5 Advantages of Using Ground-Based Laser Scanners for 3D Recording of Cultural Properties

The importance of accurately recording the current condition for preservation, investigation, and planning of repairs for cultural properties has been increasing year by year. Once cultural properties are damaged, it is difficult to restore them to their original state, and their appearance changes gradually over time due to natural environments and human use. Therefore, objectively preserving the shape, dimensions, surface condition, and positional relationships with the surroundings at this very moment provides the foundation for future conservation and comparative verification.

Against this background, a variety of recording methods—photography, measured drawings, video, plans, and elevations—have been used in the cultural property field. However, the more complex the shape or the larger the scale of the object, the more likely the limitations of traditional methods become apparent. For example, fine irregularities of stone objects, complex eaves of historic buildings, remains located on irregular terrain, or members distorted by aging can be difficult to record accurately by manual methods alone.

Attention has therefore focused on ground-based laser scanners that can acquire three-dimensional shapes at high density. In cultural property 3D recording, ground-based laser scanners are not merely new equipment. For many practitioners they are a candidate worth considering as a means to raise the quality of records—meeting field requirements for accuracy, reproducibility, comprehensiveness, and future usability.

However, at sites considering introduction, it is often unclear what specific advantages exist, how they differ from photos or manual measurements, and in which cultural property scenarios they are effective. It can be difficult to judge from equipment specifications alone if the practical benefits are not apparent.

This article explains five advantages of using ground-based laser scanners for 3D recording of cultural properties. It also outlines key considerations at the time of introduction, perspectives when combining with other recording methods, and points to reduce the chance of failure in the field. The aim is to provide a practical, practitioner-oriented summary to help those involved in preservation, investigation, restoration, or public use judge how to position ground-based laser scanners in their own contexts.

Table of Contents

• Why ground-based laser scanners are attracting attention in cultural property recording

• Advantage 1: Easy to record wide areas without omissions

• Advantage 2: Easier to capture complex shapes and subtle distortions

• Advantage 3: Can be preserved as reusable three-dimensional data

• Advantage 4: Useful for planning repairs and conservation

• Advantage 5: Easier to establish a basis for future comparisons and public use

• Points to note when using ground-based laser scanners for cultural properties

• How to differentiate use from photogrammetry and on-site positioning

• Approaches to increase the value of 3D records in cultural property practice

• Conclusion

Why ground-based laser scanners are attracting attention in cultural property recording

In recording cultural properties, it is important not only to preserve appearances. Records must allow a third party to understand where something is, in what form, and to what extent dimensions or deformations are present. In particular, many cultural properties cannot be frequently handled or moved for preservation, and opportunities to record on site are limited. A major challenge is how to capture information without omissions during those limited opportunities.

Traditional methods remain important. Photographs are excellent for situation awareness, and measured drawings are suitable for organizing and conveying required information. However, when the objective is to preserve the entire object in three dimensions at high density, another technology is sometimes necessary. For instance, complex architectural ornamentation, roughness of stone surfaces, signs of tilt or settlement, and slight displacements between members may not be fully captured by planar records alone.

Ground-based laser scanners construct three-dimensional records by emitting lasers toward the subject and acquiring many points of shape based on reflected information. A collection of these points is not just an image but three-dimensional data with positional information. That means you can later check distances, cut sections to view, and compare data from different times, greatly expanding possible uses of the record.

The attention in the cultural property field stems not merely from precision. Ground-based laser scanners are also less likely to damage objects, can record large areas in short time, and offer considerable potential for post-acquisition use—making them well suited to both preservation and utilization. The more constrained the field conditions, the more important it is to get the record right the first time. In that sense, ground-based laser scanners are valued as a means to raise the overall quality of cultural property records.

Also, in cultural property work it is common for people from different roles—investigators, conservators, designers, contractors, administrators—to handle the same object. Having a three-dimensional dataset that everyone can reference reduces misunderstandings. A record that can be shared remotely rather than information only understandable by those who saw the site in person is another major reason ground-based laser scanners are chosen.

Advantage 1: Easy to record wide areas without omissions

A major advantage of 3D recording with ground-based laser scanners is the relative ease of recording wide areas without omissions. Cultural properties do not always exist in isolation. For buildings, relationships with plinths, stone steps, surrounding terrain, and ancillary facilities are important; for stone monuments, layout, orientation, and surrounding ground conditions can matter; for archaeological remains, it is often necessary to record the object together with positional relationships to its surroundings.

Manual recording tends to focus on areas that the recorder deems important. This is not necessarily bad, but when revisiting the object from a different perspective later, required information may be missing. For example, tilts you did not initially notice, differences in elevation with surrounding areas, or the shape of a rear surface may become necessary. It is not uncommon that one cannot re-enter the site or that conditions have changed since the first visit.

Using a ground-based laser scanner makes it easier to capture information that envelopes the entire subject. Although blind spots exist, planning measurements from multiple positions makes it possible to capture the whole as a spatial entity rather than just surfaces. This is a very significant advantage in cultural property recording, because information you do not think you need now can be preserved in a usable form for the future.

Being able to record a wide area as a single entity is not just convenient. For conservation, the relationship with the surrounding environment can be more important than the condition of the object alone. For example, a building’s tilt may be inseparable from ground conditions or drainage, and bulging or collapse in a stone wall must be interpreted in relation to surrounding form. Changes that are not evident from local photographs can be more easily interpreted with broad-area three-dimensional data.

Another overlooked advantage is reducing variability in field judgment. Manual measurements and visual records may vary in density depending on the recorder’s experience. In contrast, ground-based laser scanners can acquire wide areas relatively uniformly when operated according to consistent procedures. This stability in recording quality is valuable in projects involving multiple workers or when data will be handed over to different personnel in later years.

Cultural properties can be larger than expected. To capture not only exterior appearances but also interior spaces, ceilings, floor unevenness, relationships between columns, surrounding terrain, and access routes, plan views and photographs can be insufficient. Being able to treat a wide area as a single three-dimensional dataset helps preserve overall relationships during analysis, which is one reason ground-based laser scanners are highly valued in the cultural property field.

Advantage 2: Easier to capture complex shapes and subtle distortions

Cultural properties are not all uniform, simple shapes. Rather, many acquire distinctive deformations, weathering, signs of previous repairs, and variations in workmanship over long periods. To understand such objects properly, it is necessary to record not just simple dimensions but the complexity of form itself. The strength of ground-based laser scanners is precisely their ability to capture this complexity.

For example, stone cultural properties have fine features such as carved ornamentation, weathering-induced unevenness, areas of loss, and boundaries with repair materials. Historic buildings can exhibit member warping, sagging, column tilts, floor unevenness, and subtle roof-shape changes that affect assessments of conservation status. Such information may not be adequately conveyed by plan drawings or frontal photographs.

The three-dimensional data acquired by ground-based laser scanners represents the subject more accurately as point density increases. This makes it easier to objectively confirm details that are visible to the eye but difficult to translate into drawings, or distortions that are hard to perceive in photographs due to perspective. In cultural properties, one often cannot assume perfect bilateral symmetry or straight lines; small present-day differences can have important implications.

Recording complex shapes also leaves room for later interpretation. Deformations unnoticed at the time of investigation may reveal important trends when viewed in section or from different perspectives later. This means leaving material that can be repeatedly verified after the fact, rather than only capturing impressions seen on site.

In practice, impressions from the field are not always easy to share. Conveying the subtle sense of deformation or tendencies perceived by a site inspector through words and photographs alone is difficult. With three-dimensional data, for example, discussions can be facilitated by concretely showing tilts or section shapes. This helps build consensus among stakeholders when determining conservation policies or adjusting repair methods.

Moreover, cultural properties are artificial objects subject to aging. Unlike new construction, you cannot assume shapes will match design drawings; you must understand the present appearance. Ground-based laser scanners are suited to preserving the current state as data rather than as assumption. As a result, the accuracy of shape understanding improves, reducing the risk of errors in subsequent processes.

