e 1s 
the 
hue 
and 
ind 
ent 
of 
24 
er 
la 
n 
of 
1S 
Jauregui, Luis M. 
  
5 CONCLUSIONS 
With the experience acquired by us in the fields of architectural and archaeological photogrammetry, we can make the 
following remarks: 
The terrestrial photogrammetric method, due to its many advantages, is the best technique for detailed survey of 
complex shape structures. 
The new digital photogrammetric workstations encourage the use of this technique, envisioning in the short future a 
widespread application of terrestrial photogrammetry for restoration surveys. 
The use of images scaled and rectified allow to visualise in an optimal way the constructions with poor architectural 
details. This case of representation has the same geometrical qualities of a plan. Therefore, those can be measured in 
distances and angles. However, this kind of images present two disadvantages: the time of elaboration doubles the time 
used in a linear restitution. The second one is the cost of the image, increased by the longer time of work and the 
materials and equipment used in the impression. 
The aerial photography is a very valuable instrument to join at others archaeological techniques, due to the complete 
vision obtained of the studied zone. In the subject presented herein, the SFAP, take from a single motor aircraft, suited 
perfectly to the task, due to its high manoeuvrability, which permitted to flight in a place surrounded of mountains. In 
order to have the control points marked in the photographs, those were encircled in the ground with a band of lime, 
with a radius of 50 cm. 
From the restitution and photointerpretation of the aerial photographs, it was corroborated that some objets whose 
definition can be made easily in place, as the traces of superficial foundations, cannot be appreciated in the photographs, 
but some ancient motions of the soil can be seen clearly in the interpretation. In both cases, geometrical differences, or 
homogeneity of vegetation will determinate in which form of data, terrestrial or aerial an man made object should be 
identified. 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 
We are grateful to the photogrammetrical technician Mr. Luis Gerardo Toro T., who carried out the processes of 
restitution and edition in autocad, and to Eng. Msc Elvecio Pernia, for his collaboration in the taking of the aerial 
photographs. 
REFERENCES 
Carbonnell, M., Photogrammetry applied to surveys of monuments and historic centers, ICCROM, 1989, Roma. 
Conseil International des Monuments et des Sites (CIPA), Advice and suggestions for the furtherance of optimun 
practice in architectural photogrammetry surveys, UNESCO, 1981, Francia. 
Goguey, R. 1968. De l'aviation à l'archéologie. Imprimerie Electrogeloz, Paris. 
Hajdschki, I., Photogrammetric methods for architectural and archeological surveys, photogrammetria, 30:143,146., 
1975. 
Hardegen, L., The application of photogrammetry to the conservation of monuments, Schweizerische Technische 
Zeitschrift, vol 66, 1969, No 35, pp 721, 731. 
Jauregui, M., Aplicaciones prácticas de la fotogrametría terrestre, ULA, 1982. 
Pérez R., E. Patrones de Asentamiento Detectados en las Fotografías Aéreas. Memorias del primer congreso 
panamericano y tercero nacional en fotogrametria, fotointerpretación y geodesia. México, julio 1974. 
Warner, W. S., Graham, R. W., Read, R. E. 1997. Small Format Aerial Photography. ASPRS, Malta. 
  
International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. Vol. XXXIII, Part B5. Amsterdam 2000. 405