Re: Stereo to photogrammetry

[P3D Dr. George A. Themelis <fj834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>        I am an archaeologist and am
>interested in creating a visual and metrical database of Neanderthal stone
>tools while I am excavating at a site in France this summer.  I will likely
>be using an SLR with a sliding rail for the close-ups of the artefacts,
>this will give me good control over the stereo-base (which is necessary for
>photogrammetry), and it will give me a good sized (full-frame)
>negative/slide.  The principal is essentially the same as going from aerial
>photography --> elevation maps, which is done all the time.  But I will not
>be using fancy aerial cameras (which have build in index marks for
>measurement, and corrected lenses), nor can I afford "terrestrial
>photogrammetric" systems.

It is not clear to me why you will be recording these pictures.  At first,
it sounds as if you are doing stereo photography for documentation.  The
use of the word "photogrammetry" implies that you want to do measurements
on the pictures to recreate true sizes of objects.  Since you are looking
and can handle the ojects (unlike aerial or SEM photogrammetry) why don't
you measure them directly with a ruler???

>Is there an easy way to put index marks on your negative/slide without
>wrecking my camera?  Do ready made attachments for such things exist?

Why do you nead the index marks on the slide/negative and not the sample?

>In general, does anyone on the list do photogrammetry?

I have done SEM photogrammetry.  Professor Guinier in this list _teaches_
aerial photogrammetry.  The rest of us are mainly doing Realist-format
photogrammetry a.k.a. stereo photography! ;)

>Does anyone do archaeology?

Sure!  We all do!!!  Haven't you heard our stories about the Stereo
Realist, etc.?  Last weekend I was able to "unearth" a Realist in mint
condition from a local flea market.  Wonderful specimen, very well
preserved through the years!!! ;) ;) ;)

-- George Themelis


------------------------------