Making an impression

The Western Hemisphere. General term for the Americas following their discovery by Europeans, thus setting them in contradistinction to the Old World of Africa, Europe, and Asia.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

Re: Making an impression

Postby Tiompan » Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:56 am

EP , more evasive action and another failure to actually respond to requests eg evidence for what you suggested was ad hominem initiated by me and examples of me "making stuff up" .
As the evidence is close to hand failure to notice or provide it doesnt' inspire much confidence in your ability in an area that might be earlier and more difficult to interpret .
Joking aside . Don't get upset or take it personally but your ego and vanity are secondary when it comes to historical artefacts
Do yourself , and more importantly everyone who is likely to have an interest in the artefact from now on , a favour and leave the artefact to the those who know what they are doing .
The days of direct contact recording are long gone , even on robust open granite surfaces non invasive techniques or leaving well alone is the only game in town , don't be a dinasaur .

George
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Making an impression

Postby E.P. Grondine » Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:20 am

George, the days of direct contact recording are not "long gone" for some types of artifacts, and hypothetically this is one of them.

I see where they used dental impression silicone for the La Brea predator teeth.
E.P. Grondine
 

Re: Making an impression

Postby E.P. Grondine » Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:40 am

OA -

OA, your defense of the accident with the bulldozer at Cahokia demonstrated that you have no judgment.

Your assertion that I have zero excavation experience is not correct.

I don't want to gain a doctorate in material culture preservation, I simply want to learn how to safely make a very good impression of this particular hypothetical artifact, a very very very very small part of that field.
E.P. Grondine
 

Re: Making an impression

Postby oldarchystudent » Thu Dec 27, 2012 11:36 am

E.P. Grondine wrote:OA -

OA, your defense of the accident with the bulldozer at Cahokia demonstrated that you have no judgment.

Your assertion that I have zero excavation experience is not correct.

I don't want to gain a doctorate in material culture preservation, I simply want to learn how to safely make a very good impression of this particular hypothetical artifact, a very very very very small part of that field.


Oh boy.....

You told me yourself you had no excavation experience, so I was careful to include the phrase "unless something has changed". Where have you excavated? Other than your mayor's backyard.....

I'll say it again so you can conveniently forget it again - the bulldozer at Cahokia was there to repair a section of Monk's Mound that slumped. But I'm sure you will forget that and bring it up again when you feel like it.

But you do need to get up to date (something more recent than Woolley's book, for example). The use of heavy equipment in the plough zone is pretty common practice in this era of deadline driven excavation.

None of which has any bearing on the fact that you may very well screw up an artifact. This isn't about my judgement, EP, it's about yours. You don't know what you're doing here. If you can't be bothered to get the education, don't screw around. Do the right thing and put the artifact ahead of your (apparantly immense) ego.
My karma ran over my dogma.
User avatar
oldarchystudent
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 7:34 am
Location: Canada

Re: Making an impression

Postby Tiompan » Thu Dec 27, 2012 12:11 pm

EP , "The days of direct contact recording are long gone " . Maybe I should have inserted " of artefacts /rock art etc " between recording and are .


George
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Making an impression

Postby circumspice » Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:42 pm

*yawn*
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 807
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Making an impression

Postby E.P. Grondine » Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:19 pm

:|
E.P. Grondine
 

Re: Making an impression

Postby jonb » Thu Apr 25, 2013 8:27 am

My advice, if there is any ink, paint on the object, I would think it better not to do anything with it. However if you must, my advice for the best way forward. The substance you use to make the impression does not have to be very solid at all it can be very soft as long as it retains an impression of the artifact it is pressed into and then you can use a second substance like plaster of paris to make a solid copy that can be examined from that. I made very good copies of a seal stone on a signage ring using Plasticine. The problem with using something like talc I think is not that it would interfere with making a good impression, but that particles of talc would be even more likely to be left on the object than the Plasticine would, but it would not necessarily lower the lightly-hood of pulling some of the surface of the object off, because that could well happen just through the action of suction of pulling away two surfaces in close contact.

As such the object will be damaged.
Much better would be to take a number of pictures of the object with the light at different angles to it, and using different coloured lights. these can be combined together to give an outstanding representation of the object and the marks indentations on it, in much the same way Ariel photography shows up field structures at dawn and dusk, plus this would not damage the object.
jonb
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Making an impression

Postby E.P. Grondine » Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:18 pm

Hi jonb -

Thanks. When I was looking at this problem earlier, one of the real problems was dyes used in the synthetic clays, and transfers to the object.

Making a cast and duplicates would be ideal. I believe that the person keeping the artifact has advanced skills in this direction. The problems will be faced in the next several months.

One ideal suggestion from the earlier discussions was the use of carbon paper for ink to take "rubbings", and getting a far better rubbing will probably be the next step.

3-D imagery with an HD i-phone is beyond my own resources.

My guess is that the cast will likely lead to intense interest.
E.P. Grondine
 

Re: Making an impression

Postby jonb » Fri Apr 26, 2013 1:24 am

Honestly, try taking images first, Not only will you be surprised how much detail you can get from it, but I can assure you, the information will be far more accessible than just having a plaster cast. Even with only an phone to take the image a large lens which could be bought for a few pounds, by holding the object at an oblique angle to the light will show up tiny cut marks, by using a few different coloured bulbs, and daylight as light sources if there are any pigments on the object these could show up dramatically. In other words it would be better than a mere cast. Then if you know anyone with photoshop or a similar program by overlaying images detail becomes visible that cannot be seen with just the eye. This use of multiple images is common practice in astronomy, what works for the macro, will also work for the micro.

