Het kwaliteitsverschil tussen de analoge en digitale methode in het hedendaagse veldwerk

This thesis looks at the differences in quality between analogue and digital methods. This subject has been investigated because there is still a discussion between archaeologists which method is better. This investigation does not only answer the question which differences in quality are present between these methods, but also suggests new standards for the KNA. These standards make sure that the quality between the analogue and digital method are the same. To make sure that the investigation was done objectively the concept of quality was defined. Next the different work instructions and sources are studied so that the methods could be described and the pros and cons for each method are clear. A comparison was made between the analogue and digital methods. With the description of the methods, not only the fieldwork was investigated, but also the analysis of the data was considered. To see whether the results of this investigation matched the experience of archaeologists in the...Show moreThis thesis looks at the differences in quality between analogue and digital methods. This subject has been investigated because there is still a discussion between archaeologists which method is better. This investigation does not only answer the question which differences in quality are present between these methods, but also suggests new standards for the KNA. These standards make sure that the quality between the analogue and digital method are the same. To make sure that the investigation was done objectively the concept of quality was defined. Next the different work instructions and sources are studied so that the methods could be described and the pros and cons for each method are clear. A comparison was made between the analogue and digital methods. With the description of the methods, not only the fieldwork was investigated, but also the analysis of the data was considered. To see whether the results of this investigation matched the experience of archaeologists in the field, some interviews have been conducted. At some points the opinions differ but overall the answers agree with the results of this investigation. The investigation shows that although the methods have a different process, the quality was not affected by this in most cases. Considering the time effectiveness, it turned out that the rTS took less time than the analogue method when doing exploratory research and had different other advantages. One that is worth mentioning is the possibility to place a survey of cables and lines in the field book. For excavations it differs for each period and complexity of features which method is preferred. When dealing with great complexity of features the analogue method is better for the quality, for a regular excavation it makes no difference. The time efficiency of the methods was also the same. It is important to point out that the work should be executed by an archaeologist with experience. The most important suggestion made to the KNA were the demands for the digital print. This print is used to check the data from the digital method and is used during sections as a survey. There were no standards made for this print yet, but because it is a replacement for the analogue drawing it should be added.Show less

Leiden University Student Repository

Documents

In Collections

Het kwaliteitsverschil tussen de analoge en digitale methode in het hedendaagse veldwerk