Loading…
Fragments under the Lens: A Case Study of Multispectral versus Hyperspectral Imaging for Manuscript Recovery
This article seeks to clarify the varied utilities of multispectral imaging (MSI) and hyperspectral imaging (HSI) for the purposes of fragment recovery and analysis. The two technologies are discussed in detail, with the aim of explaining their functionality and required methodology to a humanities-...
Saved in:
Published in: | Digital philology 2023-03, Vol.12 (1), p.123-143 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-f56780735e3f76f5dc8adab4dd2d6deb73dd28072b1b61381700893426af440b3 |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 143 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 123 |
container_title | Digital philology |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | Zawacki, Alexander J Huskin, Kyle Ann Davies, Helen Kleynhans, Tania Messinger, David Heyworth, Gregory |
description | This article seeks to clarify the varied utilities of multispectral imaging (MSI) and hyperspectral imaging (HSI) for the purposes of fragment recovery and analysis. The two technologies are discussed in detail, with the aim of explaining their functionality and required methodology to a humanities-oriented audience. For purposes of comparison, two medieval manuscript fragments—one a palimpsest, the other damaged by abrasion and staining—were imaged using both MSI and HSI systems. The data sets were then compared using several metrics and the results outlined. MSI was found to have significantly better spatial resolution (the amount of fine detail that the system is capable of capturing), while HSI had vastly better spectral resolution (the number of wavelengths discerned by the system). The MSI system also displayed a superior signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and edge response, meaning that images were clearer and sharper. MSI images enabled the identification, transcription, and approximate dating of the palimpsested fragment, but the less visually clear HSI data set failed to fully do so. However, the superior spectral resolution of the HSI system allowed for the noninvasive and nondestructive identification of inks and pigments and enabled our team to differentiate between even those that appear to be identical to the naked eye. In this case, the red pigment used on the palimpsest was identified from the hyperspectral data but could not be from the multispectral. Our conclusion is that HSI systems can offer valuable information about material composition and history and may shed light on provenance. Neither system is universally superior; the choice of which one to employ depends upon what questions a scholar seeks to ask of the object. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1353/dph.2023.0004 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2813654706</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2813654706</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-f56780735e3f76f5dc8adab4dd2d6deb73dd28072b1b61381700893426af440b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkEtLAzEURoMoWLRL9wHXU_OeqbtSrC20CFbXITPJtFPmZR7C_HszVOsqH-Hc7yYHgAeMZphy-qT744wgQmcIIXYFJgQLksw5J9eXzNgtmDp3igQSGRMCTUC9surQmNY7GFptLPRHA7emdc9wAZfKGbj3QQ-wK-Eu1L5yvSm8VTX8NtYFB9dDH8Pf5aZRh6o9wLKzcKfa4Apb9R6-m6KL_HAPbkpVOzP9Pe_A5-rlY7lOtm-vm-VimxSEcJ-UXKQZSik3tExFyXWRKa1ypjXRQps8pTFFgOQ4F5hmOEUom1NGhCoZQzm9A4_n3t52X8E4L09dsG1cKUmGqeAsRSJSyZkqbOecNaXsbdUoO0iM5OhURqdydCpHp5Fnl9ZT_HATnPkvjg9ICZP70fWonVA8Tgn6Azuzeks</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2813654706</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Fragments under the Lens: A Case Study of Multispectral versus Hyperspectral Imaging for Manuscript Recovery</title><source>Project Muse:Jisc Collections:Project MUSE Journals Agreement 2024:Premium Collection</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>Linguistics Collection</source><source>ProQuest One Literature</source><creator>Zawacki, Alexander J ; Huskin, Kyle Ann ; Davies, Helen ; Kleynhans, Tania ; Messinger, David ; Heyworth, Gregory</creator><creatorcontrib>Zawacki, Alexander J ; Huskin, Kyle Ann ; Davies, Helen ; Kleynhans, Tania ; Messinger, David ; Heyworth, Gregory</creatorcontrib><description>This article seeks to clarify the varied utilities of multispectral imaging (MSI) and hyperspectral imaging (HSI) for the purposes of fragment recovery and analysis. The two technologies are discussed in detail, with the aim of explaining their functionality and required methodology to a humanities-oriented audience. For purposes of comparison, two medieval manuscript fragments—one a palimpsest, the other damaged by abrasion and staining—were imaged using both MSI and HSI systems. The data sets were then compared using several metrics and the results outlined. MSI was found to have significantly better spatial resolution (the amount of fine detail that the system is capable of capturing), while HSI had vastly better spectral resolution (the number of wavelengths discerned by the system). The MSI system also displayed a superior signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and edge response, meaning that images were clearer and sharper. MSI images enabled the identification, transcription, and approximate dating of the palimpsested fragment, but the less visually clear HSI data set failed to fully do so. However, the superior spectral resolution of the HSI system allowed for the noninvasive and nondestructive identification of inks and pigments and enabled our team to differentiate between even those that appear to be identical to the naked eye. In this case, the red pigment used on the palimpsest was identified from the hyperspectral data but could not be from the multispectral. Our conclusion is that HSI systems can offer valuable information about material composition and history and may shed light on provenance. Neither system is universally superior; the choice of which one to employ depends upon what questions a scholar seeks to ask of the object.