31
N°I 2024 MuseoMag
DIGITISATION
are unable to visit the museum or see the physical
object for whatever reason the option of accessing it
online or by tactile means in the form of a 3D printed
reproduction. These models could also be used for
educational purposes, for example to explain how an
object works without handling the physical object
and risking further damage.
It is important to note, however, that a 3D model
can never replace the physical object, no matter how
detailed it is. Moreover, creating this type of data
does not necessarily mean that it can be preserved
long term. Preserving digital data and its readability
requires continual effort and adequate resources. In-
deed, there are varying degrees of quality that can
be achieved in 3D digitisation. A reproduction for
scientific study or preservation needs to be as de-
tailed as possible, which means that a large amount
of data needs to be gathered and processed to
create the model. A model destined for educational
purposes may require less detail, but then may not
be useful for scientific study.
OUR FIRST FORAY INTO DIGITISING
OBJECTS: KEY TAKEAWAYS
We needed to experience the 3D scanning pro-
cess firsthand to assess how to move forward with
this technology. We decided to collaborate with
In-visible, a local scanning provider, to scan seven
sculptures currently on show at the Nationalmusée
um Fëschmaart. Each sculpture presented its own
unique challenges, and we learnt a lot in the process.
The method used by In-visible is called photogram-
metry. In simplified terms, it involves taking multiple
photographs of an object while also recording data
about the position of the specific part of the object
being photographed. Afterwards an algorithm is
used to create a 3D model from the photographs
according to their position.
We encountered two difficulties during the scan-
ning process that we will have to take into account
for future projects. The first is handling the objects
themselves. The sculptures we chose are made
of marble and other kinds of stone and are there-
fore very heavy. Photographing them from all sides
meant they had to be lifted with the help of our
team of registrars. We weren’t able to scan the back
of a bas-relief from the archaeology section, for
example, because that would have involved taking
it out of its fixture. In other cases, the bottom of the
pedestal wasn’t scanned. Had we wanted to docu-
ment those parts of the sculptures for a scientific
scan, we would have needed more resources.
The second difficulty we encountered were the
technological limits of photogrammetry itself. Since
it relies on light to determine the position of the
object, it struggles with shiny or translucent sur-
faces. The bronze statue of Dante and the slightly
translucent marble statue of Paolo and Francesca
where especially challenging to scan and required
even more photographs to be taken to accurately
document them than a matte surface would have.
The resulting 3D models can be viewed on the
MNAHA’s Sketchfab account. They are perhaps im-
perfect, but we gained valuable insights from making
them which will inform our future 3D endeavours.
They also complement our digital offer and show
how 3D might be used to make our museums more
accessible in the future.
Edurne Kugeler
