This presentation is part of the 2017 3D Digital Documentation Summit.

Beyond Hype and Promise: Digital Heritage Strategies in Our Nation’s Parks for Preservation, 3D Learning, Outreach, and Education

Speaker 1:           Thank you very much. Hopefully we’re all back in from the break here. Today, I wanted to talk a little bit about a lot of the technologies that you’ve been seeing, and also deal a little bit with the hype of the technology that you’re seeing and how these are being utilized, and how they can be utilized going into the future. We’re all sort of the cool factor. We’re all enamored with these point clouds and what they are, but maybe we’re not utilizing them to their fullest extent, or we’re maybe not utilizing sometimes proper tools on improper ways. This is a cave site, Russell Cave National Monument. I’ll be showing you a little more of that later in the talk.

Who we are, just really quickly, I’m going to try to buzz through some of these. We’re kind of a new initiative, but Travis and I have actually been doing this at University of South Florida since 1999. We were one of the first adopters of laser scanning in the southeast area for archeological purposes for sure. Started out with the old Cyrax scanner that you saw yesterday. Things have changed a lot.

Where we are today is the University of South Florida has created a new initiative in our library system. We have 48,000 students plus, and growing. Second largest campus in Florida, behind University of Central Florida. Metropolitan based, that sort of feel, but we do have a lot of students living full-time on campus and integrating into the library system. So we’re capturing a lot of students through the library. How do we also engage them and utilize 3D technologies in this area?

We have this new fishbowl kind of concept. This is our offices on the main floor of the library, but we also have a new digital media technology area. I’ll show you a little bit of that in just a second. What we’re doing with this is we’re bringing all of these projects we’ve been working on since 1999 into collection databases in our library through proper archival standards that we’re adopting and working with other agencies on. We’re bringing these collections to, not only our students, but to the global audience as well.

The other thing I wanted to touch on is the toolkits that we use. I see a lot of emphasis on one particular brand or one particular kind of instrument, and what I’m going to be preaching a little bit today is that … And we saw with SCI-Arc it’s not one, it’s many. So you’re using many different tools on these kinds of projects. How do you bring these tools together? It sounds easy. It’s not.

How do these data sets work together? How do these things come together? These are just some of the types of instruments that we’re using on every single project that we do, everything from drone base, GPS, GNSS kind of surveys, face shift and time of flight kinds of longer range instruments, structured light and white light scanning, and then different configurations and platforms for mobile to different elevation kind of opportunities that we have, a different tripod, different types of imaging, different photogrammetry, gigapixel that you saw a little bit yesterday, also some other kinds of sensor imaging. This is gigapixel photography. How many people were here yesterday saw some of the gigapixel stuff? I’ll show you some of that. Also, reflectance, transformation imaging.

How do all these things come together, and what are we doing with all these different types of technology? It looks so cool, right? VR, AR, all of these things. Where do they fall here? There’s this thing called the hype cycle, okay? Gartner, you can look this up as a reference on this. As things are introduced and as they come out, people are all excited about them and you see these incredible things on Kickstarter, and everything looks so cool and great. Then you get them and you try them and you go, “This doesn’t work,” right? Or, “This isn’t what I saw on the YouTube video.” So there’s all of this sort of peak of what you think is going to happen and the expectation off it, and then you become disillusioned with the whole thing.

The early adopters of technology tend to fit in here, and we’re trying to figure all this out. People that did laser scanning in the beginning, like we did, it was really a challenge. I think Chad was showing you some of the cables and the battery configurations and all the things that you had to do to get out in the field with some of these instruments. You go through this period of disillusionment, and also a lot of times you’re getting a reputation or you’re running into other people’s reputations. You’ll go to do a scan project and somebody will say, “I tried that. It doesn’t work.” Maybe it does work, it’s just they used the wrong tool on the project or they didn’t provide the full deliverable or think about where that point cloud can take you.

