Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
John Stephenson
2110706
November 2012
This report has been produced as part of the assessment for
ARCH8404 Directed Study in Archaeology graduate topic in the
Department of Archaeology,
Flinders University
Digital Reconstruction of the Point Puer Boys’ Prison Flinders University and the Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority
Executive Summary
This paper discusses the process of building a digital reconstruction of the Point Puer Boys Prison at
Port Arthur, Tasmania. This is an important historical site, representing the first dedicated juvenile
detention centre in the British Empire. Today the site consists of ruins and archaeological features,
where physical recreations of buildings and the placement of interpretive signage have been
avoided. Therefore the site represents a perfect testing ground to investigate the use of digital
technology as an interpretative method at an historic site.
A metadata based modelling approach was used to recreate over twenty historic buildings and
features utilising Trimble Sketchup software. Images from the completed model have been used to
visually demonstrate the evolution of the site between 1833 and 1849. The physical evolution of the
site parallels changing philosophies toward the management of juvenile prisoners with the rewards
of schooling and learning a trade coexisting with corporal and solitary confinement for reoffenders.
The importance of an accurate digital terrain model (DTM) for such a project is demonstrated by
comparing two terrain models. A simple DTM constructed from 10m contours failed to accurately
represent important topographic features at the site, so an accurate terrain model was created using
an airborne LiDAR dataset. The LiDAR dataset was also used to identify archaeological features
sitting under forest cover, representing a technique which has implications for survey planning at
other PAHSMA sites, and the broader heritage management community in Tasmania.
Finally, it has been demonstrated how the completed model can be used as an interpretive and
educational tool, with options for a Google Earth layer or an Iphone application. These examples
illustrate how digital technology can be used as a tool to present traditional historical and
archaeological data in a fun and informative format accessible to those who would not usually read
such material.
i
Disclaimer
This report contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree
or diploma in any university, and to the best of the authors knowledge, contains no material
previously published or written by any other person, except where due reference is made in
the text.
John Stephenson, November 2012.
ii
List of Contents
Executive Summary i
Disclaimer ii
Table of Contents iii
List of Figures iv
List of Tables v
List of Abbreviations vi
Chapter 1 – Introduction page 1
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector page 3
Chapter 3 – Methodology page 14
Chapter 4 – Results page 24
Chapter 5 – Discussion page 35
Chapter 6 - Conclusion page 45
References page 46
iii
Table of Figures
Chapter 1. Introduction Page
Figure 1. Point Puer and the Port Arthur World Heritage Site. 2
Chapter 2. Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
Figure 2. L’Enfant’s 1791 plan & Digital Terrain Model of Washington DC 5
Figure 3. Comparison of an 1813 sketch of the US Capitol and a digital reconstruction 6
Figure 4. Rome Reborn 7
Figure 5. Roman temple produced from procedural modelling techniques 8
Figure 6. Information Balloon from the Rome Reborn Google Earth layer 9
Figure 7. Rome Reborn ‘Landing Page’ 10
Figure 8. Populating the Colossuem 11
Figure 9. Google Educators project utilizing Rome Reborn 12
Chapter 3. Methodology
Figure 10. Boys Barracks - Example of 1836 series PWD buildings plans 15
Figure 11. Rectification Process using Arcmap 16
Figure 12. Comparison of 1845 map with PAHSMA Archaeology layer 17
Figure 13. Airborne LiDAR technique 18
Figure 14. LiDAR map of Point Puer 19
Figure 15. Digital Terrain Modelling in ArcScene 19
Figure 16. Digital Terrain Modelling in Sketchup 20
Figure 17. Creating digital buildings in Trimble Sketchup 21
Figure 18. Digital reconstruction imported into Google Earth 22
Figure 19. Methodology Flowchart 23
Chapter 4. Results
Figure 20. Building locations coloured by class 26
Figure 21. Digital Reconstruction 1833 27
Figure 22. Bark huts at Point Puer, January 1834 27
Figure 23. Trades Area, late 1834 28
Figure 24. Punishment Area 1835 29
iv
Figure 25. Trades Area 1838 29
Figure 26. Prison Area 1838 30
Figure 27. Chapel and School Building 1839 30
Figure 28. Trades Area 1845 31
Figure 29. Gaol Area 1845 31
Figure 30. Digital model displayed in a smartphone application 33
Figure 31. Digital model displayed in a Google Earth layer 34
Chapter 5.
Figure 32. Point Puer from the Commandant’s Garden 38
Figure 33. Digital model from the same location 38
Figure 34. Photo from the same location 38
Figure 35. Suicide Cliffs (photograph) 39
Figure 36. Chapel building displayed with Google Earth terrain 40
Figure 37. Chapel building displayed with DTM from this project 40
Figure 38. Comparison of LiDAR data and current aerial photograph 41
Figure 39. Comparison of LiDAR data and 1997 archaeology 42
Figure 40. Current photograph of the convict aqueduct 43
List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of building information 24
Table 2. Comparison of building coordinates 36
v
List of Abbreviations.
ACARA – Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority
AI – Artificial Intelligence
DEWHA – Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts
DTM – Digital Terrain Model
KML - Keyhole Markup Language
GPR – Ground Penetrating Radar
LiDAR – Light Directional Aperture Radar
PAHSMA – Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority
PWD – Public Works Division
GIS – Geographic Information System
GPS – Global Positioning System
vi
1
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Aim
The aim of this directed study in archaeology is to produce a digital reconstruction of the Point Puer
Boys’ Prison, and demonstrate how this virtual model can be used as an interpretative tool. The
construction of this model will test the suitability of virtual heritage as a technique for research and
interpretation of historic sites. This project concentrates on Point Puer, which is part of the Port
Arthur Historic Site, but has implications for other PAHSMA sites and the wider Tasmanian cultural
heritage management sector.
Description and Location of Point Puer
The Point Puer Boys Prison is located on a narrow peninsula facing Canarvon Bay (formerly Opossum
Bay) on the Tasman Peninsula in South East Tasmania (Figure 1) (DEWHA 2008). The site is part of
the Port Arthur Historic Site World Heritage Area and managed by PAHSMA, located on the western
side of Canarvon Bay (DEWHA 2008). The site operated as a prison between 1834 and 1847, and
held up to 700 boys at a time (Humphrey 1997). The present site consists of ruins and
archaeological features (Jackman 2001). Much of the site is overgrown by Eucalypt forest, although
there are grassed sections in the north and a golf course at the southern end (DEWHA 2008).
A guided tour of the site is available, which takes approximately 1 hour, but there are no signs or
interpretive plaques for self-guided walks (Jackson 2001). The absence of any interpretive signs or
building reconstructions makes Point Puer the perfect site to test the suitability of virtual heritage as
an interpretative tool.