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2162-9544</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2162-9552</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2162-9552</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1353/dph.2023.0004</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press</publisher><subject>Case studies ; Cultural heritage ; Historical text analysis ; Humanities ; Identification ; Inscriptions ; Palimpsests ; Philology ; Rare books ; Rare materials ; Sermons ; Signal to noise ratio ; Technology ; Transcription</subject><ispartof>Digital philology, 2023-03, Vol.12 (1), p.123-143</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Johns Hopkins University Press</rights><rights>Copyright Johns Hopkins University Press 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-f56780735e3f76f5dc8adab4dd2d6deb73dd28072b1b61381700893426af440b3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2813654706/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2813654706?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21382,21394,27924,27925,33611,33911,43733,43896,62661,62662,62677,74196,74221,74413</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zawacki, Alexander J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huskin, Kyle Ann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davies, Helen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kleynhans, Tania</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Messinger, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heyworth, Gregory</creatorcontrib><title>Fragments under the Lens: A Case Study of Multispectral versus Hyperspectral Imaging for Manuscript Recovery</title><title>Digital philology</title><description>This article seeks to clarify the varied utilities of multispectral imaging (MSI) and hyperspectral imaging (HSI) for the purposes of fragment recovery and analysis. The two technologies are discussed in detail, with the aim of explaining their functionality and required methodology to a humanities-oriented audience. For purposes of comparison, two medieval manuscript fragments—one a palimpsest, the other damaged by abrasion and staining—were imaged using both MSI and HSI systems. The data sets were then compared using several metrics and the results outlined. MSI was found to have significantly better spatial resolution (the amount of fine detail that the system is capable of capturing), while HSI had vastly better spectral resolution (the number of wavelengths discerned by the system). The MSI system also displayed a superior signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and edge response, meaning that images were clearer and sharper. MSI images enabled the identification, transcription, and approximate dating of the palimpsested fragment, but the less visually clear HSI data set failed to fully do so. However, the superior spectral resolution of the HSI system allowed for the noninvasive and nondestructive identification of inks and pigments and enabled our team to differentiate between even those that appear to be identical to the naked eye. In this case, the red pigment used on the palimpsest was identified from the hyperspectral data but could not be from the multispectral. Our conclusion is that HSI systems can offer valuable information about material composition and history and may shed light on provenance. Neither system is universally superior; the choice of which one to employ depends upon what questions a scholar seeks to ask of the object.</description><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Cultural heritage</subject><subject>Historical text analysis</subject><subject>Humanities</subject><subject>Identification</subject><subject>Inscriptions</subject><subject>Palimpsests</subject><subject>Philology</subject><subject>Rare books</subject><subject>Rare materials</subject><subject>Sermons</subject><subject>Signal to noise ratio</subject><subject>Technology</subject><subject>Transcription</subject><issn>2162-9544</issn><issn>2162-9552</issn><issn>2162-9552</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>CPGLG</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkEtLAzEURoMoWLRL9wHXU_OeqbtSrC20CFbXITPJtFPmZR7C_HszVOsqH-Hc7yYHgAeMZphy-qT744wgQmcIIXYFJgQLksw5J9eXzNgtmDp3igQSGRMCTUC9surQmNY7GFptLPRHA7emdc9wAZfKGbj3QQ-wK-Eu1L5yvSm8VTX8NtYFB9dDH8Pf5aZRh6o9wLKzcKfa4Apb9R6-m6KL_HAPbkpVOzP9Pe_A5-rlY7lOtm-vm-VimxSEcJ-UXKQZSik3tExFyXWRKa1ypjXRQps8pTFFgOQ4F5hmOEUom1NGhCoZQzm9A4_n3t52X8E4L09dsG1cKUmGqeAsRSJSyZkqbOecNaXsbdUoO0iM5OhURqdydCpHp5Fnl9ZT_HATnPkvjg9ICZP70fWonVA8Tgn6Azuzeks</recordid><startdate>20230301</startdate><enddate>20230301</enddate><creator>Zawacki, Alexander J</creator><creator>Huskin, Kyle Ann</creator><creator>Davies, Helen</creator><creator>Kleynhans, Tania</creator><creator>Messinger, David</creator><creator>Heyworth, Gregory</creator><general>Johns Hopkins University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CLO</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>PAF</scope><scope>PPXUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQHSC</scope><scope>PQLNA</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PROLI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230301</creationdate><title>Fragments under the Lens: A Case Study of Multispectral versus Hyperspectral Imaging