Where are we in the technology scheme? Photogrammetry. Everybody’s so excited. Maybe photogrammetry is not new, but all the software and the things that it does are at this peak, are coming into the fluorescence of this. So we’re about to all become disillusioned, I guess, right? Because then you try it and, oh, maybe it does work and maybe some of the software goes away. We heard about 123D Catch, things like that that happen. Those kind of things happen until they work themselves out. I’m hearing a lot about the accuracy of photogrammetry and things of that nature.

We’re sort of in this cycle with a lot of these technologies, and we have not hit a plateau of productivity yet with them. But laser scanning, we really are almost sort of at that level, at least practitioner wise, maybe not communicating to the public wise. I’ll just run through using some of our projects, where with are with some of these different types of technologies that we’ve been exposed to and been hearing about.

TLS, terrestrial laser scanning. Laser scanning can have lidars, lidars, lidar. It can happen on different platforms, though, airborne lidar. Terrestrial based is what I’m showing here though, and that’s lidar on a stick, lidar on a tripod. It’s also maybe mobile lidar could be another platform for this. So there’s many different platforms for lidar data, including drone based. But TLS data, we’re familiar with the point cloud look, right?

This is a project that we’re working on at the World Heritage Site of [inaudible 00:06:54] Monastery in Armenia. I’ll show you a few things that we’re deriving, then, from the point cloud data. We’re also, at the same time, we’re doing terrestrial stuff. We’re doing things like the photogrammetry applications coming from drone, so we’re taking imagery, structure from motion. Not only are we getting video capture, we’re also getting still imagery that then from this, we’re doing things like condition assessments, using the kinds of videography and imaging tools. But then we’re taking this and we’re making both point cloud and mesh models from the photogrammetry tools.

You can see that this is a way that we can easily … I say easily. We can easily capture a landscape relatively quickly, and we can process this in such ways that we get different derivative types of moles out of them, maybe not the most accurate. I wouldn’t want to go all the way to Armenia and come home with just photogrammetry kinds of applications because maybe it’s not going to inform me or give me the answers to the research questions that we might necessarily have about these structures.

It’s a nice way, though, to provide another type of data set. From the structure for motion data, we were able to process it in such a way that because there’s no lidar airborne, lidar available for this area, we’ve processed photogrammetry data to provide us with some high resolution ways of looking at elevation modeling for the site. This is useful for looking at features like … I don’t know if you can pick this out, but this is a previous wall formation there.

So we’re able to see certain things from these types of products, and we’re able to map and look at a scale that is wider than a building structure or something that we could do with laser scanning on the ground. These models are also really useful for interpretation education. This is throwing it into Sketchfab, doing an interpretive tour out of this that can then be also brought into a VR environment. I’ll show you a little bit of that. You can find us on Sketchfab. All of these models and things that I’m showing are available for public use on Sketch Fab as well.

But then what are we doing with some of the more detailed data that we’re connecting using the laser scanning? This is terrestrial lidar that we’re making and doing forensic analysis of the structures of the monastery. We’re interested in all the different building episodes and how they might’ve come together, and that’s where we need a higher resolution type of product than what the photogrammetry can provide us. We’re also taking these data sets and bringing them into the hype of augmented reality, so not virtual reality, but actually enhancing reality with an augmented model, in this case. These kinds of things, again, can be used to virtually explore interesting both in the classroom and for heritage tourism kinds applications.

But more importantly, maybe for the conservation preservation of the structures we’re doing things with CAD and with sectional analyses and building analyses from the laser scan data and the derived meshes and models that we create from that. These building forensics are important, as I said, for looking for different episodes of the structures and for analyzing how all these things come together, and also looking at relationships between past, archival types of documents and present and comparison kind of situations as well.

Here we see an example of looking at the interior of a structure in relation to exterior kinds of features, so we can really see into … Although it’s a line of sight type of technology, we’re able to see through and see into structures and how they’re actually created and made. At a different scale, though, on the same project, we’re also interested in iconography and carving. That can’t be accomplished with that same tool that we employed to do the building structure with, so we’re using a different type of laser scanning to be able to get this fine level of detail, down to half a human hair type of accuracy with some of the scanning techniques. Then, bringing those models to view in such a way that they can be studied in 360, in their full extend.

