point cloud as a guide, and build polygons manually in a program like AutoCAD. AutoCAD, being made by Autodesk, who also make 3DSMax, there is a lot of compatibility between the two programs. For a start, they can both work in either 2-D or 3-D shapes, although the way they are constructed varies (AutoCAD is used more for designing buildings and complex mechanical parts, 3DSMax focuses more on smaller scale models for game engines etc.).

 

Shaded and wireframe views of the gothic library so far... the walls will be textured (given colour, physical properties) etc. when the model is finished.

However, the time spent in AutoCAD limited how much time could be spent in 3DS Max, which is a factor because 3DS Max is very time-consuming. Furthermore it was decided only to focus on the construction of the windows, and then the point cloud would be used to take images of the rest of the interior. These images will form the basis of the textures which will be rendered inside the library. This differed from the original plan of digitising every element inside the gothic library using autoCAD as this would be even more time consuming(!), as well as cutting down on the time spent digitising. Once the main model was built out of the point cloud, the rest of the model could be created in 3DS Max, using the edit poly feature from the modifier list to add elements and features which had not been included in the model. this additional editing in 3DS MAx took a little while longer than expected but with practice, the speed of modelling starts to improve.

Next time: texturing and lighting!