Advantage 3: Can be preserved as reusable three-dimensional data

Often overlooked but extremely important in cultural property recording is whether the acquired information can be easily reused later. Records are not meant only for a one-time report. Work related to cultural properties—revising conservation plans, comparing before-and-after repairs, creating exhibition materials, education and outreach, and planning post-disaster recovery—continues over long timeframes. Therefore, record data should be preserved with future use in mind.

Three-dimensional data obtained with ground-based laser scanners differs from mere image materials in that it is highly reusable from multiple perspectives. It can be used as baseline data for plans or sections, for dimensional checks of specific parts, or overlaid with information obtained by other methods. In other words, once acquired, the data can be processed and used for different purposes.

This reusability has great significance in cultural property work. For example, if you originally measured mainly for record preservation, the data can later be used to check sections if repair planning becomes necessary, or to form the basis for visualization materials for public use. The fewer times you can re-enter a site, the more valuable it is to make the most of a single measurement.

It also adapts to the differing information needs of stakeholders. Conservators may want to inspect trends in deformation or damage, designers may prioritize dimensional accuracy, and administrators may require materials that are easy to present. Three-dimensional data provides a foundation that can be expanded into the required forms from the same source.

Being easily reusable also extends the lifespan of records. Paper drawings and reports are important, but because they are outcome-specific products, they do not preserve the original spatial information intact. By contrast, three-dimensional data can be re-evaluated later if new perspectives or technologies emerge. For long-term subjects like cultural properties, this is a particularly compatible characteristic.

Of course, data management and preservation require attention, but even accounting for that, the advantage of producing records that can be carried forward into later work is significant. Cultural property records are not only for the current responsible persons but should also be useful to future custodians, researchers, and technicians. In that sense, being able to preserve data as reusable three-dimensional information is one of the essential strengths of ground-based laser scanners.

Advantage 4: Useful for planning repairs and conservation

Records of cultural properties are not valuable merely for preservation’s sake. The real importance is that records help inform conservation and repair decisions. Ground-based laser scanner data is powerful in these practical applications because it enables an objective, three-dimensional understanding of current conditions, clarifying where problems exist and what responses are needed.

For instance, building tilt, floor unevenness, member deformation, bulging of stone walls, and relationships with the ground are all critical factors when considering conservation policies. If these can be grasped based on three-dimensional data rather than subjective impressions, it becomes easier to assess the need and priority for repairs. The data is also useful for predicting the effects of repairs and identifying areas that require special attention during construction.

In cultural property restoration, avoiding excessive intervention is important. To limit intervention appropriately, one must accurately understand the current state and carefully distinguish between changes and original features. Ground-based laser scanner data increases the amount of objective information available for such determinations. As a result, it becomes easier to share the basis for decisions and to explain the appropriateness of the chosen repair approach.

Moreover, the data is useful not only in planning stages but also for before-and-after comparisons. If the pre-construction state is documented in detail, it is easier to review what changed and by how much. This is valuable not only as a construction record but also for future conservation planning. Because cultural property management is not a one-time task, the ability to track conditions over time has great value.

Three-dimensional data also aids communication among stakeholders. Cultural property work often involves people from different specialties meeting to discuss. Two-dimensional drawings and text alone can fail to convey important points. With three-dimensional data, the location and shape of problem areas can be shared visually, reducing misunderstandings. This improves both the quality and speed of decision-making.

Repair and conservation are tasks of repeated, careful judgments under limited opportunities and conditions. If the initial understanding is insufficient, uncertainty persists through all subsequent steps. Ground-based laser scanners help reduce that uncertainty, making them highly meaningful tools in practical cultural property work.

Advantage 5: Easier to establish a basis for future comparisons and public use

The value of cultural property records is not determined solely at the time of recording. Years later—or after a disaster or damage—being able to compare the current state with past records can greatly affect the meaning of those records. Three-dimensional records from ground-based laser scanners excel in creating a basis for such future comparisons.

Cultural properties may appear static but actually change gradually. Wear by wind and rain, freeze-thaw cycles, ground subsidence, humidity fluctuations, vegetation effects, and human contact all contribute to changing conditions. Changes that are negligible in the short term can become significant over years. If past three-dimensional data can be compared with current data, trends of change are easier to grasp.