Some of what we’re doing also with the high resolution imaging is to be able to provide things that you can’t necessarily see when you’re on site with the human eye, things that are obscured by either layers of plaster or color, and not that, again, that we’re seeing through things, but we’re seeing them in different ways, in this example, extracting color information away in order to see these pound set layers of information that are contained underneath the color data.

Here we can see the larger context where we’ve combined a wider scale of laser scanning with the close-range laser scanning to be able to look at things together in the same scale. So here, we’re seeing these really detailed carved areas in relationship to the entirety of the wall, and we have these mapped and tied to where they actually originate from, because this monastery is just filled with carving.

How do we visualize it and maybe see it even closer range? No, did I mess up? We’re using tools like reflectance transformation imaging, and we’re going to hear more about that in the talk after ours. This is a computational way of taking multiple types of images from a set point and rotating the lighting source around. This allows you to do things post processing once you have the mosaic, the map that’s created from all of these images. So this is actually probably 50 images that we’re looking at to be able to derive this one image here. Then, we can use free software that you’re going to hear about from [inaudible 00:13:08] where we can actually move the lighting source, we can actually see things at much higher level of detail and all the time tracking where things are coming from.

So how are we bringing these projects, then, back? We’re bringing back and teaching in pedagogy kind of ways, and not necessarily … We’re doing it in two different ways. I’ve heard training a lot with the technology. We’re training workshop levels with the technology, but we’re seeing how this is actually tied to pedagogy and how it’s actually utilized in everyday classes. How are we using this in geology? How are we using this in Meso-American archeology, or in more traditional kinds of heritage preservation types of classes I teach at digital museums? How are we using these tools for pedagogical kinds of reasons?

But then also the short courses, the workshops. How are we training students to pick up these kinds of skillsets? Maybe it’s not a good idea to do it in a classroom, like Chad was saying. It takes up too much of your time. So the library’s role in our school is actually to allow students to come in and utilize these technologies in the library space with some direction, learn it there, explore it there, and then go to their classes or do projects in conjunction with the library experts and the classroom environment.

We have what’s called the digital thread concept in our library now, where we’re actually going from the create, the compute, and the capture, and utilizing all these different technologies together. That includes things like VR or 3D printing, and then all of the software suites, which we make accessible. We also have equipment checkout so students can come into our library and actually check out a photogrammetry kit or check out lower end laser scanners, the next engine kind of versions, and the sense scanners. Those kinds of tools are made widely available to students as well.

I’ve heard some of the hype and some of the things that we’re talking about, and I wanted to make distinctions for us today too. There’s VR, AR, and MR. We’ve heard a lot about VR and AR maybe, but the MR is sort of on that peak right now, so we’re going to see more and more of the mixed reality. How many people have heard of Microsoft Hololens? Okay, so hologram kind of stuff is the MR. That’s where you’re actually physically engaging somehow, you’re merging the digital world with the physical world. In VR, you’re replacing it. You’re all digital, in AR you’re enhancing, and in MR you’re actually merging the two. So there’s distinctions between these that we should think about.

A library’s role in our case is that we can take students places. We can inform how these places can be brought into the classroom and we can allow students to, again, play and explore with these kinds of technologies in a space that’s familiar to them, including, like I say, things like 3D printing, promoting innovation. This is a project with Meso-American archeology where they’re looking at sculpture.

We’re also beginning to create digital content through collections. These are done with Dublin core, these are done with metadata standards, these are done with providing DOIs, digital object identifiers for each piece, and these are being done with standards that we’ve adopted from agencies primarily in Europe right now. But we’re bringing this into collection potentials and wanting to outreach to places like SCI-Arc as well to create even more discoverability and accessibility to these kinds of projects.