Or is the only motivation I want a copy I can hold in my hand?
jonb
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Making an impression

Postby E.P. Grondine » Fri Apr 26, 2013 5:21 am

Hi jonb -

As I explained earlier, that technique is entirely out of my price range. If I had that much money, I would invest it in researching a possible crater. Or else set up a system for converting my existing works into ebooks.

Aside from that, I no longer have the programming skills involved in setting up a system.

Why do I want a cast?
The Native American experts in this area are used to working that way;
another thing is the artifact has a funtional use, so it is important to have it in that form.

There are no experts in this area within the American archaeological community, at least none who I know of.

The cast and analysis will likely be followed by stone proveniencing by nuclear chemical techniques and verification of manufacture method to demonstrate that the inscription is not a modern creation as well as to deteermine the method of its manufacture. That will involve direct electron microscopy, working from higher resolution imagery than a simple camera system could provide.

If memory serves, there is a very good lithics lab in Pennsylvania who could do that work. They make casts as well. The problem, as usual, is money,

But all work is contigent on the artifact keeper's consent and the weather.

Making a better rubbing will be the first step. Using carbon paper and a sponge is an excellent technique. This should occur quite soon, but as I mentioned before, it all depends on the weather.
E.P. Grondine
 

Re: Making an impression

Postby jonb » Fri Apr 26, 2013 7:13 am

Out of price range?
As you may or may not know I am almost now house bound, and consequently as you can imagine not the wealthiest person going. However I use a ten year old copy of photoshop, given free with a magazine, any old lens can be used to magnify, and an old digital camera a few pounds, yes it is awkward, and it means you have to juggle about and a lot of pictures will be wasted because the lens moved, but that is the way we people that have to rely on few resources do things. Yes I know what you are going through I am still looking for somebody to lend me a video so I can show some stuff. But I have to say please give it a try you will be surprised just how much detail you will be able to see that will not be that evident even on the original, even with a camera with only a few thousand pixels. I know you have the only expensive part of what I am suggesting because we would not be posting without them.
jonb
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Making an impression

Postby E.P. Grondine » Fri Apr 26, 2013 9:07 am

Hi jonb -

I don't think you understand.

My home machine is a .5 Ghz pentium 3 running Windows 98 on dial-up.
That was the initial set-up, along with a 26'' Sony monitor and other graphic goodies from that time.
It now has certain handicap features which a systems programmer friend who is now dead set up on it for me in 2005.

It does not have standard Win 2000 USB drivers, which is ging to make any data port to a new macine difficult, alongside the software upgrades/ports.

My plan was to set up an ebook publishing system last year, but what money I had then for the upgrade went into keeping a friend and colleague, his wife and 3 kids in their house, and it has been very rough for them since then.

I still don't know the best graphic format(s) for ebooks.
E.P. Grondine
 

Re: Making an impression

Postby jonb » Fri Apr 26, 2013 1:23 pm

The system is more than good enough, i do not know what the secondhand market in the states is like, but any old digital camera even just the sort that comes as part of a cellphone that you can plug in to your system is enough.
I was working (Playing with) digital imaging in 87 when we could only dream of the system you have in front of you.
The difficulty is not with the system, or the expense I should think you might be able to buy the extras you need for twenty thirty dollars as a guess, but the frustration of taking the pictures, getting the angle of light right and focusing the image through a magnifying glass at the same time.
If you are interested with this method of recording the object, I will go into all the inns and outs and offer you all the help I can. You will have to work hard to get the job done, because you cannot buy the technology that would make the job easier, but the advantage is there is no direct contact to contaminate the object, and it will show up detail.
jonb
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Making an impression

Postby E.P. Grondine » Sat Apr 27, 2013 10:28 am

jonb wrote:The system is more than good enough, i do not know what the secondhand market in the states is like, but any old digital camera even just the sort that comes as part of a cellphone that you can plug in to your system is enough.
I was working (Playing with) digital imaging in 87 when we could only dream of the system you have in front of you.
The difficulty is not with the system, or the expense I should think you might be able to buy the extras you need for twenty thirty dollars as a guess, but the frustration of taking the pictures, getting the angle of light right and focusing the image through a magnifying glass at the same time.
If you are interested with this method of recording the object, I will go into all the inns and outs and offer you all the help I can. You will have to work hard to get the job done, because you cannot buy the technology that would make the job easier, but the advantage is there is no direct contact to contaminate the object, and it will show up detail.


jonb -

As I mentioned before, this system would not provide the data that is necessary for the research tasks at hand.

It would not provide the replica that Native experts work with, nor enough detail for lab analysis of manufacture for archaeologists.

By the way, as I've never owned a cell phone, you need to add in camera costs. As far as shooting through a magnifying glasss goes, that is a complete kludge, so you have to add the lens to the camera cost. And a scale cube.
E.P. Grondine
 

Previous

Return to New World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests