CONCLUSIONS
Whilst
having some notable disadvantages over other scanning techniques (notably a low
resolution, no texture recording, and a potentially limiting scanning volume),
the Kinect™ offers a very low cost option for studies where general morphology,
rather than small details are required in 3D. Aside from the cost, the Kinect™
sensor in conjunction with the freely available software is fast and provides
processed data (meshed models) in real time, allowing checking of data at the
point of acquisition. Although perhaps not as versatile to palaeontology as
traditional laser scanning or photogrammetry, there are some tasks which would
see immediate benefits in terms of ease-of use, particularly where the
digitization of mounted skeletons is required. Importantly, this is a rapidly
developing technology driven by a major global industry in which market forces
drive innovation while simultaneously keeping prices as low as possible.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to thank
the respective developers of all software referred to in this paper. This work
was supported by a Marie Curie International outgoing Fellowship within the 7th
European Framework Programme. I wish to thank Christine Janis and Kristin Stover
(Brown University) for help with access to specimens. I am grateful to Heinrich
Mallison, Matteo Belvedere, and the editor for useful comments on improving the
manuscript.
Back
Next