[A] article; [B] book; [CH] chapter; [I] interview; [R] review; [S] survey; [ED] editorial work.


[CP] Anna Bentkowska-Kafel, Julio M. del Hoyo Melendez, Aurore Mathys and Vera Moitinho de Almeida, ‘Virtual Numismatic Museum. A Case Study in Presentation of Spatial and Spectrometric Records of Silver Roman Denarii’, Proceedings of ARQUEOLÓGICA 2.0 – 8th International Congress on Archaeology, Computer Graphics, Cultural Heritage and Innovation, Universitat Politècnica de València, 5–7 September 2016.

[CH] “The Virtual Museum. The concept and transformation”, Culture, Technology and the Image, ed. Jeremy Pilcher, Intellect in association with CHArt.


[A] ‘Muzeum wirtualne – muzeum bez granic?’, Muzealnictwo, 54 (2013), pp. 159-166, PDF, based on an invited paper presented at the Fifth Conference Cyfrowe spotkania z zabytkami. Reprodukcja cyfrowa zabytku – metody, wiarygodność, trwałość, Wrocławskie Centrum Transferu Technologii, Wrocław, 19th and 20th November 2012.

[A]vr29_coverI bought a piece of Roman furniture on the Internet. It’s quite good but low on polygons”—Digital Visualization of Cultural Heritage and its Scholarly Value in Art History, Visual Resources. An International Journal of Documentation, Special Issue on Digital Art History edited by Murtha Baca et al., vol. 29, No. 1, March 2013, pp. 38–46. DOI:10.1080/01973762.2012.761117

This paper looks at select practices in computer-based visualisation of cultural heritage and raises questions about evaluation criteria for digital scholarship in this area of arts and humanities research. The premise here is the acknowledgment of the complexity of computer-based visualisation and significance of earlier research. Scholarly visualisation is considered as a mode of inquiry and form of communication. The process of visualisation involves manipulation. Scholarly visualisation of heritage may only be recognised as valid and ethical—it is argued in accordance with the London Charter for the Computer-based Visualisation of Cultural Heritage—when accompanied by paradata, i.e., the documentation of the evaluative, analytical, deductive, interpretative, and creative decisions made in the course of research.


Paradata_Ashgate[B] [ED] [CH] Paradata and Transparency in Virtual Heritage. A volume of essays for the AHRC ICT Methods Network series, Digital Research in the Arts and Humanities, co-edited with Hugh Denard, Ashgate 2012; see the book blog pages for a synopsis, information about contributors, images, reviews, and to leave a comment; visit Ashgate to order.

Intellectual transparency of visualisation-based research, the pervading theme of this volume, is addressed from different perspectives reflecting the theory and practice of respective disciplines. The contributors — archaeologists, cultural historians, computer scientists and ICT practitioners — emphasise the importance of reliable tools, in particular documenting the process of interpretation of historical material and hypotheses that arise in the course of research. The discussion of this issue refers to all aspects of the intellectual content of visualizstion and is centred around the concept of ‘paradata’. Paradata document interpretative processes so that a degree of reliability of visualisation outcomes can be understood. The disadvantages of not providing this kind of intellectual transparency in the communication of historical content may result in visual products that only convey a small percentage of the knowledge that they embody, thus making research findings not susceptible to peer review and rendering them closed to further discussion. It is argued, therefore, that paradata should be recorded alongside more tangible outcomes of research, preferably as an integral part of virtual models, and sustained beyond the life-span of the technology that underpins visualisation. More…


[A] ‘Zabytek wirtualny: kryteria oceny i rola Karty londyńskiej’, [Virtual Heritage. Evaluation criteria and the role of the London Charter], in: Agnieszka Seidel-Grzesińska and Ksenia Stanicka-Brzezicka (eds), Informatyka w historii sztuki. Stan i perspektywy rozwoju wspolczesnych metodologii, Wrocław: Uniwersytet Wroclawski, 2009, pp. 72–81 (incl. a CD).

[CH] The Fix v. the Flux. Which digital heritage? PDF, in: netpioneers 1.0 – archiving, representing and contextualising early netbased art, edited by Dieter Daniels and Günther Reisinger (Berlin and New York: Sternberg Press in association with the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute, Linz, 2009), pp. 55–72, more info about this book…



[A] ‘Historyczna wiarygodność zabytku wirtualnego. Uwagi na marginesie Karty londyńskiej’ [Virtual heritage, historical credibility and the role of the London Charter], in: Agnieszka Seidel-Grzesińska and Ksenia Stanicka-Brzezicka (eds), Nowoczesne metody gromadzenia i udostępniania wiedzy o zabytkach, Wrocław: Via Nowa, 2008, pp. 35–47 (incl. a CD).

Zob. skrót p.t.’Wprowadzenie do zagadnień Karty londyńskiej’ (PDF)


3DVisA Bulletin[ED] 3DVisA, Published by the 3D Visualisation in the Arts Network, ISSN 1751-8962 (Print), ISSN 1751-8970 (Online), September 2006–March 2008.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: