Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-76mfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-23T01:41:41.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards three-dimensional non-invasive recording of incised rock art

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2015

Alice Simpson ,
Phil Clogg ,
Margarita Díaz-Andreu  and
Brian Larkman
Alice Simpson
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Durham, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, UK (Email: r.simpson3@ntlworld.com)
Phil Clogg
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Durham, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, UK (Email: p.w.clogg@durham.ac.uk)
Margarita Díaz-Andreu
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Durham, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, UK (Email: m.diaz-andreu@durham.ac.uk)
Brian Larkman
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds Metropolitan University, Calverley Street, Leeds LS1 3HE, UK (Email: b.larkman@lmu.ac.uk).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ancient art cut into rock is difficult to research and manage off-site without precise three-dimensional records. Experiments with photographic modelling by the authors led to a relatively accessible and economical way of making them.

Keywords

Rock artpetroglyphsfield recordingconservation

Information

Type
Method
Information
Antiquity , Volume 78 , Issue 301 , September 2004 , pp. 692 - 698
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Beckensall, S. 1983. Northumberland’s Prehistoric Rock Carvings. Rothbury: Pendulum Publications.Google Scholar
Beckensall, S. 1992. Prehistoric Rock Motifs of Northumberland. Vol 2. Beanley to the Tyne. A Complete Guide. Hexham: The Abbey Press.Google Scholar
Beckensall, S. 1999. British Prehistoric Rock Art. Stroud: Tempus.Google Scholar
Beckensall, S. 2001. Prehistoric Rock Art in Northumberland. Stroud: Tempus.Google Scholar
Bettess, G. 1995. Cup marked stones, Alnmouth, Archaeology in Northumberland: 11. Morpeth: Northumberland County Council Archaeological Section 1994–1995.Google Scholar
Coles, J. 2003. A measure of conviction: recording emphasis in Scandinavian rock carvings. Antiquity 77: 567–571.Google Scholar
Donnan, E. 1999. Recording British Rock Art. Tracce 11.: http://www.rupestre.net/tracce/donnfra.html.Google Scholar
Eklund, J. & Fowles, S. 2003. Three-dimensional recording by laser scanning of the petroglyphs at Rombald’s Moor, West Yorkshire. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 6: 11–22.Google Scholar
Gillings, Mark 2000. Plans, elevations and virtual worlds: the development of techniques for the routine constructions of hyperreal simulations, in Barceló, J., Forte, M. &. Sanders, H. (eds. Virtual reality in Archaeology – Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 843: 59–69.Google Scholar
Loendorf, L. 2001. Rock Art Recording, in Whitley, D.S. (ed.) Handbook of Rock Art Research: 55–79. Walnut Creek, London, New Delhi: Alta Mira Press.Google Scholar
Rapp, 2000. Rock Art Pilot Project. Bournemouth and London: University of Bournemouth and University College London.Google Scholar
Yates, T., Butlin, R. & Houston, J. 1999. Carved stone decay in Scotland. Assessment methodology handbook. Edinburgh: Historic Scotland.Google Scholar
Zilhão, J. 1996. The stylistically Palaeolithic petroglyphs of the Côa valley (Portugal) are of Palaeolithic age: a refutation of their ‘direct dating’ to recent times. Antiquity 69: 883–901.Google Scholar