This comparability fits well with preventive conservation. Rather than reacting after major damage, detecting small changes early enables timely countermeasures, and that requires baseline records. Ground-based laser scanner data functions well as this baseline and can serve as the foundation for ongoing monitoring.

There are also possibilities for public use. While preservation is paramount, communicating value to society is also important. Three-dimensional data can be used to create materials for exhibitions, educational resources, and visualizations for interpretation. Public release requires careful consideration, but 3D records are an effective way to convey shape without imposing stress on the actual object.

For the general public and non-specialists, the value of cultural properties is not necessarily intuitive from drawings or text alone. Three-dimensional presentations or views from angles not normally visible can help foster interest. Even when on-site preservation takes precedence, leveraging acquired records to promote understanding is a major benefit.

Moreover, three-dimensional records have value for disaster preparedness. If damage occurs, pre-existing three-dimensional records can help plan restoration and understand what was lost. While not everything can be restored exactly, having records versus not having records can make a substantial difference in the quality of subsequent responses. 3D recording of cultural properties can therefore be considered a foundation for preservation, comparison, public use, and emergency response.

Points to note when using ground-based laser scanners for cultural properties

Having seen the benefits, it is important to understand that using ground-based laser scanners does not automatically guarantee good records. To effectively employ them for cultural properties, some cautions must be understood. Failure to address these can lead to disappointing results.

First, clarify the purpose of recording before you start. Are you recording primarily for preservation, as the basis for repair design, to create a reference for future comparisons, or with public use in mind? The desired density and extent of recording will vary depending on the purpose. If the objective is vague, you may miss necessary areas or alternatively acquire excessive data that becomes burdensome to process.

Next, pay attention to blind spots. Ground-based laser scanners are highly effective but cannot capture everything from a single direction. Areas such as behind columns, under eaves, narrow interior spaces, shadows cast by obstacles, and deep within complex recesses are prone to missing data. Therefore plan where to measure and how many passes to take, and confirm that the necessary information has actually been captured.

Also be mindful of conditions unique to cultural properties. Restrictions on scaffolding, limits on access, lighting conditions, visitor routes, and protected areas that must not be touched create constraints different from general facilities. Operation must prioritize protection of the cultural property as well as measuring convenience. Planning site movement and selecting appropriate time windows for work are directly linked to data quality.

Data post-processing is also crucial. Three-dimensional data does not end with acquisition; alignment, cleaning of unnecessary parts, and outputs tailored to intended uses all require management planned for downstream tasks. In cultural property work, it is desirable to organize data in a way that is understandable to future users. Ambiguity in file names, measurement extents, reference point concepts, or acquisition dates can render valuable data underutilized.

Most importantly, carry out measurements informed by field understanding. Even if the equipment is high-performance, records will not improve without a perspective on what should be preserved as cultural property. Consider which areas may exhibit deformation, which surfaces will be important in the future, and how much of the surroundings should be included. Such considerations are indispensable in cultural property recording.

How to differentiate use from photogrammetry and on-site positioning

When considering 3D recording for cultural properties, ground-based laser scanners may not provide a complete solution on their own. In practice, combining photographic records, photogrammetry, on-site positioning, and high-precision surveying where needed often produces more usable results. The key is not simply to compare which method is superior but to assign roles according to purpose.

Ground-based laser scanners are strong in capturing shape at high density across wide areas. On the other hand, photographs are effective for capturing surface texture, color, and for explaining visual details. Reports and public materials are often more comprehensible when photographs complement three-dimensional data. Therefore, in cultural property recording, treat three-dimensional shape and visual information as complementary rather than separate.

The positional aspect—deciding where the three-dimensional data is located—is also important. Cultural properties derive value not only from the object itself but from its place. When considering surrounding terrain, site layout, existing drawings, and alignment with other surveys, there are situations that demand reliable position information. In such cases, carefully designing on-site positioning and reference systems affects the overall usefulness of the data.

Aligning data across multiple times or integrating with other surveys requires a consistent positional standard. Matching shapes alone can make later comparisons difficult. Adopting an on-site position management approach appropriate to the field increases the value of cultural property records.

Practitioners should keep in mind that while ground-based laser scanners are a powerful core method, they are not万能 on their own. Combining photographs, positioning, existing drawings, and on-site observation insights makes it possible to understand the state of cultural properties in a practical, three-dimensional way. Thinking in terms of the optimal combination for the objective—rather than choosing a single method—leads to a less failure-prone approach.

Approaches to increase the value of 3D records in cultural property practice

To succeed in 3D recording of cultural properties, having a recording philosophy matters more than simply choosing equipment. In other words, plan with awareness of what to record, to what extent, and who may use it in the future. This perspective alone can greatly alter the value of the same measurement results.

First, prioritize preserving relationships rather than just points. The value of cultural properties is not determined solely by the accuracy of single components. Spatial context—height relationships with surroundings, interactions between members, connections to terrain, sightlines, and movement flows—is important. Ground-based laser scanners are well suited to preserving these relationships in three dimensions. Therefore, when measuring, consider not only the object itself but how much of the surroundings to include.

Second, do not target only the outputs needed immediately. For example, if you only need an elevation drawing this time and measure just that extent, the data may be difficult to reuse for other purposes later. Because cultural property investigations are rarely one-off, it is valuable to anticipate and record things that may be needed later. This does not mean expanding endlessly, but when revisiting is difficult, allowing some margin in acquisition is effective.

Also, do not separate field notes and observational findings from the three-dimensional data. Some information cannot be discerned from data alone: material differences, surface fragility, probable repair histories, or reasons for access restrictions are often known only from on-site observation. Using three-dimensional data as the objective core while layering in field insights raises the overall resolution of the record.

Consider cultural property records not only as preservation tools but also as explanatory records. Discussions among specialists, explanations to owners, administrative decisions, community understanding, and planning for future use all carry obligations of explanation. Three-dimensional data can serve as a common language to support such explanations. The more interpretation varies by viewer, the greater the value of objective three-dimensional information.

Finally, treat 3D recording as part of the infrastructure for conservation rather than as a special task. In the workflow of recording, comparison, review, sharing, and publicizing, ground-based laser scanners become a powerful foundation. Rather than introducing advanced equipment for its own sake, position it as part of practical infrastructure to protect cultural properties over the long term and hand them on to the next generation.

Conclusion

The advantages of using ground-based laser scanners for 3D recording of cultural properties can be organized into five points: ease of recording wide areas without omissions; better capture of complex shapes and subtle distortions; preservation as reusable three-dimensional data; usefulness for planning repairs and conservation; and facilitating a basis for future comparisons and public use. Each of these offers highly practical and important value in cultural property practice.

Cultural properties are not subjects you can redo. How you preserve the current state affects the quality of future conservation. Therefore, methods that can objectively record shape and positional relationships, not merely appearance, are increasingly important. Ground-based laser scanners are one such method well suited to this need.

At the same time, the quality of outcomes depends greatly on purpose setting, measurement planning, and post-acquisition utilization design. Clarifying why you measure, what to preserve, and how to combine with other recording methods before introduction is the way to avoid failure. A mindset that first considers what should be recorded as a cultural property is required beyond simply whether equipment is available.

Also, in 3D recording for cultural properties, capturing shape alone is not enough—position management is important too. Considering site layout, relationships with surroundings, and alignment for future comparisons and re-measurements means that handling position information in the field cannot be overlooked. In such cases, combining high-density three-dimensional recording by ground-based laser scanners with methods that quickly secure position improves overall recording accuracy and usability. If you want to organize site records of cultural properties more efficiently—not just shape but also position—options like LRTK are worth considering. LRTK is an iPhone-mounted GNSS high-precision positioning device, and in some situations it pairs well with on-site position capture and record management. Those who want to put cultural property 3D records to more practical use should consider combining ground-based laser scanner shape acquisition with such on-site positioning approaches.