Industry Partner
The industry partner for this directed study is the Conservation and Interpretation Branch of
PAHSMA. This branch is responsible for research, interpretation and conservation of three world
heritage sites: the Port Arthur Historic Site (including Point Puer), the Coal Mines and Cascades
Chapter 1 - Introduction
2
Female Factory. A very useful resource in researching this project was the Port Arthur Resource
Centre, containing a vast number of published papers and archaeological reports.
Figure 1. The Point Puer study area (circled) and the Port Arthur World Heritage Area (LIST 2005 and 2011).
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Dr David Roe (Archaeology Manager at Port Arthur) for suggesting this site for
such a study, and for having the foresight to understand the potential of this project while still at an
early concept stage.
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
3
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
Virtual Heritage is often referred to as a relatively new branch of scholarly research (Frischer 2008),
but it is more correctly a continuation of traditional cultural heritage research utilising modern
techniques (Koller, Frischer and Humphreys 2009). Advancements in GIS technology, computer
graphics and modelling, image sensors, surveying techniques and web-based applications have
significantly changed the way archaeological data is recorded and presented (Styliadis, Akbaylar,
Papadopoulou, Hasanagas, Roussa and Sexidis 2009). This chapter presents a brief introduction to
techniques and issues for the creation of digital recreations of historic sites; analysing two case
studies in more detail.
Techniques
Traditional surveying methods can be used to collect spatial data from extant buildings; Lerones,
Fernandez, Fernandez, Gomez-Garcia-Bermejo and Casanova (2010) believe photogrammetric
techniques are useful for recording buildings with simple shapes (planer polygons, cylinders, cones)
but more complex shapes require laser scanning. Modern laser scanners record up to 1500 points
per second to form a ‘cloud’ of data, which is used to create a 3D surface from triangular shapes that
represent the measured surface (Lerones et al. 2010:2).
Semi-demolished and subsurface sites must be modeled from scratch using dedicated 3D software
(Styliadis et al. 2009). For these sites it is important to justify the history, architecture, structure and
temporal geometry of each feature (Styliadas et al. 2009). Information regarding the location,
accuracy, notes on any missing information where assumptions must be made, and any opposing
theories about use or building form must be stored and made accessible, this information is called
metadata or ‘data about data’ (Styliadis et al. 2009:297). Metadata based 3D modelling is seen as an
accurate scientific approach to creating digital reconstructions that can be justified in a scholarly
debate (Koller et al. 2009).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
4
Issues and Opportunities
Treating uncertainty in 3D visualizations is a complex process. At present there is no standard
method of graphically representing uncertainty in either 2D GIS or 3D modeling (Koller et al. 2009).
Uncertainty refers to decisions made about the shape, size or texture of a building where there is
limited evidence to support these decisions. Some techniques that have been used include blurring
the uncertain area, error bar glyphs, false-colouring, or clarifying areas of uncertainty in the
metadata information (Koller et al. 2009).
GPS and mobile phone technology allows users to combine ‘direct observation’ with ‘external’ data
provided on a location controlled device (Ott and Pozzi 2011:1368). One example utilizing this
technology is the Villa Serra in Italy, where a location based mobile phone application allows blind
people to experience the site, being given verbal information on points of interest as they are guided
along a pathway (Ott and Pozzi 2011).
Education is not restricted to the classroom; smartphones and computers allow students to continue
their research at home (Ott and Pozzi 2011). The use of computer technology allows barriers of time
and space to be removed; turning institutions that were places of informal learning (eg. Museums
and historic sites) into platforms for formal research through the use of the internet and Ipad
applications (Ott and Pozzi 2011).
Case Study 1: Visualizing Washington
The Visualizing Washington project is an ambitious attempt to recreate the site of Washington DC as
it was in 1790, when L’Enfant began designing the Capitol (Bailey and Schroader 2011). As there is
no contemporary photographic evidence of the city, the image of early Washington DC is gained
from paintings and sketches, many containing inaccuracies and romantic exaggerations (Bailey and
Schroader 2011). The first step of creating a digital image of the Capitol involved creating an
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
5
accurate DTM. Elevation contours were manually digitized from 47 historic maps, and any unnatural
features such as quarries and roads were removed (Bailey and Schroader 2011:4). It took a total of
ten months to create the DTM in Figure 2, this landscape was populated with buildings
reconstructed from a database of historic information (Bailey 2010b).
Figure 2. L’Enfant’s 1791 plans overlayed onto a Digital Terrain Model of Washington DC (Bailey 2010b).
Bailey (2009) has investigated the juxtaposition of photographs to produce ‘then and now’ images.
He has experimented with different rendering techniques for producing these comparisons,
concluding that images rendered as sketches represent a more direct comparison compared to the
traditional photo-realistic textures favoured by many digital modellers, as presented in Figure 3
(Bailey 2010a).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
6
Figure 3. Comparison of an 1813 sketch of the US Capitol building (above) and a digital reconstruction rendered in sketch
form (still shot from an animation) (Bailey 2010a).
Case Study 2: Rome Reborn.
The Rome Reborn project is a digital reconstruction of Rome in the year 320AD, the model consists
of ~7000 buildings, making it the largest scholarly reconstruction to date (Figure 4) (Dyalla, Frischer,
Mueller, Ulmer and Haegler 2010:62). These buildings have been divided into two classes: Class I
consists of ~250 well documented buildings where the position, use and design is well recorded,
while Class II represents buildings with only basic information (Dyalla et al. 2010).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
7
Figure 4. Rome Reborn Screenshot (Dyalla et al. 2009).
Class II buildings were originally scanned using laser technology from a large physical model of
Ancient Rome in 1:250 scale (Guidi, Frischer, De Simone, Cioci, Spinetti, Carosso, Micoli, Russo and
Grasso 2006). Meanwhile Class I buildings were constructed individually using a multitude of
historical and archaeological data (Dyalla et al. 2010:62). This created large discrepancies between
the final visualization of the two classes of buildings, creating a need to edit the second class
buildings. Therefore the Rome Reborn team used procedural modeling techniques to create the
Class II buildings, where computer software would make a digital building according to a few known
values, constrained by attributes stored in a database from known examples, allowing a large
number of buildings to be created in limited time (Figure 5) (Dyalla et al. 2010).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
8
Figure 5. Roman temple produced from procedural modelling techniques, with attributes table displayed (Dyalla et al.
2010).
In 2008 a version of this project was released as a Google Earth layer, allowing much wider
dissemination of the model (Wells, Frischer, Ross and Keller 2010). To create the Google Earth layer
the Rome Reborn team had to convert the model from MultiGen to KML format, this proved to be a
difficult and time intensive five stage workflow. Wells et al. (2010) suggested that in hindsight it
would have been easier to create the model from scratch in Google Sketchup. The team also had
trouble matching the ancient terrain to fit the Google Earth DTM of the current city, so it was
decided to suspend the Rome Reborn layer above the current terrain (Wells et al. 2010). The Google
Earth layer contains information balloons for each of the Class I buildings, consisting of a brief
description, and a link to a ‘landing page’ where further information could be sought (Figures 6 and
7) (Wells et al. 2010:369).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
9
Figure 6. Information Balloon from the Rome Reborn Google Earth layer (Wells et al. 2010).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
10
Figure 7. Example of a ‘landing page’ supporting the Rome Reborn project (Wells et al. 2010).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
11
A later development of this project involved the use of AI technology to test theories about seating
in the Colosseum. Approximately 7600 software entities (avatars) were used to fill one quarter of
the Colosseum (Figure 8). It was found that it would take an average of 15-20 minutes to move from
an entrance gate to an assigned seat, compared to long-held theory that the stadium could be filled
and emptied in only a few minutes (Gutierrez, Frishcer, Cerezo, Gomez and Seron 2007:184). It was
also calculated that the entire Colosseum could house a maximum of 48-50,000 spectators (Frischer
2010).
Figure 8. Software entities (avatars) populating a digital reconstruction of the Colosseum (Gutierrez et al. 2007).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
12
The Rome Reborn layer in Google Earth has been used as an educational tool in classes across the
America. In 2011 Google launched the ‘Ancient Rome 3D Curriculum Competition’ in which teachers
were given the opportunity to design projects which integrated the Rome Reborn model into the
school curriculum; where students could demonstrate proficiency in historical research, geography,
mathematics and writing (Google 2011). Google awarded prizes for both students and teachers who
demonstrated the best use of the available technology. One winning entry for a grade three class
included the project ‘Archy-the-Arch’, in which a student was asked to identify the genealogy of a
modern arch. This included the investigation of seven examples of arches from ancient Rome,
locating them in Google Earth, reading their history, conducting mathematical calculations and
comparisons to the modern arch in Google Sketchup, and then justifying which historical arch was
the ancestor of ‘Archy-the-Arch’ (Google 2011b).
Figure 9. Grade 3 students were asked to identify and find each of the seven ancient roman arches, then justify which was
most closely related to ‘Archy-the-Arch’. Sketchup files were provided for each example (Google 2011b).
Chapter 2 – Virtual Reality and the Cultural Heritage Sector
13
Implications for the Port Arthur Historic Site
A digital reconstruction of the entire Port Arthur site could be created using a combination of many
of the techniques presented above, including laser scanning and photogrammetry of the extant
buildings and digital reconstructions of other buildings from archaeological and historical data. The
absence of extant buildings at Point Puer means a metadata based approach is most appropriate.
Sketchup software is recommended as this allows for easy integration to Google Earth. The
construction of a digital model will allow for comparison of ‘then and now’ images, and could form
the basis for later educational opportunities.
Chapter 3 - Methodology
14
Chapter 3 – Methodology
This chapter presents a description of the techniques and technologies used to display, interpret and
model the data for this project. Some of the techniques used in this process represent a complex
combination of geoscience, geophysical, and digital modelling techniques; wherever possible these
processes have been simplified for those readers without a geoscience background. Four concurrent
process streams were used to complete the digital reconstruction: historical research, GIS mapping,
Terrain Modelling and 3D modelling.
Historical Research
A series of primary and secondary sources (journals, architectural plans, maps, archaeological
surveys and historic analyses) were used to identify all the buildings from the site and to create a
database of information. This information contained dimensions, coordinates, building materials,
date of construction, any known alterations for each building, and theories about use or form of the
poorly documented buildings.
Unfortunately, no buildings remain at the site, and only a few sketches were made before the
establishment was demolished. There is however a comprehensive collection of architectural plans
drawn by the Public Works Division, many by the convict artist Henry Laing in 1836-7; these are
stored at the Port Arthur Resource Centre and the Tasmanian Archives Office (Figure 10). Digital
plans were collated and measurements taken of important features such as: door and window size,
roof lines and building materials which were used to justify a digital reconstruction.
Chapter 3 - Methodology
15
Figure 10. Building plans for the Boys Barrracks, an example of architectural plans from the Public Works Division (PWD
1836-57).
2D Mapping
The GIS program ESRI Arcmap 10.1 was used for the initial rectification and spatial analysis of two
historic maps, dated to 1838 and 1845. This process involves taking known co-ordinates of ground
features at Point Puer and matching these against places that stand out on the historic map, and
then performing mathematical calculations to transform the image into a georeferenced map (ie. a
map with known coordinates). Points on the coastline and the former jetty were used for the
georeferencing process (Figure 11).
Chapter 3 - Methodology
16
Figure 11. Rectification Process using Arcmap 10.1; a series of control points were identified on both the 1845 map and the modern aerial photo with known coordinates, transforming the image of the 1845 map into a georeferenced dataset, allowing the two images (layers) to be overlayed as one image (PWD 1845 and LIST 2005).
A georeferenced map provided the basis for geospatial interpretation; co-ordinates were calculated
for each building, and the size of each building was measured using the Arcmap measuring tool.
Distances could also be measured between buildings and precincts, for comparison to statements
found in the historic sources (Figure 12). By over-laying the rectified historic maps and the current
archaeological maps it was possible to compare the accuracy levels of the two maps and identify any
discrepancies.
Chapter 3 - Methodology
17
Figure 12. Comparison of the coloured 1845 map (at 50% transparency) with PAHSMA Archaeology data (PWD 1845 and
Firth and Austral 1998).
Chapter 3 - Methodology
18
Terrain Modelling
A Digital Terrain Model (DTM) was created from a LiDAR dataset originally flown to monitor canopy
height in nearby forests. LiDAR is an active radar system mounted on a fixed-wing aircraft, as the
aircraft flies along the radar shoots numerous beams of light (called a radar swath) towards the
ground. When these beams hit an object (a tree, building or the ground), they bounce back and are
recorded by a radar receiver, the time it takes to reach the ground and be returned is used to
calculate the elevation at that point (Fig 13). Responses from the tree canopy were filtered out from
the data, allowing a detailed model of the ground surface to be recorded (Figure 14).
Figure 13. Airborne LiDAR technique for recording ground height. The range of the pulse ( r ) is calculated from the time a pulse takes to be transmitted and received, multiplied by the speed of light ( c ) and divided by 2 (for a return pulse). The height above sea level can then be calculated as the position of the plane is recorded by Differential GPS.
The LIDAR dataset was presented in ‘raster format’ (square cells containing geographic information
and height) in ArcScene, allowing a contour map of 1m interval to be created by connecting cells of
common height (Figure 15). The contour map was exported from ArcScene to Sketchup, where the
contour lines were digitised and the line extrapolated to the correct height, after which a wire mesh
was created by joining these lines, representing the topographic surface (Figure 16).
Chapter 3 - Methodology
19
Figure 14. LiDAR data of Point Puer (Forestry Tasmania 2012).
Figure 15. Creation of a 1m contour map in ArcScene. Raw LiDAR was supplied in raster format of 1m squares (a) allowing
cells of like height to be connected (b) to form contour lines, these were exported as a complete contour map (c).
Chapter 3 - Methodology
20
Figure 16. Creation of a Digital Terrain Model in Sketchup. The contours from Figure 15 were extracted to their
corresponding height above sea level (a), from which a ‘wire mesh’ was created by connecting the tops of the contour lines
and smoothed in between by a mathematical process (b). Without the smoothing process the surface consists of
interconnected triangles (c). With the contour lines turned off (d) a smooth terrain surface is presented, which was copied
and the second surfaced placed slightly lower (e), a grass texture was attached to the higher and sandstone texture to the
lower to represent land surfaces. Finally a sea surface layer was added with a water texture to represent the peninsula (f).
Chapter 3 - Methodology
21
3D modelling
Buildings were modelled in the 3D software program Sketchup. This involved using simple geometric
shapes (lines, rectangles, polygons) connected together in the shape and dimensions of the buildings
researched above (Figure 17). The final textures were added to these simple shapes, thus
transferring them from a collection of shapes to a digital representation of the former building.
Some of these textures were default material from Sketchup, others were taken from photographs
of materials (brick and weatherboards, bark on trees), edited in SumoPaint and converted into a
material by defining the size and level of transparency.
Figure 17. 3D modelling process in Sketchup. Simple geometric shapes are used to represent a feature or building, this example uses 24 polygons. Textures and shadows transform these shapes into a realistic representation of a building.
Chapter 3 - Methodology
22
Display in Google Earth
A KML file containing a georeferenced 3D model of the terrain and each building was exported from
Sketchup directly into Google Earth. At this stage only a trial version was temporarily placed in
Google Earth to test the final format of the model and to experiment with information bubbles
(Figure 18).
Figure 18. Digital reconstruction imported into Google Earth.
Summary
The following flow-chart summarises the above processes, illustrating how the four separate process
streams connect to produce the final model (Figure 19).
Chapter 5 - Discussion
23
Figure 19. Methodology Flowchart for producing the Point Puer digital reconstruction.
Chapter 4 - Results
25
Chapter 4 - Results
Historical research of the buildings at Point Puer has allowed a database of information to be
created for each feature, this is an important resource for the creation of 3D models. Appendix 1
represents the information used to justify the final model for each building, including contemporary
architectural plans or sketches, coordinates, historical and archaeological summary and any
uncertainties about form or use. Table 1 presents a summary of this information; with the key
points being the location, construction year, material, and whether architectural plans exist.
Table 1. Summary of building information.
No. Building Material Plans Year Class East North
1 Boys Barracks Weatherboard Yes 1834 I 570683 5221868
2 Workshop Weatherboard Yes 1834/35 I 570690 5221910
3 Superintedenent's House Weatherboard Yes 1834 I 570673 5221804
4 Catechist's House Weatherboard Yes 1834 I 570678 5221835
5 Exempt Room Weatherboard Yes 1836 I 570664 5221926
6 Cookhouse Weatherboard Yes 1834 I 570705 5221899
7 Bakery Masonry Yes* 1836 III 570730 5221885
8 Washroom & Store Weatherboard Yes <1836 I 570706 5221869
9 Sawyers Shed Rough Wood No 1834 III 570595 5221759
10 Stone Cutters Building ?? No 1840-1 III 570670 5221897
11 Boat Builders Shed ?? No 1840-1 III 570659 5221905
12 Chapel / School Building Weatherboard Yes* 1839 II 570640 5221605
13 Chapel Outbuilding ?? No >1838 III 570639 5221637
14 Separate Cells Weatherboard Yes 1835 I 570758 5221305
15 Soldier's Hut Weatherboard Yes 1835 I 570799 5221321
16 Solitary Cells Weatherboard Yes ?? I 570794 5221297
17 New Gaol Masonry Yes 1838 I 570662 5221261
17a New Gaol Extensions Masonry Yes* 1839 II 570646 5221263
18 Gaol Superintendent's ?? No 1838 III 570588 5221263
19 Officer's Barracks ?? No 1841 III 570553 5221268
20 Additional Separate Cells ?? No >1838 III 570508 5221277
21 Trades Jetty Timber No 1834 III 570600 5221826
22 Gaol Jetty Stone No <1838 III 570435 5221376
23 Old Jetty Stone No >1838 III 570487 5221719Yes* indicates that buildings plans exist but it appears these do not accurately reflect the final construction.
24
Chapter 4 - Results
25
This information was used to classify buildings into three classes (Figure 20). Class I contains those
where a large amount of information is known and a digital reconstruction can confidently be made.
Class II buildings represent those buildings where the location is known and an original plan exists,
but it is believed the construction was altered at some stage. Class III items represent features that
were known to exist in some form, but the exact location is not known and there are no plans of the
exact form; a generic model has been used to represent these features.
Chapter 4 - Results
27
Figure 20. Building locations coloured by class.
26
Chapter 4 - Results
27
A visual history of the Point Puer Boys Prison
The expansion of the settlement is presented in ‘snapshots’ of the camp in 1834, 1835, 1838 and
1845 in Figures 21-29. The evolution of the both the physical site and the philosophy of juvenile
detention and reformation is captured in these images. Figure 21 represents the undeveloped
peninsula in facing onto Canarvon Bay, where Commandant Booth presided over the Port Arthur
settlement (Humphery 1997). By Christmas 1833 prisoners form Port Arthur had built a series of
rough huts for use by the first shipment of boys, who arrived in January 1834 (Figure 22) (ed. Heard
1981).
Figure 21. Digital recreation of Point Puer in 1833.
Figure 22. Bark huts built on the peninsula to house the first shipload of boys, Christmas 1833.
Chapter 4 - Results
28
The 1834 image (Figure 23) represents rapid expansion in the northern ‘trades’ complex,
concentrating on buildings for accommodation and catering, which were completed within a few
months of settlement (Tuffin 2007). The Workshop was still under construction in November 1834
(ed. Heard 1981).
Figure 23. Digital recreation of Point Puer in late 1834.
The 1835 image (Figure 24) illustrates the beginning of the punishment complex, and a realisation
that the nineteenth century enlightened views of juvenile detention envisaged for the prison were
not a reality (Horne 1843). It was clear within the first year that schooling, trades training and
religious instruction would not alone turn these boy prisoners into model citizens (Horne 1843). A
‘punishment’ area was established; containing twelve separate cells, with a small contingent of
soldiers to supervise them and manage the semaphore station.
Chapter 4 - Results
30
Fig 24. Digital recreation of the punishment area in 1835; containing solitary cells for 12 prisoners, a soldier’s hut and
semaphore station.
The 1838 image represents a digital model of the corresponding 1838 map (PWD 1838). The
workshop had been completed, exempt room added, and the amount of cultivated land had
increased. An increase in prisoner numbers required more accommodation, resulting in extensions
to the boys barracks and a new gaol building at the southern end, allowing classification of prisoners
according to their crimes and behaviour upon arrival at the site. Spatial demarcations according to
the prisoner class were developed and maintained (Jackman 2001). Well behaving boys and those
nearing release remained at the northern area, where they were rewarded with schooling, trades
training and free time where they could explore and fish along the coastline (Figure 25) (Tuffin
2007). Second class prisoners were imprisoned in the new gaol and performed menial tasks during
the day, while repeat offenders would be sentenced to imprisonment in the separate cells and fed
reduced rations (Figure 26) (Horne 1843).
Figure 25. Digital recreation of the trades area in 1838.
29
Chapter 4 - Results
30
Figure 26. Digital recreation of the prison area in 1838. The separate cells have doubled in size, with a new gaol housing
100 prisoners and a house for the gaol superintendent located on the southern side of the ‘line of demarcation’.
During 1839-40 the chapel / school building was built in the centre of the prison (Figure 27). This
building was built on a ~2m platform to the northern end, resulting in an imposing presence visible
from all directions of the prison (Jackman 2001).
Figure 27. Chapel & outbuilding located in the centre of the prison, 1839.
The 1845 image (Figures 28 and 29) illustrate the prison in 1845, at its height of development. Both
the trades and gaol areas have been expanded. Dedicated buildings for stone cutting and boat
building have been built, further accommodation built in the trades area, while the gaol is more than
double the original size to accommodate a population that peaked at over 700 prisoners (Tuffin
Chapter 4 - Results
31
2007). The separate cells had been extended again, solitary cells built, and additional separate cells
were built on the western side.
Figure 28. Digital recreation of the trades area in 1845, illustrating the addition of sheds for stone cutting and boat
building.
Figure 29. Digital recreation of the gaol area in 1845, containing additional separate cells and new solitary cells on the
eastern side, an extension of main gaol and more solitary cells on the western side of the peninsula.
Chapter 4 - Results
31
Presentation of Data
PAHSMA is currently developing an iPhone application for interpretation at the main Port Arthur
site; at the time of writing a Point Puer tour was not part of that development. Figure 30 illustrates
how this digital reconstruction could be integrated into the guided tour of Point Puer. A location
based smartphone application would represent a mobile platform for viewing ‘then and now’
images, gaining additional information about a specific building, or reading stories about some of the
boys from the prison.
It is also worth noting that as there is presently no wheelchair access to Point Puer (PAHSMA 2003),
a virtual tour could be an alternative means of experiencing the site. The current general access to
the main Port Arthur site also includes a cruise of Canarvon Bay which passes by Point Puer, and
drops off those who have paid extra to take part in the guided tour. An Iphone application would
allow those who do not have time or are physically unable to join the tour to at minimum gain an
understanding of how the site may have looked from the comfort of the MV Marana.
Just as the Rome Reborn model was presented in Google Earth 2 it is possible to present the Point
Point model on this free internet based platform. This would allow for a wide dissemination of
information regarding Point Puer and the related issues of convict transportation, the effects of the
industrial revolution on the youth of Britain in the early nineteenth century and the early history of
Tasmania. A Google Earth Point Puer layer could be integrated into classes teaching the History
section of the Australian Curriculum; especially years 5 and 9 which study convict related studies
(ACARA 2012). Figure 31 presents examples of how the Point Puer model could be used as an
education platform when presented as a Google Earth layer.
32
Chapter 4 - Results
32
Figure 30. Smartphone application example: The chapel building platform is brought to life through an interactive display
of ‘then and now’ images, and providing additional information by clicking on the information button.
33
Chapter 4 - Results
33
Figure 31. Proposed Google Earth layer; a test version of the model is presented in Google Earth with labels for each of the
main buildings. These labels could link to a brief description of the feature, which in turn links to a ‘landing page’ similar to
those found in Appendix 1 for those seeking additional information or a list of references.
34
Chapter 5 - Discussion
34
Chapter 5 – Discussion
The aim of this study was to create a digital model of the Point Puer Boys Prison, and investigate
how such a model could be used for interpretative and educational purposes. The major difficulties
faced in this project were the reliance on non-photographic evidence for the location and form of
historical buildings, and the creation of a dedicated DTM. These matters will be discussed in detail in
this chapter.
The use of LiDAR technology to produce an accurate DTM had the secondary effect of identifying
archaeological features. This is a geophysical survey method which has broad potential for other
historic sites presently covered by forest. A database of information for over twenty buildings and
features at the site is attached in Appendix 1; this collection of information is itself a useful resource
for the site, and is also discussed in this chapter.
Accuracy Comparisons
The locations of buildings for this reconstruction were reliant upon information from historic maps
and the 1997 archaeological survey. Unfortunately not all the building locations were identified in
1997, which means information from the 1838 and 1845 maps is very important. To confidently use
this information it was important to first test the accuracy of the three sources, by comparing the
central location of each known building (Table 2). There are obvious differences between the 1997
results and the 1838 map in the gaol area, where they differ by ~100m, the punishment area is also
~30m out. Overall the locations of buildings in the 1845 map are more accurate, but it is noted that
the trades area buildings have been located ~20m south of where they were mapped in 1997.
Overall the majority of buildings were found ~10m from where the 1845 map stated. The location of
some buildings in the model have been derived solely from this map, it can therefore be concluded
that the final digital reconstruction is accurate to ~10m.
35
Chapter 5 - Discussion
36
Table 2. Comparison of location data from Firth and Austral (1997), PWD 1838 and PWD 1845.
Austral (1997) 1838 Map 1845 Map
No. Building East North East North Diff E. Diff N. East North Diff E. Diff N.
1 Boys Barracks 570683 5221868 570681 5221877 2 -9 570683 5221846 0 22
2 Workshop 570690 5221910 570678 5221916 12 -6 570691 5221884 -1 26
3 Superintedenent's House N/A N/A 570671 5221817 N/A N/A 570674 5221786 N/A N/A
4 Catechist House N/A N/A 570676 5221845 N/A N/A 570680 5221817 N/A N/A
5 Exempt Room 570664 5221926 570649 5221936 15 -10 570674 5221907 -10 19
6A Cookhouse N/A N/A 570704 5221878 N/A N/A 570708 5221881 N/A N/A
6B Bakery 570730 5221885 570729 5221900 1 -15 570738 5221886 -8 -1
7 Washroom & Store 570706 5221899 570705 5221878 1 21 N/A N/A N/A N/A
8 Sawyers Shed 570595 5221759 570607 5221747 -12 12 570601 5221762 -6 -3
9 Stone Cutters Building 570670 5221897 N/A N/A N/A N/A 570675 5221878 -5 19
10 Boat Builders Shed 570659 5221905 N/A N/A N/A N/A 570662 5221886 -3 19
11 Chapel / School Building 570640 5221605 N/A N/A N/A N/A 570639 5221591 1 14
12 Chapel Outbuilding 570639 5221637 N/A N/A N/A N/A 570641 5221628 -2 9
13 Separate Cells 570758 5221305 570728 5221292 30 13 570763 5221298 -5 7
14 Soldier's Hut 570799 5221321 570755 5221319 44 2 570806 5221316 -7 5
15 Solitary Cells 570794 5221297 N/A N/A N/A N/A 570795 5221293 -1 4
16 New Gaol 570662 5221261 570575 5221248 87 13 570654 5221255 8 6
16a New Gaol Extensions 570646 5221263 570548 5221252 98 11 570638 5221257 8 6
17 Gaol Superintendent's 570588 5221263 570485 5221242 103 21 570582 5221252 6 11
18 Officer's Barracks 570553 5221268 N/A N/A N/A N/A 570539 5221257 14 11
19 Additional Separate Cells 570508 5221277 570454 5221314 54 -37 570492 5221263 16 14
21 Trades Jetty N/A N/A 570574 5221816 N/A N/A 570615 5221821 N/A N/A
21 Gaol Jetty 570435 5221376 570417 5221367 18 9 570435 5221374 0 2
21 Old Jetty 570487 5221719 N/A N/A N/A N/A 570496 5221719 -9 0
Red numbers for 1838 indicate a proposed building, and presumed not to exist when surveyed.
‘Then and Now’ Images.
The complete digital reconstruction allows us to compare scenes created in digital format to those
created by contemporary artists. This process has multiple benefits:
1. Test the accuracy of the digital recreation (are buildings in the right location? Are they made of
the right material?
2. To narrow the time gaps for when an artwork was created. The exact dates of some of the
artworks are not known, but if it is known when buildings were constructed it is possible to identify
when the sketch or painting was made (to within a year or two).
Chapter 5 - Discussion
37
3. Allows us to see the artwork in photo-realistic form.
The example below (Figure 32) presents the mid-1840s (exact date unknown) painting by R.W.
Newman. This photograph is from the Commandant’s Garden, on the eastern side of Canarvon Bay,
and pictures the entire prison site. Although building detail is limited it is possible to identify the
location of buildings, and the material used through colour (white for weatherboard and pink-red for
brick). Figure 33 represents the 1845 digital reconstruction from approximately the same location,
overall it is felt this represents a fairly accurate comparison, with the distinct trades, chapel and gaol
areas evident on both examples. The corresponding large weatherboard separate cells, and
masonry officer’s quarters and additional separate cells in the gaol area indicate that the painting
was made around 1845. Figure 34 illustrates how the site looks today from the same location.
Chapter 5 - Discussion
38
Figure 32. ‘Point Puer From the Commandant’s Garden’ (Newman n.d.).
Figure 33. Digital Model from the Commandants’ Garden.
Figure 34. Modern photo from what is believed to be the same location.
Chapter 5 - Discussion
39
Digital Terrain Modelling.
Previous difficulties found when creating a DTM for a digital reconstruction were discussed in
Chapter 2, similar problems were found with this project. The importance of the terrain at Point
Puer was realised on the first site visit for this project, the cliffs on the eastern side represent a
barrier for escape (Figure 35), while the western side gently slopes back towards the water-line,
allowing an almost a complete view of the site from the Commandant’s residence at Port Arthur.
Originally it was planned simply to place the digitally reconstructed building models onto the existing
DTM presented in Google Earth, but as this DTM failed to encapsulate the above features, it was
decided to create a DTM from scratch. The differences between Google Earth and the DTM created
for this project are depicted in Figures 36 and 37.
Fig 35. Suicide cliffs, located on the eastern side of the peninsula (Harvey 1910).
Fig 36. Chapel building displayed with Google Earth terrain, viewed from the eastern side of the peninsula.
Chapter 5 - Discussion
40
Fig 37. Chapel building displayed with DTM from this project, viewed from the eastern side of the peninsula.
Light Directional Aperture Radar (LiDAR) – and implications for Archaeological Research.
The LiDAR dataset provided for Point Puer was used primarily to create an accurate DTM for the site,
this is a common technique used in the spatial science industry (Bennet, Welham, Hill and Ford
2012). In Europe and the Americas this technique is also used to identify archaeological features in
forested areas (Challis, Forlin and Kincey 2011), but at the time of writing no Australian published
articles could be found demonstrating this practice. Therefore this project may represent the first
time that this technique has been used in Australia, and the results were very promising compared
to interpreting traditional aerial photography, despite using low resolution LiDAR data (Figure 38).
Chapter 5 - Discussion
41
Figure 38. Aerial Photo (Google Maps 2012) compared to LiDAR data (Forestry Tasmania 2012).
A very brief investigation of this data has identified at least nine features that can be identified from
a desktop survey; these are compared to those features identified by Firth and Austral (1997) in
Figure 39. The retaining walls at the trades complex (#1) are clearly visible in the LiDAR data despite
being covered by trees in the aerial photo (Figure 38); likewise the high platform of the chapel (#2).
Linear features representing drainage channels are visible at #3. The water storage pit (or sawpit) at
#4 and the water filter (or tannery) at #5 are both clearly visible in the LiDAR image but both are
covered by trees in the aerial photo. Number 6 represents the former line of demarcation, a current
track and fenceline. The gaol building at #7 has left the entire building footprint visible in
Chapter 5 - Discussion
42
the LiDAR image, but once again is covered by trees in Figure 38. The former aqueduct stands out as
a roughly north-south linear feature in Figure 39, this compares sharply with the bracken covered
channel that is photographed in Figure 40. Feature #9 is interesting as it does not correspond to
anything identified in the 1997 survey, but appears to be a sharp change in topography, possibly a
quarry.
Figure 39. Archaeological features mapped by Firth and Austral (1998), compared to LIDAR data collected by Forestry
Tasmania (2012).
Chapter 5 - Discussion
43
Figure 40. Aqueduct channel photographed in 2012.
This brief summary confirms that this is an area worthy of further research, with implications for
both PAHSMA and the broader cultural heritage sector in Tasmania for identifying archaeological
features in heavily forested areas. An initial step should investigate results for different vegetation
types as just on this peninsula a mixture of mature Eucalypt, tea tree and thick bracken are present,
and appear to correspond to different textures in Figure 33. The platforms of the buildings west of
the gaol complex are not clearly visible; this may be caused by the presence of a different vegetation
type in this area. Thick bracken cover does not appear to produce a reduced response as expected,
as the aqueduct is prominent in Figure 39 despite thick bracken cover.
It is envisaged that this technique could be used at an initial survey planning stage, identifying
features and areas worthy of further ground work. The identification of features using airborne
LiDAR data could reduce the time and cost of contracted archaeologists, and justify the need for
controlled burns in key areas, which caused delays for the 1997 survey (Firth and Austral 1998).
Chapter 6 - Conclusion
44
Database of Buildings and Further Research
The database attached in Appendix 1 represents a summary of information for each of the main
buildings and features at the Point Puer site. By storing this database in digital format it allows an
editable collection of information that can be updated or changed as further research is conducted.
The process of creating meta-data information for each feature was a very useful process in itself,
allowing the areas where limited or no information is known to be identified. These Class II and II
features require further investigation, primarily geophysical surveys to identify previous building
outlines and possible excavations over the coming years. In the trades area the sawyers shed, boat-
builders shed and workshop additions have been identified as needing further research; this area is
very open so geophysical methods such as GPR should work well. The gaol area is very poorly
understood, with the image presented in Figure 32 the only reference. This whole complex would
benefit from further study; site visits from this project found the area overgrown and undulating,
reducing the likelihood of geophysical methods being successful (Links, Roach and Jackman 2004),
indicating that excavation may be necessary in this area.
Chapter 6 - Conclusion
45
Chapter 6 - Conclusion
A digital reconstruction of the Point Puer Prison has been completed using a metadata based
approach. This model has been used to demonstrate how virtual heritage can be used as a tool for
both tourism and education at the Port Arthur Historic Site, with broader implications for the
cultural heritage sector in Tasmania.
The biggest problem faced during this project was creating an accurate DTM, which is a common
problem faced with digital reconstructions and something that needs to be taken into account. It is
recommended that future projects allocate much more time at the beginning of the project
specifically for creating an accurate terrain model, or conversely accepting a lower quality terrain
model where significant topographic features are not needed or time is restricted.
This project was envisaged as a technology demonstration project and was not in itself expected to
produce a digital model fit for public display. Thus far feedback has been positive, so it is felt the
project has achieved its aims. It has been illustrated how such a model can be integrated into an
Iphone application for tourist applications, or a Google Earth layer for education purposes. Further
works is planned to add more detail to the model before a public release in 2013.
Bailey (2010) suggests that a digital reconstruction can only be regarded as a success if it passes the
‘so what’ test – was it worth the effort, and does anybody care? The feedback thus far from
professionals and the general public indicate that this project was worth the effort. This project has
taken scholarly information that is stored in the State Archives and Port Arthur Resource Centre, and
presented that information in a format that is interactive and understandable for tourists and
students. Digital technology is a very useful tool for bridging the gap between traditional
archaeological research and publication methods, and the general public who expect data to be
presented in an engaging format.
Appendix
46
References:
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) 2012 The Australian
Curriculum: History. Accessed 1 November 2012,
<http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/History/Curriculum/F-10>.
Bailey, D. 2009 “Then and Now” Techniques, Part I, Visualizing early Washington DC, blog posting, 14
Nov, viewed 3 October 2012, <http://visualizingdc.com/2009/11/then-and-now-techniques-part1/>.
Bailey, D. 2010a “Then and Now” Techniques, Visualizing early Washington DC, blog posting, 28
March, viewed 3 October 2012, <http://visualizingdc.com/2010/03/then-and-now-techniques-part-
ii/>.
Bailey, D. 2010b Polished 1790 Carat Diamond, Visualizing early Washington DC, blog posting, 2
May, viewed 3 October 2012, <http://visualizingdc.com/2010/05/polished-1790-carat-diamond/>.
Bailey, D., and L. Schroader 2011 Visualizing early Washington DC. The Portolan 80: 33-41.
Bennet, R., K. Welham, R.A. Hill and A. Ford 2012 A comparison of Visualization Techniques for
Models Created from Airborne Laser Scanned Data. Archaeological Prospection 19: 41-48.
Bickford, A. 1993 Point Puer, Port Arthur archaeological survey Unpublished report commissioned
for the Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority, Sydney.
Challis, K., P. Forlin and M. Kincey 2011 A Generic Toolkit for the Visualization of Archaeological
Features on Airborne LiDAR Elevation Data. Archaeological Prospection 18: 279-289.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) 2008 Australian Convict
Sites – World Heritage Nomination. Blue Star Print, Canberra.
Dylla, K., B. Frischer, P. Mueller, A. Ulmer and S. Haegler, 2010 Rome Reborn 2.0: A Case Study of
Virtual City Reconstruction Using Procedural Modelling Techniques. In Frischer, B., J.W. Crawford
Appendix
47
and D. Koller (eds), CAA 2009 Making History Interactive. 37th Proceedings of the CAA Conference
March 22-26, 2009, Williamsburg, Virginia, pp: 62-66. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Firth, F. and Austral Archaeology 1998 Point Puer, Port Arthur Historic Site; archaeological heritage
assessment 1997. Unpublished report for the Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority.
Glebe, Tasmania.
Frischer, B. 2008 The Rome Reborn Project: How Technology is helping us to study history, viewed 2
October 2012, < http://www.romereborn.virginia.edu/rome_reborn_2_documents/papers/Frischer_OpEd_final2.pdf>.
Frischer, B. 2010 Beyond Illustration: New Dimensions of 3D Modelling of Cultural Heritage Sites and
monuments (Closing Plenary Session). Coalition for Networked Information, Fall 2009 Membership
Meeting, December 14-15 2009. Viewed 6 September 2012 <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-
SSJ2Ck0hqw>.
Google 2011 Ancient Rome 3D Curriculum Competition. Accessed 14 October 2012,
<http://www.google.com/educators/romecontest.html>.
Google 2011 Roman Archy: Google Earth Project Plan. Accessed 14 October 2012,
<http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrusted_dlcp/www.google.com/en//educ
ators/learning_materials/romecontest/Archy-the-Arch_Google_Lesson.pdf>.
Guidi, G., B. Frishcer, M. Russo, A. Spinetti, L. Carosso, L. Micoli 2006 Three-dimensional acquisition
of large and detailed cultural heritage objects. Machine Visions and Applications 17: 349-360.
Gutierrez, D., B. Frischer, E. Cerezo, A. Gomez and F. Seron 2007 AI and virtual crowds: Populating
the Colosseum. Journal of Cultural Heritage 8: 176-185.
Harvey, R.C. 1910, photograph, Point Puer. Viewed 18 October 2012,
<http://catalogue.statelibrary.tas.gov.au/item/?q=point+puer&i=15&id=NS1029-1-238>.
Appendix
48
Heard, D. (ed.) 1981 The journal of Charles O'Hara Booth, commandant of the Port Arthur penal
settlement. Historical Research Association, Hobart.
Horne, B.J. 1843 Report on Point Puer Boys’ Prison, to His Excellency Sir John Franklin K.C.H. and K.R.
Lieut. Governor of Van Diemen's Land, Point Puer, March 7 1843. Unpublished letter, Archives Office
Tasmania (C0280/157/520).
Humphrey, K. 1997 Point Puer: Images and Practices of Juvenile Imprisonment in Convict Australia.
Unpublished report commissioned by the Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority.
Tasmania.
Jackman, G. 1998 Point Puer Bakehouse Conservation Plan – Draft Unpublished report commissioned
for the Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority. Tasmania.
Jackman, G. 2001 Get Thee to Church: hard work, Godliness and tourism at Australia’s first rural
reformatory. Australasian Historical Archaeology 19: 6-13.
Koller, D., B. Frishcer and G. Humphreys 2009 Research Challenges for Digital Archives of3D Cultural
Heritage Models. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 2, 3 (7): 1-17.
Land Information Services Tasmania (LIST) 2005 State Orthophoto Mosaic. Information and Land
Services, Tasmania.
Land Information Services Tasmania (LIST) 2011 LIST World Heritage Areas. Information and Land
Services, Tasmania.
Lerones, P.M., J.L. Fernandez, A.M. Gil, J.Gomez-Garcia-Bermejo, E.Z. Casanova 2010 A practical
approach to making accurate 3D layouts of interesting cultural heritage sites through digital models.
Journal of Cultural Heritage 11: 1-9.
Links, F., M. Roach and G. Jackman 2004 Using Geophysics to locate burials and other cultural
features, Isle of the Dead, Port Arthur, Tasmania. ASEG Extended Abstracts. 2004(1): 1-5.
Appendix
49
Ott, M and F. Pozzi 2011 Towards a new era for Cultural Heritage Education: Discussing the role of
ICT. Computers in Human Behavior 27: 1365-1371.
PAHSMA 2003 Point Puer Tourism Masterplan Unpublished report by Port Arthur Historic Site
Management Authority, Tasmania.
Styliadis, A.D., I.I. Akbaylar, D.A. Papadopoulou, N. D. Hasanagas, S.A. Roussa a,d L.A. Sexidis 2009
Metadata-based heritage sites modeling with e-learning functionality. Journal of Cultural Heritage
10: 296-312.
Tuffin, R. 2007 Point Puer Overview History. Unpublished Report commissioned by the Port Arthur
Historic Site Management Authority. Tasmania.
Wells, S., B. Frischer, D. Ross and C. Keller 2010 Rome Reborn in Google Earth. In Frischer, B., J.W.
Crawford and D. Koller (eds), CAA 2009 Making History Interactive. 37th Proceedings of the CAA
Conference March 22-26, 2009, Williamsburg, Virginia, pp: 365-371. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Illustrations:
Mitchell, C.A. 1848 View of Cape Pillar and Entrance to Port Arthur, taken from the back of the
gardens at Point Puer, 1848. Sketch stored at the Beattie Slide Collection, Queen Victoria Museum,
Launceston.
Mitchell, C.A. n.d. Rough Sketch of Point Puer taken from a boat. Sketch stored at the Beattie Slide
Collection, Queen Victoria Museum, Launceston.
Newman, R.W. Point Puer From the Commandant’s Garden. Watercolour sketch stored in the
Crowther Collection, State Library of Tasmania.
Geospatial Datasets:
Forestry Tasmania 2012. LiDAR Products for Port Arthur Historic Site. Hobart.
Appendix
50
Google Maps 2012 satellite imagery, Port Arthur, viewed 12 October 2012,
<http://maps.google.com.au/>.
Public Works Division 1838 Boys Establishment, Point Puer, Showing the Relative Position of the New
Gaol and Settlement, October 1838. Plan 266/1846, PWD, Tasmania.
Public Works Division 1845 Plan of Point Puer, Port Arthur, 1845. PWD, Tasmania.
Building Plans:
(Note - the names of some plans contain spelling errors, as per original plans)
(Note ii – dashed numbers are to differentiate plans in the 1836 CON87 series (10 plans))
Public Works Division 1836-54 Catechist Quarters at Point Puer – plan and elevation. Plan prepared
by H. Laing, Plan CON87/54, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-55 Superintendants Quarters at Point Puer – plan and elevation. Plan
prepared by H. Laing, Plan CON87/55, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-57 Boys Barracks Point Puer – section and elevation. Plan prepared by H.
Laing, Plan CON87/57, PWD Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-58 Work Shops Puer Puer – plan. Plan prepared by H. Laing, Plan
CON87/58, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-59 Work Shops Puer Puer – section and elevation. Plan prepared by H.
Laing, Plan CON87/59, PWD, Hobart.
Appendix
51
Public Works Division 1836-60 Buildings at Puer Puer – plans. Plan prepared by H. Laing, Plan
CON87/60, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-61 Exempt Room – elevation and plans. Plan prepared by H. Laing, Plan
CON87/61, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-62 Buildings at Point Puer – plans. note – with attachment proposed
addition. Plan prepared by H. Laing, Plan CON87/62, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-63 New Bakehouse. Plan prepared by H. Laing, Plan CON87/63, PWD,
Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-64 New Barracks Point Puer – elevation, section and plan. Plan prepared
by H. Laing, Plan CON87/64, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1836-65 Outbuildings to Chaplin’s Quarter Point Puer – plans. Plan prepared by
H. Laing, Plan CON87/65, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1837a Design for Proposed Chapel and School at Point Puer. Plan prepared by
Royal Engineers Office, Plan 266/1831, PWS, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1837b Design for Proposed Chapel and School at Point Puer. Plan prepared by
Royal Engineers Office, Plan 266/1832, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division 1837c Boys Barracks Point Puer – proposed addition. Plan prepared by H.
Laing, Plan CON87/56, PWD, Hobart.
Public Works Division n.d. Puer Puer Gaol - Additions. Plan prepared by Royal Engineers Office , Plan
266-1-1835, PWD, Hobart.
Appendix
1
Appendix 1
Building Inventory and digital reconstructions
Point Puer
Building Locations in Appendix 1
Appendix
1
2
Appendix
1
3
Appendix
1
4
Appendix
1
5
Appendix
1
6
Appendix
1
7
Appendix
1
8
Appendix
1
9
Appendix
1
10
Appendix
1
11
Appendix
1
12
Appendix
1
13
Appendix
1
14
Appendix
1
15
Appendix
1
16
Appendix
1
17
Appendix
1
18
Appendix
1
19
Appendix
1
20
Appendix
1
21
Appendix
1
22
