Omeka Item Link: https://dgah.sites.carleton.edu/digtialobjects/admin/items/show/160
How does attempting to model an object compare to simply viewing one in an exhibition?
The experience of modeling an object is significantly different from simply viewing one in an exhibition. Instead of admiring it from a distance, I had to examine every detail closely, understanding its form, texture, and any marks of wear that revealed its history. The process required me to be careful, not only in studying the hat itself but also in considering external factors such as lighting and positioning for an accurate scan. This in-depth engagement gave me a greater appreciation for the craftsmanship and historical context of the Carleton Marching Band Hat.
Does engaging with objects in this way make you more curious about this (and/or other) things, as well as the stories they can tell?
Interacting with objects in such a detailed manner has deepened my curiosity about the broader stories they hold. Who originally wore this hat? What significant events was it part of? How have marching band uniforms at Carleton evolved over time? Before this project, I didn’t even know Carleton had a marching band, so I googled it to learn more.
How does moving from passive observer to active modeler change your thinking on communicating about art and history to various publics?
Through the process of 3D scanning, I transitioned from merely observing an object to actively engaging with its form and history. This shift deepened my appreciation for how historical narratives are shared with different audiences. It also highlighted how technological advancements have made tasks significantly more accessible. A few years ago, creating a simple 3D design required high-end software and powerful computers, but today, the process has become much more user-friendly. With just a smartphone, we can now generate detailed 3D scans, making digital preservation and modeling more accessible than ever before.
8 thoughts on “Blog week 5”
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
I agree, technology has advanced so much that it really is incredible how accessible many things are now. Being able to generate a 3D scan from your phone means anyone can make a model and preserve an object digitally for anyone to access. Making things accessible is a key motivation behind the humanities studies and technology is at a level where this is possible.
I really liked the fact that you reflected on the actual process and considerations made when creating these 3d models. I too did not know we had a Carleton Marching Band before working with this object. It’s a good reminder that its not just about modeling an object but transferring a object with history to the online medium. This comes along with tasks such as labeling, thoughtful modeling, and archivist processes to truly do well. I agree the act of creating the 3d model has become an easier process but there are many tasks outside of this that also need to be performed well.
Great work on your Scaniverse model! I agree with your points that the process of building a model through photogrammetry can truly deepen our appreciation for artifacts and spark curiosity about their background. It’s so different from just viewing them in an exhibition. Also, using our smartphones to create a simple model is quite user-friendly and convenient.
I really liked your scaniverse model, it was way better than the one I was able to create. I also agree that being able to make these 3d models help preserve history for future generations. Preserving history is really important because it allows us and the future to reflect on history.
I really agree with your point about how interacting with these objects in such a detailed manner and paying attention to every little thing deepens curiosity about these objects. When looking at these old objects and artifacts in a museum I used to just think “oh this is cool” and move on but after working through this process I am now asking myself questions about the history of the object and the stories that it holds.
I really enjoyed reading your reflection! It’s cool to hear about your experience with 3D modeling and how engaging with the object in this way deepened your appreciation for it. I totally get what you mean about noticing more details when actively working with the piece rather than just observing it in an exhibition. It’s interesting that Scanaverse gave better results than Polycam—maybe the camera quality and lighting really do make a bigger difference than we think. The idea of using the light box sounds promising; it’d be awesome to see how much of a difference it makes in clarity!
Hi, thank you for your interesting reflection! It effectively captures the contrast between passive observation and active engagement. I appreciate how you highlight the deeper appreciation and curiosity that emerged through the process of modeling the Carleton Marching Band Hat. Your discussion on technological advancements making 3D scanning more accessible is particularly insightful as it raises interesting questions about how digital tools can democratize historical preservation. Have you considered how this accessibility might impact the way museums and archives share artifacts with the public?
I really like the way your scan turned out, though some areas get a little messy you managed to capture quite a bit of detail. It is definitely difficult to get data from the underside of the hat as you cannot touch it, nor can you move it as the lighting may change.