An irregularly updated blog about archaeology and all forms of semi-related madness
Filming & presenting an archaeological excavation: Thoughts on Must Farm
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
The photos and videos that came out of the excavations at Must
Farm, near Peterborough in Cambridgeshire, during the most recent excavations (2015-16) were some of the most exciting prehistoric
images I’ve seen in years – the incredible preservation of features and artefacts stunned both professional archaeologists and the interested public alike.
Those excavations uncovered the remains of several Bronze Age
houses – set on stilts above the water surface - and an associated defensive palisade and
walkway. The evidence indicates that the site was destroyed in a catastrophic
fire and that the settlement was abandoned. Wikipedia notes of the excavation that ‘Objects recovered include pots still containing food, textiles
woven from lime tree bark and other plant fibres, sections of wattle walls, and
glass beads’ [here].
Between the BBC documentary, the innovative use of legacy and modern social media,
along with a variety of engagement strategies, the operation has garnered a
well deserve shelf full of awards and accolades as well as expanding our
understanding of Bronze Age life. I’d also recommend checking out their
dedicated Must Farm website [here].
Still from 360-degree video
As regular readers of this blog are aware, I have a long-standing
passion for what I term ‘niche’ photography. This has included the production
of 3D anaglyph images and, more recently, 360-degree video. In terms of the
latter, I’ve been going around sites on the island of Ireland with my camera and
taking video to create immersive moments where you can (hopefully) get a
feeling for what it might be like to stand in these sites for yourself and look
about. As well as making my own videos, I frequently search for other
archaeology-related 360-degree video from other creators. Thus it was a few evenings
ago I was wearing an Oculus headset and searching through YouTube when I encountered
a video on the main Cambridge University YouTube channel [here]. The setup is
incredibly simple – a 360-degree camera has been placed on a tripod in the
approximate centre of the excavation area and for almost five unbroken minutes the
viewer gets to experience the archaeologists just going about their jobs – no discussion,
no voice overs, no talking heads. Instead you get to see the archaeologists digging
in the soil, hear the occasional scrape of a trowel, hear the background hum of
chat punctuated by a sporadic burst of laughter. Spoil buckets, environmental
samples, and finds trays festoon the site and we see notes being written and
scale drawings being ... well ... drawn ... At one end of the site there’s even a
cameraman apparently interviewing folks and documenting the site. It has been
almost 10 years since I stood in the middle of an ongoing archaeological excavation
and in all that time this was the nearest I’ve felt to that joy of seeing a site underway. I decided that ‘where there’s one there’s more’ and went looking for
similar, but it was not to be! The other video of Must Farm I found on the
Cambridge YouTube channel was of the much more traditional variety – people were
interviewed, they spoke about the interpretation of the site and how they were
excavating it, they showed finds and explained why bulk environmental samples
were being taken. It was gorgeous! This is archaeology communicated well – it
showed the site and the techniques used for its excavation, as well as introducing
us to why a person should study archaeology at Cambridge (‘The academics at
Cambridge are world leaders in their field, obviously’ [quoted without comment]).
While I learned much about the site from the second video, I
didn’t have a feeling of participation. I was being lectured and informed, and
my gaze was always being directed and constrained by what the creators wanted me
to experience. It’s not a remarkable insight because that’s how pretty much all
visual media is presented. However, the contrast with the simple joy of standing
quietly in the midst of all the action, not being spoken to and not having my gaze pointed in certain directions couldn’t be stronger. I’m not suggesting
that the immersive 360-degree video is the better experience (or that it should
supersede the traditional approach), merely that the two together create an
impact greater than the sum of the parts. Together they allowed an intellectual
and emotional response to the site that neither offered individually. This is
important because now – when archaeology as a taught subject is under threat
like never before – outreach will need to build on both of these aspects to attract
both students and wider public support. My only sadness is that although the Cambridge YouTube channel appears to have several hundred
regular videos, this is the only 360 one. If feels like this was a
once-off experiment and abandoned. This is unfortunate as the technology (both
for recording and viewing) is continually improving and becoming more
affordable. For both practicing field archaeologists and the interested public I’d
ask you to look at these videos and ask which one makes you more connected to
the site – which makes you feel more engaged? If the answer is ‘the 360 degree one’, shouldn’t
we be making more of these?
You can view this 360 degree video on an ordinary browser or
on the dedicated YouTube app for your smartphone. However, for best results we
recommend the more immersive experience that comes with an Oculus/Google
Cardboard headset. If you’re feeling the love, go check out my Archaeology 360 YouTube
channel [here]
With both standered and 360 photography give a great look at a site there should be a little low aerial photography ( drone or kite ) to help with a gernal overview. Thanks for sharing, you do a great job mate.
Swastikas are, for a number of reasons, endlessly fascinating symbols. Like all symbols, they are only invested with the meanings we give them. Otherwise they are just little shapes and drawings that mean nothing in and of themselves. Owing to its long history and brief (if traumatic) association with Nazism, the swastika probably has a stronger resonance than most. You won’t spend long on the internet attempting to discuss the swastika before someone, trying to be helpful, notes that the Nazi version rotated counter-clockwise (elbows pointing left) and was bad, but the good Buddhist/Hindu version rotated clockwise. They may be trying to be helpful, but they are invariably wrong. It’s true that the version Adolf Hitler designed for the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei only went one direction: counter-clockwise. What’s wrong is that not all other ( i.e. non-Nazi) swastikas turn the opposite direction (elbows pointing right). Rather than dutifully plod through a debun
An irregularly updated blog about archaeology and related madness! ... might just be good! ** I'm always looking for guest writers! So if you have something that you want to say about archaeology, please get in touch! ** [** If you like any of the posts on this blog, please consider making a small donation. Each donation helps keep the Irish Radiocarbon & Dendrochronological Dates project going! **] <A HREF="http://ws.amazon.co.uk/widgets/q?rt=tf_sw&ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=GB&ID=V20070822%2FGB%2Frobmchaarc-21%2F8002%2Fb7e77064-bfea-4ba8-954d-a415ec05ad0c&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.co.uk Widgets</A>
Introduction The oft-recited adage is that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Going by this logic, there can be no higher praise from an academic than outright plagiarism of your work. I have had recent cause to be on the receiving end of just such praise and I can assure you, dear reader, that it doesn’t feel like a compliment at all. In fact, it sucks. I decided that, rather than meekly accept it, I was going to fight back for the recognition due to my work. To this end, I reached out to the two universities involved (University College London and Plymouth University) and the publishing journal (PNAS) and asked them to initiate investigations into the conduct of their employees/authors. I trusted that these institutions would be keen to ensure that their academics adhered to the highest standards and that any deviation would be met with swift correction. I was wrong and my trust was sorely misplaced. Until now I have only really discussed this issue with my cont
With both standered and 360 photography give a great look at a site there should be a little low aerial photography ( drone or kite ) to help with a gernal overview. Thanks for sharing, you do a great job mate.
ReplyDeleteYou make a good point, Frank - communication of the site is enhanced by all the techniques we can bring to it!
Delete