Looking back on the readings, there was a common theme of certain technologies such as GIS that had potential but lacked sufficient applicability to the humanities, according to some scholars. According to the paper Beyond GIS: Geospatial Technologies and the Future of History by David Bodenhamer, these technologies create models that seem too focused on being “accurate” and “precise”, essentially being overly quantitative. The humanities seem to be more focused on representing and understanding heritage and culture through different perspectives using literary techniques and more qualitative methods as those match the goals of humanities scholars more. From here, we can now shift to recent advancements in virtual reality and spatial technology which allow us to reconstruct the past through models that allow for the incorporation of qualitative details from literature. Furthermore, these models work to be more accurate in representing the past and matching the objectives of humanities scholars.
This week we started the Museum Project and I’ve done the first part of taking pictures of the artifact, or horse sculpture, my group and I will model virtually. While taking the pictures, my and one of my partners made sure to get close enough to capture texture details and a variety of views to ensure a more realistic virtual representation. We wanted to get as much information as possible through taking pictures at different angles, something I bet we wouldn’t have done had we been just looking at the object as part of an exhibition. Given that we now have to pay the role of “creators”, we’re placing more emphasis on capturing every detail possible to create a realistic model for others to see.
Getting up close with the artifact does make me wonder about the origin of it. I feel that I want to know more about where it came from, who owned it, and how it made its way to Carleton. All I know is that it’s from the Han Dynasty and that it was donated by an alum. Had I known more information before taking the pictures, it maybe would’ve affected the angles at which I took the photos or the parts of the artifact I would’ve photographed.
2 thoughts on “Week 5 Reflective Blog: Museum Project Updates”
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Great thoughts, Nithin! I also find the argument about GIS use in the humanities to be interesting as I can sort of see both sides of the argument. Using GIS may take attention away from the understanding of the art, its history, and its cultural legacy, however GIS mapping may make that more available to those who can’t see the art up close and allow them to make their own interpretations of that art. It’s definitely a tough argument and one that may not have any right answers.
I agree that GIS might place emphasis too much on the details, though I believe having such details might be of use if the artifact has lots of small engravings which has cultural importance. On the other hand, having such detailed depiction might actually lead to the viewing process being unsatisfying if the running device can’t process all the details at once, leading to a more lagging experience. I hope that in the future, VR technology would develop enough that both details and the ‘vibe’ of the item can be replicated to convey both the physical object and its history.