I’m just going to take you through some of the projects that I think are important from this perspective is that these are all national park service projects. The importance of national park service projects, I think, are that you have such a wide range of heritage resources, and that includes many different scaler challenges, lots of different management challenges and strategies that you need to have addressed and answered, and then you also have that really important public interpretation and representation kind of side of things.

How do you deal with that as a park manager or a superintendent that’s trying to get beyond the hype and actually answer some questions that you really need addressed in your park? How can you use these digital tools in ways that are not just singular or oftentimes misapplied? But this is a very finite budget that we all have, so how do we spend our money wisely on these kinds of projects and choose things in appropriate kinds of ways with the outcomes and deliverables that we expect and want? And then also have archival stability as an end result of all of this, where we don’t lose these data sets after we collect them or we don’t have them in formats that you can’t ever get back to or that are not meaningful a few years from now. Then, of course, all the added value kinds of elements that can come from these types of rich data sets. We just have to know about them, know the possibilities that are there, in order to get to that sort of level.

I’m going to show you the Russell Cave Project because this really started out as a thing were we worked with our partners in the park service, utilizing a partnership program through the park service for funding mechanism, and that brought together experts from both the Southeast Archeological Center in Tallahassee. Their archeologists there are working hand-in-hand with our archeologists and heritage specialists for the stabilization and preservation of this national monument.

We approached this primarily with questions of erosion and change that have occurred at this site through time and the need for addressing public interpretive aspects, and just understanding the cave system. We had role defined research categories going into this and questions that we needed to ask, again, multiple tools coming to bear on the project, multiple persons with different skillsets that were brought in together, including park service representation on the project team.

This is a site that is very imperiled. It’s been altered primarily through archeology and through cultural weathering and different kinds of things that have occurred in the cave natural environment, and things that are happening far away from the cave system down in the ecosystem downstream that are happening with land use change. So scale is a really important aspect of this. It’s not all about the floor of the cave. It’s about the wider system, although the floor of the cave needs to be studied and understood as well.

Here’s just an image of some of the erosion going on, as well as where they’ve just taken a boardwalk out. They’re doing a lot of things to address quickly changes there, but are they addressing them in the right way? Are they doing more harm in some cases, or are they doing the right thing? That’s what they wanted the laser scanning data to be able to show them, again, some of the subsidence and erosion that’s occurring on the cave floor.

A lot of this is happening because there were excavations, and I won’t go into a lot of the history, but the cave is actually settling in because they’ve done huge excavations in the area, and then there’s all kinds of weathering sorts of phenomenon that are going. This is some of the early interpretive platforms within the cave floor that were there previously, the old boardwalks that were in there. They’ve done things to the roof of the cave where they’ve tried to stabilize the cave. None of these projects were tied together. Everything was a project, a project, a project. So how do we get a handle on what’s even been done? Then, some of the old interpreters, previous interpreters and how they’re changing through time.

This is what’s there today. They’ve taken out the boardwalk. They’re not encouraging people to explore the floor of the cave, and they’re trying to address the erosion and the subsidence that is occurring. This was a prime example of a park that said, “We tried laser scanning, and it doesn’t work.” This was a park that had worked with a company, and I won’t go into any of that, but they had done laser scanning a couple of times. A company came in with a type of instrument that was very long-range and just basically shot a scan, and said they were going to use that as monitoring, and they would come back year after year and shoot a scan, and then they were going to monitor this somehow.

The park never got any deliverables that they could use from it. There was really no data management attached to it, no archival considerations attached to any of these projects because a lot of times when they’re developing RFPs or working on these kinds of project funding opportunities, park managers might not even know the appropriate questions to ask if they’re not sure how these technologies even work. They’re gong by what’s being told to them, and sometimes what’s told to them is not accurate.

So this was a real problem. This was the best they had, was a screen capture from a laser scan that was previously done. So what we did was we came in and we looked at ALS, aerial lidar and terrestrial lidar considerations giving us different scale or kinds of approaches to this so that we could understand land use changes downstream and how that might be impacting resources upstream.

Then we also focused on the cave with terrestrial lidar. This is the cave floor in red, and then there’s a wet portion of the cave over here. We actually were able to, in two days’ time, scan the entirety of the rock shelter and the wet cave side of the feature. Obviously, we’re most interested in the cave floor side, and so what we’re looking at here, you can actually see we’ve created from the lidar data a nice map of where the boardwalk used to be because we can see the microvariation in the topography and the change that was associated with all of those previous parts of the boardwalk. We can also see areas of subsidence and where erosion is happening across the cave floor, and then we can match that up with what we know of the physical environments from previous things that have occurred in the cave.

Here we have complete documentation of the floor of the cave, the roof of the cave, and then the cave environment considered with slope and other kinds of things that we can begin to look at, elevational subsidence kind of pockets and changes through here, looking at real microtopography of the cave floor. We pulled in all of the georeference information from previous excavations so we could see where work had been done in the cave and how that relates to what we’re seeing today.

Some of these things could not be georeferenced because they were done as hand sketches, so we were referencing them to the best of our ability and then we were using things like ground penetrating radar to see where things really did occur and were linking ground penetrating radar data sets georeferencing to the lidar data in order to be able to see that kind of activity going on, again, where previous archeology had occurred, and then now with our data set we can also do things like slope analysis. We can look at erosion factors, we can slice this in any direction, and we can track where those points are across the cave surface. We can look at things like the drip line and where that’s affecting erosion across the floor.

These are all products that came out of the conditional assessment that we provided to the park, again, slices in any number of ways through the surface. We also did a bolt map, a map of where they had put those bolts into the ceiling so you’re seeing all of those are now positionally tied, and we have the floor and the ceiling tied together with where the bolts are in relation to that. Then we also have animations that we can run where we can actually look at how erosion might occur and how slope and things might impact what we’re seeing happening in the cave. All of these are tied to positional data information that we’re able to assess.

Then the broader impacts of these projects are really important to not lose sight of. This is the cave put into Sketchfab. I can’t link to this, but you’re welcome to check it out on Sketchfab. We’ve done an interpretive tour of it so that we can use this in the classroom, we can use it in a geology class, we can also use it in other kinds of classes for different types of engagement and for virtual reality applications.

Then, the next project I’ll show you quickly is one that we did at 96 National Historic Site. Again, same kind of things where we have a really big landscape and then we’re also looking at smaller features within the landscape. This is a star fortification that was part of American Revolutionary War period site, and underneath the star fortification, or going toward the star fortification, were tunnels that were being constructed by the Patriots trying to dig into where the British were held up in this fort.

Today, those tunnels cannot be looked at or interpretive. They’re closed off to the public. Too dangerous to go into. So what we had as a goal was to map these tunnels and to understand them in relation to this star fort story. Again, going from high detail wide area to close range kinds of modeling activity. To show you how dangerous this is, this is what it looks like inside the tunnel. We had to do confined space permits. This was all very strictly monitored by OSHA. We had to have a rescue, and they said, “They’re not a rescue. They’re a recovery.” We had to have a rescue crew that was trained in confined space rescue on site with us at all times. The whole Fire Department from Greenville was out there, and we had to be tracked the whole time with monitors and with respirators while we were inside this tunnel.

Here’s the little hole that you go down into to get into one of these features, and there’s what it looks like inside, trying to laser scan it. I didn’t go. I was on the surface talking to them. I did the GPS work for this project. We did a lot of aboveground things too. We tied this all together with RTK above surface, and we also ran GPR across the surface, did some magnetometry and some other geophysics. We had a team from our geology department on site as well, and tying this all together in the same reference system.

So what we ended up with was a complete analysis and understanding of the tunnels in relation to the star fortification features, how close they were to actually penetrating and getting in, and where collapses had occurred, and what was the structural integrity of this. We were doing this primarily from an engineering standpoint as well, looking at potentials for collapse, where things needed to be stabilized. You can see there’s a whole segment that has collapsed that we were not able to get into at all.

Then, conducting and doing profile assessments for the park so that they understand what’s beneath their feet, essentially. They’re interested in it from a structural standpoint, what’s safe, but they’re also interested in the story of this and how they can bring this story to the public. Previous archeological mapping had shown a tunnel going in a completely opposite direction, so being able to correct the story of this became a really important element of this project.

Tying geophysics together with point cloud assessment, so here’s the point cloud from the terrestrial work that we’ve done above surface tied together with the below surface work that we’ve done so that we can see tunnels in relationship to the star fortification kind of feature. I think it’s spinning around here. The tunnels are actually right over here, below the surface there. You can just start to see them there.

Again, this is a point cloud. What are we doing with this point cloud? This is not the end product. It’s meant to really be the beginning, and so this is a little bit of shameless plugging there. But these are the entry holes down into the tunnels, and then what’s beneath your feet. This was meant to be tied to signage, and through augmentation, through bring your own device kind of concepts in the park, people can see what’s beneath their feet or can see how this might have connected to the whole story of the battle at 96.

I should say we were followed by the local PBS channel for this project, and there was a whole documentary and they’ve since won a bunch of awards for the documentary too. Really tied to the broader impact elements of this project. Here we see some of the modeling that is derived from the laser scan data that can inform us much more stringently.

I’m going to stop there. I have a couple of other things that we’re going to show in the engagement section. Let me just go to my final slide, if I can here, because I do think that the roles of libraries are really changing and that what we’re trying to do is empower students by allowing them to have access to, not only tools, but workshops and training on how to use those tools, and then training the professors and the teachers on how to use that in the classroom, not for training about 3D technologies, for training about Meso-American archeology or whatever they teach, and using this as a tool, what it’s meant to be used for in the classroom.

Really, this is a real evolution that occurring in the role of libraries, and I think that we all really need to think about how this is changing the work that we do and to also be cautious of a lot of the hype and the technology wow factor that’s there and really think about what these things are doing for us or the potentials of what they can do for us and how they can and should be tied to research, discovery, and pedagogy and how we can connect communities better through these kinds of strategies. I’d be happy to answer any questions.

Speaker 2:           What software are you using to stitch together your broad lidar and your detailed lidar?

Speaker 1:           We’re primarily utilizing a tool called … We use LIDAR Analyst, we use Lost Tools … Are you talking about airborne lidar?

Speaker 2:           No.

Speaker 1:           Or you’re talking about bringing together lidar data sets from terrestrial?

Speaker 2:           [inaudible 00:32:37].

Speaker 1:           Oh, okay. We use a whole bunch of different software. For aerial focus stuff, we’re using SCENE Software. We go out of SCENE and usually into Geomagic is our preference, and we’re also big Maya users and Autodesk products and ReCap and Capturing Reality and all of the software that we’ve really heard here. Unfortunately, there are a lot of software packages that are necessary to view and look. You can’t just say, “Here’s a solution.” You do have to deal with these data sets individually a lot and then bring things together, either through decimation. With some of the lidar sets you’ve got to think about how much data, too. Yeah.

Speaker 3:           What software are y’all using to do the animated slope analysis? The [crosstalk 00:33:32].

Speaker 1:           That visualization, I think, was done in Maya, I believe. But to make those products, it’s coming out of terrestrial laser scanning, so SCENE is what we’re using with the FARO data, Cyclone would be if it’s … There’s all these native proprietary kind of formats. There’s also things like MeshLab and other kinds of tools. When we work with people, the products that we give them are all software neutral. I should say that. So when we give products back to the park, we ever require a software requirement. It’s all software neutral file formats and file formats that are E57 compliant. I saw that mentioned in one other talk, and that E57 compliant data is really important going forward. As park managers, you should be asking for your data sets that way, because otherwise you get these proprietary formats that you just can’t use. So super important.

Speaker 3:           Thank you.

Speaker 4:           We have time for one more question, then we’ll switch to Travis. Okay, good.

Speaker 1:           Great.

 

Abstract

Heritage in our National Parks range from natural and cultural landscapes and constructed environments, to features and portable artifacts. Differences in scale and representation requirements create unique challenges for digital documentation projects concerning best methods and approach, with expectations for desired outcomes often exceeding potentials for the selected technologies. Advances in scalar applications using a variety of terrestrial laser scanning and imaging tools can be brought together for an integrated approach to documentation that can greatly extend capabilities for representation, survey, and digitization. Still, digital tools are often misapplied or used singularly, without maximizing the outcome and deliverable potentials. Visualization of data using mixed reality and multimedia approaches, 3D printing, and 3D social media applications, are also greatly evolving in capability for heritage preservation, research, education, and dissemination, but thoughtful approaches to both the collection and the presentation of digital data is needed to achieve more than the hype and promise of technology. 3D, spatial, and imaging tools are helping to increase data access, and are improving the ability to share, interpret, and digitally preserve archaeological information on public lands. The ability to rapidly and accurately document the world around us is revolutionizing fields of archeology, museum studies, and library sciences, and is creating new areas of research integration, archival collection schemes, and curriculum development. The application of these technologies is creating new areas in research integration and offering new opportunities for libraries in particular to become stronger partners in science through the creation of digital collections and archives. Libraries should be active partners in heritage projects and can afford wider dissemination opportunities, and provide for robust metadata and permanency of archival collections, while combining data from disparate sources into meaningful and valuable information and digital collections.

Using a series of case studies performed in our nation’s parks, we will show how innovative partnerships and interdisciplinary research can be applied to areas of critical resource management, and how heritage sites are benefiting from the application of appropriate technologies in the area of rapid digital and spatial documentation. Examples from select projects include work performed to document endangered historic architecture, hard-to-access artifacts and collections, fragile rock art and carved stone monument digitization, and landscape terrain and cave system survey. These efforts highlight a real-world application and problem-solving approach for heritage managers and agencies, and demonstrate the unique role of universities and libraries serving as partners to provide expertise and resources relating to digital database and collection development, data accessibility, and share-ability of information.

Emphasis will be placed on how we can move beyond the hype of digital and 3D to create meaningful research and educational products and visualizations. Important considerations relating to curation and standards, metadata and archive development, and data distribution potentials will be discussed.

Outcomes from case study projects will show how careful and collaborative research design development among stakeholders and partners are allowing digital technologies and strategies to be used to their fullest capability, and how our collaborators in the NPS system are benefiting in areas of resource management, research, and interpretation.

Speaker Bio
Dr. Lori Collins is the co-Director of the University of South Florida (USF) Library’s Digital Heritage and Humanities Collections, and is a Research Associate Professor in the USF School of Geosciences. She has led a number of research projects in National Parks, and specializes in the application of LiDAR and terrestrial laser scanning and imaging for heritage documentation. She teaches courses on technologies for heritage preservation, Global Positioning Systems, 3D printing, and museum visualizations. Areas of primary interest are in landscape preservation and management, iconographic and rock art documentation, and LiDAR and terrestrial laser scanning applications for heritage.

Dr. Travis Doering
is the co-Director of the University of South Florida (USF) Library’s Digital Heritage and Humanities Collections, and is affiliated faculty in the School of Geosciences and the Department of Anthropology at USF. He has led a number of projects across the United States, including Hawaii and the US Virgin Islands, and at archaeological sites and museums in Mexico and Guatemala. He has conducted 3D surveys in Europe including Armenia, France, and Spain, and has worked with a variety of industry, government and agency partners. His specializations include rock art and stone monument digitization, architecture, and landscape surveys.

National Center for Preservation Technology and Training
645 University Parkway
Natchitoches, LA 71457

Email: ncptt[at]nps.gov
Phone: (318) 356-7444
Fax: (318) 356-9119