for Manuscript Recovery</title><author>Zawacki, Alexander J ; Huskin, Kyle Ann ; Davies, Helen ; Kleynhans, Tania ; Messinger, David ; Heyworth, Gregory</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-f56780735e3f76f5dc8adab4dd2d6deb73dd28072b1b61381700893426af440b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Cultural heritage</topic><topic>Historical text analysis</topic><topic>Humanities</topic><topic>Identification</topic><topic>Inscriptions</topic><topic>Palimpsests</topic><topic>Philology</topic><topic>Rare books</topic><topic>Rare materials</topic><topic>Sermons</topic><topic>Signal to noise ratio</topic><topic>Technology</topic><topic>Transcription</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zawacki, Alexander J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huskin, Kyle Ann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davies, Helen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kleynhans, Tania</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Messinger, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heyworth, Gregory</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Literature Online Core (LION Core) (legacy)</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>One Literature (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest Learning: Literature</collection><collection>Literature Online Premium (LION Premium) (legacy)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>History Study Center</collection><collection>Literature Online (LION) - US Customers Only</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Literature Online (LION)</collection><jtitle>Digital philology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zawacki, Alexander J</au><au>Huskin, Kyle Ann</au><au>Davies, Helen</au><au>Kleynhans, Tania</au><au>Messinger, David</au><au>Heyworth, Gregory</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Fragments under the Lens: A Case Study of Multispectral versus Hyperspectral Imaging for Manuscript Recovery</atitle><jtitle>Digital philology</jtitle><date>2023-03-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>123</spage><epage>143</epage><pages>123-143</pages><issn>2162-9544</issn><issn>2162-9552</issn><eissn>2162-9552</eissn><abstract>This article seeks to clarify the varied utilities of multispectral imaging (MSI) and hyperspectral imaging (HSI) for the purposes of fragment recovery and analysis. The two technologies are discussed in detail, with the aim of explaining their functionality and required methodology to a humanities-oriented audience. For purposes of comparison, two medieval manuscript fragments—one a palimpsest, the other damaged by abrasion and staining—were imaged using both MSI and HSI systems. The data sets were then compared using several metrics and the results outlined. MSI was found to have significantly better spatial resolution (the amount of fine detail that the system is capable of capturing), while HSI had vastly better spectral resolution (the number of wavelengths discerned by the system). The MSI system also displayed a superior signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and edge response, meaning that images were clearer and sharper. MSI images enabled the identification, transcription, and approximate dating of the palimpsested fragment, but the less visually clear HSI data set failed to fully do so. However, the superior spectral resolution of the HSI system allowed for the noninvasive and nondestructive identification of inks and pigments and enabled our team to differentiate between even those that appear to be identical to the naked eye. In this case, the red pigment used on the palimpsest was identified from the hyperspectral data but could not be from the multispectral. Our conclusion is that HSI systems can offer valuable information about material composition and history and may shed light on provenance. Neither system is universally superior; the choice of which one to employ depends upon what questions a scholar seeks to ask of the object.</abstract><cop>Baltimore</cop><pub>Johns Hopkins University Press</pub><doi>10.1353/dph.2023.0004</doi><tpages>21</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2162-9544 |
ispartof | Digital philology, 2023-03, Vol.12 (1), p.123-143 |
issn | 2162-9544 2162-9552 2162-9552 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2813654706 |
source | Project Muse:Jisc Collections:Project MUSE Journals Agreement 2024:Premium Collection; Social Science Premium Collection; Linguistics Collection; ProQuest One Literature |
subjects | Case studies Cultural heritage Historical text analysis Humanities Identification Inscriptions Palimpsests Philology Rare books Rare materials Sermons Signal to noise ratio Technology Transcription |
title | Fragments under the Lens: A Case Study of Multispectral versus Hyperspectral Imaging for Manuscript Recovery |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T19%3A40%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Fragments%20under%20the%20Lens:%20A%20Case%20Study%20of%20Multispectral%20versus%20Hyperspectral%20Imaging%20for%20Manuscript%20Recovery&rft.jtitle=Digital%20philology&rft.au=Zawacki,%20Alexander%20J&rft.date=2023-03-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=123&rft.epage=143&rft.pages=123-143&rft.issn=2162-9544&rft.eissn=2162-9552&rft_id=info:doi/10.1353/dph.2023.0004&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2813654706%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-f56780735e3f76f5dc8adab4dd2d6deb73dd28072b1b61381700893426af440b3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2813654706&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |