Studies in Conservation

ISSN: 0039-3630 (Print) 2047-0584 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ysic20

Built-Heritage Multi-temporal Monitoring through

Photogrammetry and 2D/3D Change Detection
Algorithms

Dante Abate

To cite this article: Dante Abate (2019) Built-Heritage Multi-temporal Monitoring through
Photogrammetry and 2D/3D Change Detection Algorithms, Studies in Conservation, 64:7, 423-434,
DOI: 10.1080/00393630.2018.1554934

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00393630.2018.1554934

Published online: 05 Dec 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 135

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ysic20
STUDIES IN CONSERVATION
2019, VOL. 64, NO. 7, 423–434
https://doi.org/10.1080/00393630.2018.1554934

ORIGINAL RESEARCH OR TREATMENT PAPER

Built-Heritage Multi-temporal Monitoring through Photogrammetry and 2D/3D

Change Detection Algorithms
Dante Abate1,2
1
Andreas Pittas Art Characterization Labs (APAC), Science and Technology in Archaeology and Culture Research Centre (STARC), The Cyprus
Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus; 2Centre of Archaeology, Staffordshire University, Stoke on Trent, UK

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Cultural heritage assets are continuously exposed to risks and hazards. With the main aim to Received August 2018
assess deterioration and improve conservation methods, the scientific community has Accepted November 2018
proposed a variety of tools for the early identification of changes in heritage.
KEYWORDS
Multidisciplinary approaches are common in heritage monitoring and conservation. This Built heritage; change
paper investigates the potential of change detection algorithms developed in remote detection; remote sensing;
sensing, and here applied at the monumental scale instead of the geo-spatial one. A photogrammetry; MAD/MAF
monitoring methodology which integrates photogrammetry, 2D/3D change detection, and
data interpretation is described and tested on the façade of the church of Stavros tou
Missiricou (church of the Cross within the walls) in Nicosia, Cyprus.

Introduction and paper objectives
Heritage sites and artefacts around the world are fragile
assets, faced with different and continuous challenges.
Both natural hazards (e.g. earthquakes, floods, storms,
and wildfires) and man-made ones (e.g. armed
conflicts and wars, pollution, uncontrolled urbanization,
and tourist development) pose major conservation pro-
blems (Teijgeler 2006; Fatorić and Seekamp 2017).
Regular maintenance is tightly linked to the preser-
vation of monuments, and preventive conservation is a
real necessity in everyday practice. Historical buildings
are continuously exposed to a wide range of threats
which may affect their conservation and appearance.
The material alteration processes which occur on
the monument surface, identified over short,
medium, and long-term periods respectively, may
lead to saline efflorescence, the formation of black
crusts, biological alteration, material exfoliation, and
decay (Parker 1995; Chen, Blume, and Beyer 2000;
Watt et al. 2009), or even to structural and static
issues (Lemos 2007).
With the main objectives of containing and studying
deterioration and monitoring the condition of monu-
ments, the conservation community tends to adopt a
multidisciplinary approach, using multiple sensors
and Non-Destructive Techniques (NDTs) (Moropoulou
et al. 2013). Among them, remote sensing, and
change detection algorithms, in particular, represent
a promising solution.
The change detection process aims to identify and
evaluate differences on a surface over time. The goal
is mainly to provide a map of changes by processing
two or more images/maps acquired at different time
(Δt) over the same area.
This paper proposes a methodology for built-
heritage terrestrial-monitoring, using remote sensing
techniques and change detection algorithms, coupled
with close-range photogrammetry. The final goal is to
evaluate the potential of an easy-to-use and intuitive
tool for the production of degradation maps, and the
identification of areas which have been affected by
chemical and physical changes over time. This
approach will support conservators interested in
detecting, describing, and understanding changes
that occur in large-scale built structures.
2D change detection
Many techniques have been developed in the remote
sensing domain, with the purpose of identifying differ-
ences occurring on the Earth’s surface over time. This
task, usually referred to as change detection, can be
approached in a supervised or unsupervised way, the
latter being preferred when no training samples or
only little knowledge on the ground is available.
The Multivariate Alteration Detection (MAD) algor-
ithm was selected in this study after a comparison
with the well-known, and widely used in remote
sensing, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) algorithm
(Jolliffe 2011). The latter is a statistical procedure used
in several domains and developed to transform a set of
correlated variables to a new set of uncorrelated vari-
ables considering the principal directions in which
the data are spread in space.

CONTACT Dante Abate d.abate@cyi.ac.cy Andreas Pittas Art Characterization Labs (APAC), Science and Technology in Archaeology and Culture
Research Centre (STARC), The Cyprus Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus
© The International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works 2018
424 D. ABATE
Whereas PCA allows to reduce the size and redun-
dancy in the original data, since most of the infor-
mation is contained in the first components, MAD
considers maximum autocorrelation, taking into
account the maximum variance of the difference
images and eliminating issues related to the possibility
that a dominating element in the image affects the PCA
components. In addition, MAD is invariant for linear
transformations of the data, making it insensitive to
the application to raw Digital Numbers (DNs) or trans-
formed images (Canty 2014).
MAD is a broadly used mathematical analysis
method of images linear transformation. Introduced
by Nielsen, Conradsen, and Simpson (1998), MAD
seeks to improve the simple image differentiating tech-
niques by exploiting Canonical Correlation Analysis
(CCA). Indeed, the main principle is to make the
images as similar (i.e. correlated) as possible, before
computing their difference. The latter is carried out
by using CCA to find two sets of linear combinations
of the original variables, where the first two linear com-
binations (called canonical variates) are the ones fea-
turing the largest correlation (called first canonical
correlation). This process is then iterated to compute
the higher-order canonical correlations/variates,
under the condition to be orthogonal (i.e. uncorrelated)
to the previous ones. If N is the maximum number of
bands in first and second input images, the differences
between the corresponding pairs of variates (called
MAD variates or components), constitute N change
maps that are usually combined in a single multi-
band image.
Since MAD analysis lacks semantic interpretation,
the adoption of a combined procedure can be pre-
ferred, to support the understanding of changes
found by MAD. For this reason, Nielsen proposed to
apply the Maximum Autocorrelation Factor (MAF)
transformation to the MAD components (Nielsen
et al. 2010). Indeed, MAF transform seeks to isolate
the noise component of the data, by computing a
new set of variates out of the original ones, where
low order components feature maximal spatial auto-
correlation (signal), whereas the highest order variates
feature minimal spatial autocorrelation (noise). Accord-
ingly, the first MAF-MAD component will identify areas
with maximum changes, while the noise is expected to
be isolated in the lower order MAF-MAD components.
The use of the MAD technique, either alone or in
combination with MAF transformation, is well-known
in the remote sensing community (Coppin et al. 2002;
Nori, Sulieman, and Niemeyer 2009; Zanchetta and
Bitelli 2017).
Although the MAF-MAD pipeline can be exploited
using different kind of imagery datasets (traditionally
acquired with spaceborne or airborne sensors in the
visible or multispectral range), in this study the use
of data generated through terrestrial close-range
photogrammetry is twofold: (i) given the small size
of the features that ought to be identified, high-res-
olution ortho images are essential means to detect
the fine changes that occurred on the facades; (ii)
process intermediate photogrammetric data (i.e.
dense point cloud) for additional 3D analysis, which
can be used for further data assessment and
interpretation.
Related work
Detecting changes in images of the same scene
acquired at different times have seen an important
development in a wide range of disciplines such as
video surveillance, remote sensing, medical diagnosis,
driver assistance systems, civil engineering, disaster
management, and cultural heritage. Over the last
three decades, a variety of change detection methods
have been proposed using different approaches such
as image differencing, image rationing, principal com-
ponent analysis, change vector analysis, and post-
classification. A complete review of change detection
algorithms can be found in Singh (1989), Coppin and
Bauer (1996), and Radke et al. (2005).
Change detection algorithms are usually categor-
ized into two main typologies:
. Algebra-based change detection, including image
differencing, image rationing, image regression,
vegetation index differencing, change vector analy-
sis, and background subtraction techniques;
. Classification-based change detection such as post-
classification comparison, spectral-temporal analy-
sis, unsupervised change detection, and hybrid
change detection.
The heritage and archaeological domains have
extensive use of multi-temporal satellite or aerial
imagery as effective tools for large-scale protection of
monuments, sites, and cultural landscapes from man-
made threats or natural hazards (Cowley 2011).
Table 1 presents a literature review concerning the
use of 2D change detection algorithms applied in heri-
tage and archaeological science.
In the 3D domain, change detection algorithms ask
for three-dimensional models as input data instead of
2D images. These are usually obtained through state-
of-the-art image- and range-based modelling tech-
niques, in forms of point clouds or meshes.
Changes are then usually identified by measuring
the distance between 3D models. Four main
approaches for distance computation are generally
adopted, namely:
. DEM of difference (DoD) (William 2012);
. Direct cloud-to-cloud comparison with closest point
technique (C2C) (Girardeau-Montaut et al. 2005);
 BUILT-HERITAGE MULTI-TEMPORAL MONITORING THROUGH PHOTOGRAMMETRY AND 2D/3D CHANGE DETECTION ALGORITHMS 425

Table 1. 2D change detection, summary of the literature review.

Site
‘Norwegian National Sites and
Monuments Record’ List
Ancient city of Ur (Iraq)
Ventarron (Lambayeque, Peru)
Nasca (Peru)
Paphos (Cyprus)
Homs (Syria)
Mølen Vestfold County (Norway)
Palmyra (Syria)
Method Notes Authors
2D Change Detection and Satellite Document the reforestation processes Barlindhaug, Holm-Olsen,
images. representing threats to archaeological assets and Tømmervik (2007)
2D Change Detection and Satellite Monitor archaeological areas, before and after Di Giacomo and Scardozzi
images. the second Gulf War. (2012)
2D Change Detection and Satellite Multi-temporal images acquired and Lasaponara et al. (2013)
images. processed to highlight looting patterns.
2D Change Detection and Satellite Detect land-use and morphological changes of Cigna et al. (2013)
images. cultural landscape.
2D Change Detection and Satellite Address the overall risk of the area which is Agapiou et al. (2015)
images. enriched by archaeological sites.
2D Change Detection and Satellite Monitoring the effects of the civil war started Tapete et al. (2015)
images. in 2011, on heritage sites.
2D Change Detection, historical Changes occurred in landscape and individual Risbøl et al. (2015)
images and Airborne Laser monuments.
Scanning.
2D Change Detection and Satellite Use of satellite imagery for change detection Cerra et al. (2016)
images. of lost heritage.

. Cloud-to-mesh distance or cloud-to-model distance
(C2M) (Cignoni and Rocchini 1998; Monserrat and
Crosetto 2008; Olsen et al. 2009)
. Multiscale Model to Model Cloud Comparison
(M32C) (Lague, Brodu, and Leroux 2013).
In Table 2 are summarized a few significant
examples describing how the aforementioned 3D
change detection algorithms, coupled with range-
and image-based modelling techniques, can help
monitor geometric features of heritage sites over time.
The case study
To address the specific research questions presented in
this paper, the church known as Stavrou tou Missiricou,
(later the Arablar mosque), in Nicosia (Cyprus), was
selected due its location and conservation (Figure 1).
The religious building is indeed situated in a very popu-
lated area, still open to frequent vehicle traffic and
exposed to systematic air pollution.
The sixteenth-century church was built with a Byzan-
tine layout, featuring a range of Gothic and Renaissance
architectonic elements, like a minaret added after 1570
(Jeffrey 1918; Papageorgiou 1987; Leventis 2005). It fea-
tures a three aisled roughly rectangular plan, built with
well-carved blocks, measuring approximately 13.8 ×
8.5 m. The building has three entrances (north, west,
and south). Today only the north one remains open.
Due to its position, Stavrou tou Missiricou church is
constantly exposed to different threats and hazards.
The structure is mainly endangered by:
. air pollution agents, resulting in the formation of
black crust, saline efflorescence, biological altera-
tion, and material decay;
. static issues, due to the constant vibrations caused
by the urban traffic;
. vandalism and misuse.
The exterior facades underwent a conservation
intervention during 2015–2016, led by the Department
of Antiquities of Cyprus, which aimed to stop degra-
dation and solve ongoing preservation issues. Plaster
was applied in-between stone blocks; biological
elements were removed, and the surfaces were
cleaned.
The north façade of the church of Stavrou tou Mis-
siricou was specifically chosen for the proposed ana-
lyses due to its conservation status, the absence of
obstacles for the image-based modelling survey,
and for the availability of a dataset collected prior
to its restoration in March 2010 (Solomidou-Ieronymi-
dou et al. 2010).
The façade is characterized by plain, simple, stone
blocks. It is enriched with a few architectural elements,
such as the central portal, two flanking semi-columns,
and two stone gutters (Figure 2).
Methodology
The proposed workflow consists of four steps: (i)
photogrammetric survey, (ii) dense point cloud and
orthophoto production, (iii) 2D and 3D multi-

Table 2. 3D change detection, summary of the literature review.

Site Method Notes Authors
Baiae (Italy) 3D Change Detection and underwater image- Status-quo of the archaeological remains before and Bruno et al. (2013)
based modelling. after the cleaning procedure.
Lab experiment 3D Change Detection and image-based Support for the comprehension of buildings, by Peteler et al.
modelling. visualizing temporal effects. (2015)
Hierapolis of Phrygia 3D Change Detection and Geomatics Comparison between points clouds spatial geometry, Chiabrando et al.
(Turkey) techniques. and mapping of changing areas. (2017)
Ferrara (Italy) 3D Change Detection, image-based modelling Comparison and check of metric reliability of data Bolognesi et al.
and range-based modelling. collected UAVs. (2018)
426 D. ABATE
Figure 1. Stavrou tou Missiricou church, east side view (left), and aerial top view (right).
temporal change detection, (iv) data interpretation
(Figure 3).
The methodology was tested on a multi-temporal
dataset, consisting of images acquired in two
different periods separated by eight years.
The first data set (2010) was acquired before the res-
toration process, with the final goal of creating a 3D
model of the church through Structure from Motion
(SfM) and dense image matching methods, in order
to serve as a virtual canvas for further architectonic
analysis. The second dataset (2018) was instead col-
lected in the framework of this study. The adopted
image-based 3D reconstruction procedure followed
the typical photogrammetric workflow (see Data Post
Processing section below), and 3D point clouds and
orthophotos have been created for the change detec-
tion analysis. The latter has been investigated and
assessed both from a bi-dimensional (2D Change
Detection) and three-dimensional (3D Change Detec-
tion) point of view. Finally, data have been discussed
Figure 2. Stavrou tou Missiricou, North Façade.
(see Data Interpretation section below) according to
the result achieved.
Photogrammetric surveys
The first image-based survey (2010) was performed
using a Nikon camera D90, featuring a 12.9-megapixel
DX-format CMOS sensor (5.51 μm pixel size). All images
were acquired with an 18 mm focal length. After an
initial assessment of the camera shooting parameters
through the image metadata, it was possible to con-
clude that different ISO and f/stop camera settings
were adopted, which reflects a non-rigorous camera
setup for the photogrammetric workflow.
The survey was carried out following a convergent
camera network schema, yielding an estimated
camera-object distance of 6.5 m, thus resulting in a
mean Ground Sample Distance (GSD) of 1.8 mm
(Figure 4, left). An average base-to-depth ratio (B/D)
of 0.1 was derived.
 BUILT-HERITAGE MULTI-TEMPORAL MONITORING THROUGH PHOTOGRAMMETRY AND 2D/3D CHANGE DETECTION ALGORITHMS
Figure 3. Proposed methodology.
During 2018, a second dataset was collected. The
camera used was a Canon 5D Mark IV camera, 30-
megapixel full-frame sensor (6 μm pixel size), equipped
with a Canon EF 20 mm f/2.8 USM prime lens. Due to
the changes of the space setup surrounding the
church which have occurred over the last decade,
(new traffic layout and obstacles), the average
camera-object distance chosen was set to 3.4 m,
resulting in a mean GSD of 1.02 mm. A photogram-
metric camera network was planned a priori (Nocerino,
Menna, and Remondino 2014), using both convergent/
oblique images (mean convergent angles of 45°), and
normal/vertical images, with a mean overlap between
two consecutive normal views of about 80% to guaran-
tee the automated matching of homologous points
and an adequate number of intersecting rays (Fraser
1987). An average base-to-depth ratio (B/D) of 0.2
was considered (Figure 4, right).
In order to define a common coordinate system for
both surveys, it was decided to measure natural fea-
tures on the façade, which were clearly identifiable in
both imagery datasets. A total station was used in
reflector-less mode to establish a topographic
network. Thirteen control points were measured on
the monument: eight points were used as Ground
Control Points (GCPs) in the photogrammetric bundle
adjustment (BA) and the remaining were used as
Control Points (CPs). The Root Mean Square Error
(RMSE) on CPs after the BA was estimated in 2 mm
for both datasets.
Data post processing
All images, acquired in RAW format, were pre-pro-
cessed (colour calibration, histogram stretching, and
white balancing) in a photo editing software.
The typical photogrammetric workflow was applied,
consisting of three main steps, namely: image corre-
spondences detection, bundle adjustment, and dense
image matching (Remondino et al. 2014).
Starting from the estimated camera poses and
orientations, a dense 3D reconstruction via pixel-
based image matching algorithm was applied. This
was performed using the first-level image pyramid, cor-
responding to the original full image resolution. The
derived dense point clouds consisted of ∼10 million
points for the 2010 dataset and 21 million points for
the 2018 dataset.
Besides the dense point cloud, the orthophoto of
the façade was produced as well, which was
427
radiometrically balanced, and digitally blended so
that the seam lines between images are not visible
(Figure 5).
With the final goal of using the orthophotos for the
multi-temporal change detection analysis described in
the next section, the two images were generated with
the same pixel size (2.3 mm).
The last step of the post-processing pipeline was to
crop the two orthoimages using a photo-editing soft-
ware, so to fit the same physical space, preserving
the same initial resolution and pixel-size.
The 2010 and 2018 orthophotos were processed
using the open-source software Orfeo ToolBox (OTB),
a remote sensing image processing library developed
by CNES, the French Space Agency. A three-step strat-
egy was adopted:
First, in order to refine the image overlap, and over-
come possible errors in the GCPs positioning step, an
initial image co-registration was performed. This appli-
cation computes a disparity map in 2D between two
images that correspond to the same scene. It is
intended for cases where small mis-registration
between images should be estimated and fixed. The
algorithm uses an iterative approach to estimate a
best match between local patches, and the final
output image contains X and Y offsets, as well as the
metric value, with a sub-pixel accuracy. It is implicit
that the input images should have the same size and
occupy the same physical space.
Second, change detection between the othophotos
is performed by adopting the MAD algorithm. A MAD
map is thus produced, consisting of three bands that
represent the variates (change maps) sorted by increas-
ing correlation (Figure 6, top);
Finally, the MAF transform is applied to the MAD
variates (Figure 6, bottom), and the lowest order
MAF-MAD component (i.e. the first component) is
initially analyzed to detect the changes that occurred
(Section “Data interpretation”). The MAF/MAD analysis
isolates the highly spatially coherent pattern of
changes in MAD/MAF1 band and confines the noise
to MAD/MAF2 band (Figure 7).
3D change detection
Since the MAD/MAF change detection approach
described above identifies changes only in two-dimen-
sional space, 3D change detection algorithms were
used to assess the condition of the façade and
compare the overall results in 2D and 3D space in
428 D. ABATE

Figure 4. 2010 camera network (left), 2018 camera network (right).

connection with the MAD/MAF outcomes. A cloud-to- implemented in the open source software CloudCom-
cloud signed distances map was computed adopting pare, performs a direct comparison of point clouds in
the method Multiscale Model to Model Cloud Compari- 3D, thus avoiding the preliminary phase of meshing
son (Lague, Brodu, and Leroux 2013). This algorithm, or gridding (Figure 8).

Figure 5. 2010 orthophoto (top), and 2018 orthophoto (bottom).

 BUILT-HERITAGE MULTI-TEMPORAL MONITORING THROUGH PHOTOGRAMMETRY AND 2D/3D CHANGE DETECTION ALGORITHMS
Figure 6. MAD RGB map (top) and MAF RGB map (bottom).
The colour-coded point cloud in the range of −10/
+10 cm, delivered by inter-comparison, is then segmen-
ted and analyzed to identify any change in the façade
structure and details (section “Data interpretation”).
Data interpretation
The analysis of the 2D and 3D change detection results
was realized by mutually comparing the 2D RGB
orthophotos, MAD/MAF change detection maps, and
Multiscale Model to Model Cloud Comparison distance
map.
2D change detection results
As mentioned in section “2D change detection”, the
lowest order MAF-MAD component (i.e. the first
429
component) is initially used to detect the changes.
The change detection procedure returns a map
(Figure 9) which highlights a series of anomalies
present on the facade, most of them being solved
during the restoration process (2015–2016), and no
longer visible in the current condition (2018). Saline
efflorescence, consolidation metal-chains and sup-
ports, vegetation growth, and plaster used to fill the
gaps between the stone blocks and holes can be ident-
ified (Figure 10).
Although black crusts and blackening effects appear
very clear in RGB orthophotos, to visualize them in the
MAF map a different combination between com-
ponents has to be set up. This effect applies also
where changes in the texture colour are observed,
like the case of stones which went through a
washout/discoloration process (Figure 11).
430 D. ABATE

Figure 7. MAD/MAF2 band, noise.

A MAD/MAF1 false-colour map highlights a 3D change detection results

pattern of positive changes (blue to magenta) and
The Multiscale Model to Model Cloud Comparison has
negative changes (red to yellow). Blue changes
allowed instead the identification and analysis in 3D
can be mainly observed as results of the consolida-
space of the geometric modifications that occurred on
tion process between stone blocks where mortar
the façade of the of the Stavrou tou Missiricou church.
was added. Vice versa, green changes are clear
For this purpose, different distance thresholds were
where a washout effect occurred smoothing the
identified, corresponding to different changes at
surface.
varying scale.
Although the MAD/MAF results contain a high
Most of the points describing the structures lay in
degree of details, their interpretation requires care.
the range of −0.4 cm/+0.4 cm (Figure 11(a)) showing

Figure 8. Multiscale Model to Model Cloud Comparison (-10/+10 cm).

 BUILT-HERITAGE MULTI-TEMPORAL MONITORING THROUGH PHOTOGRAMMETRY AND 2D/3D CHANGE DETECTION ALGORITHMS 431

Figure 9. MAF band-1 map (top), MAF band-1 map detail saline efflorescence (a), 2010 RGB Orthophoto detail saline efflorescence
(b), 2018 RGB Orthophoto detail saline efflorescence (c); MAF band-1 map detail plaster hole-filling (d); 2010 RGB Orthophoto detail
plaster hole-filling (e); 2018 RGB Orthophoto detail plaster hole-filling (f).

almost a null variation of the general behaviour of the
structure. Outside this min–max range, negative values
are revealing areas where, during the restoration
process, plaster was added to fill gaps between (i)
stone blocks and (ii) holes (Figure 11(b)). These
values are additionally confirmed by the outcomes of
the MAD-MAF results in the blue–magenta interval.
Positive values are instead indicators of areas
where (i) the stone blocks were not yet eroded in
2010, levelling up the surface, or where (ii)
vegetation was present in 2010, and missing in 2018
(Figure 11(c)).
Higher deviations visible in the range between
−10, cm +10 cm can be considered either as (i)
artefacts created during the photogrammetric
process due to the different sensors and camera
432 D. ABATE

Figure 10. MAF RGB map (top), MAF RGB map detail washout/discoloration (a), 2010 RGB Orthophoto detail washout/discoloration
(b), 2018 RGB Orthophoto detail washout/discoloration (c).

networks, or (ii) objects moved between the two consolidation chains re-applied during the restor-
epochs such as the door leaves, and the ation (Figure 11(d)).

Figure 11. Cloud Segmentation, -0.4 / +0.4 cm displacement (a); Negative Values (b); Positive Values (c); Consolidation Chain detail (d).
 BUILT-HERITAGE MULTI-TEMPORAL MONITORING THROUGH PHOTOGRAMMETRY AND 2D/3D CHANGE DETECTION ALGORITHMS
Conclusions
Heritage and archaeological assets are daily threatened
by natural and man-made hazards and new monitoring
instruments are fundamental for their preservation and
documentation.
The contribution of this paper for addressing this
need relies on a new approach applied to built heritage
monitoring, using change detection algorithms. The
latter were applied to the results of multi-epoch terres-
trial photogrammetric surveys, i.e. high-resolution RGB
orthophotos and dense image matching 3D point
clouds. This research proposes an additional tool for
identifying changes that occurred on built-heritage,
specifically on a vertical façade, combining a set of
different Non-Destructive and low-cost techniques.
The core idea is that a remote sensing tool, namely
MAD/MAF algorithms, usually applied to aerial or satel-
lite images can be successfully applied for small scale
applications (such as buildings) rather than large ones
(such as landscapes). A 3D analysis has been further
performed to integrate and complete the aforemen-
tioned results.
Although the proposed approach showed promis-
ing outcomes in the identification of features in the
2D space, the data interpretation is not always univocal
and needs an iterative refinement and cross-checking
with different kinds of data for a correct validation.
Future work will focus on the collection of orthopho-
tos with a time gap of 3 and 6 months, using the 2018
photogrammetric setup and protocol, to test the val-
idity and reliability of the change detection method
over shorter-term material behaviour.
The methodologies described and applied here for
the first time to built heritage (2D Change Detection
algorithms) can be broadly used in the heritage
science domain. The fields which could mainly
benefit are foreseen to be those dealing with monitor-
ing issues such as frescoes (indoor and outdoor), paint-
ings on different supports (wood or frame), and all
those artefacts which are exposed to decay due to
the incorrect conservation conditions (environmental
parameters such as temperature and humidity; pol-
lution; natural and man-made threats).
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Marina Faka of STARC of the
Cyprus Institute for the support provided during the topo-
graphic data collection.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
References
Agapiou, A., V. Lysandrou, D. D. Alexakis, K. Themistocleous, B.
Cuca, A. Argyriou, A. Sarris, and D. G. Hadjimitsis. 2015.
433
“Cultural Heritage Management and Monitoring Using
Remote Sensing Data and GIS: The Case Study of Paphos
Area, Cyprus.” Computers, Environment and Urban Systems
54: 230–239.
Barlindhaug, S., I. M. Holm-Olsen, and H. Tømmervik. 2007.
“Monitoring Archaeological Sites in a Changing
Landscape–Using Multitemporal Satellite Remote
Sensing as an ‘Early Warning’ Method for Detecting
Regrowth Processes.” Archaeological Prospection 14 (4):
231–244.
Bolognesi, M., A. Furini, V. Russo, A. Pellegrinelli, and P. Russo.
2018. “Testing the Low-Cost RPAS Potential in 3D Cultural
Heritage Reconstruction”. The International Archives of the
Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information
Sciences, Volume XL-5/W4, 229–235, 25–27 February
2015. Avila, Spain.
Bruno, F., A. Gallo, F. De Filippo, M. Muzzupappa, B. Davidde
Petriaggi, P. Caputo. 2013. “3D Documentation and
Monitoring of the Experimental Cleaning Operations in
the Underwater Archaeological Site of Baia (Italy)”.
Proceedings of 2013 Digital Heritage International Congress
(DigitalHeritage): 105–112. doi:10.1109/DigitalHeritage.
2013.6743719.
Canty, M. J. 2014. Image Analysis, Classification and Change
Detection in Remote Sensing: With Algorithms for ENVI/IDL
and Python. 3rd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Cerra, D., S. Plank, V. Lysandrou, J. Tian. 2016. “Cultural
Heritage Sites in Danger—Towards Automatic Damage
Detection From Space”. Remote Sensing 8: 781.
doi:10.3390/rs8090781.
Chen, J., H. P. Blume, and L. Beyer. 2000. “Weathering of Rocks
Induced by Lichen Colonization – a Review.” Catena 39 (2):
121–146.
Chiabrando, F., G. Sammartano, A. Spanò, and G. Semeraro.
2017. “Multi-Temporal Images and 3D Dense Models for
Archaeological Site Monitoring in Hierapolis of Phrygia
(TR).” Archeologia e Calcolatori 28 (2): 469–484.
Cigna, F., D. Tapete, R. Lasaponara, N. Masini. 2013.
“Amplitude Change Detection with ENVISAT ASAR to
Image the Cultural Landscape of the Nasca Region, Peru”.
Satellite Radar in Archaeology and Cultural Landscape 20
(2): 117–131.
Cignoni, P., and C. Rocchini. 1998. “Metro: Measuring Error
on Simplified Surfaces.” Computer Graphics Forum 17 (2):
167–174.
CloudCompare. [Accessed 26 June 2018] http://www.
danielgm.net/cc/.
Coppin, P., and M. Bauer. 1996. “Digital Change Detection in
Forest Ecosystems with Remote Sensing Imagery”.
Remote Sensing and Review 13, 207–234.
Coppin, P., E. Lambin, I. Jonckheere, and B. Muys. 2002.
“Digital change detection methods in natural ecosystem
monitoring: A review”. In Analysis of Multi-Temporal
Remote Sensing Images, edited by L. Bruzzone and
P. Smits, 3–36. IEEE.
Cowley, D. C., 2011. “Remote Sensing for Archaeological
Heritage Management”. EAC Occasional Paper, No. 5,
Budapest.
Di Giacomo, G., and G. Scardozzi. 2012. “Multitemporal High-
Resolution Satellite Images for the Study and Monitoring of
an Ancient Mesopotamian City and its Surrounding
Landscape: The Case of Ur”. International Journal of
Geophysics, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/716296.
Fatorić, S., and E. Seekamp. 2017. “Are Cultural Heritage and
Resources Threatened by Climate Change? A Systematic
Literature Review.” Climatic Change 142: 227. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10584-017-1929-9.
434 D. ABATE
Fraser, C. 1987. “Limiting Error Propagation in Network
Design.” Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote
Sensing 53 (5): 487–493.
Girardeau-Montaut, D., M. Roux, R. Marc, and G. Thibault.
2005. ““Change Detection on Points Cloud Data Acquired
with a Ground Laser Scanner”.” International Archives of
Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information
Sciences 36 (Part 3): 30–35.
Jeffrey, G., 1918. A description of the historic monuments of
Cyprus: Studies in the Archaeology and Architecture of the
island. Nicosia, 44–45.
Jolliffe, I. 2011. “Principal Component Analysis.” In
International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science, edited by
M. Lovric. Berlin: Springer.
Lague, D., N. Brodu, and J. Leroux. 2013. “Accurate 3D
Comparison of Complex Topography with Terrestrial
Laser Scanner: Application to the Rangitikei Canyon (N-
Z)”. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
82: 10–26.
Lasaponara, R., G. Leucci, N. Masini, and R. Persico. 2013.
“Investigating Archaeological Looting Using Satellite
Images and GEORADAR: the Experience in Lambayeque in
North Peru”. Journal of Archaeological Science 42: 216–230.
Lemos, V.J., 2007. “Discrete Element Modeling of Masonry
Structures.” International Journal of Architectural Heritage:
Conservation, Analysis, and Restoration 1 (2): 190–213.
doi:10.1080/15583050601176868.
Leventis, P., 2005. Twelve times in Nicosia: Nicosia, Cyprus,
1192-1570: Topography, Architecture and Urban experi-
ence in a diversified capital city, 105.
Monserrat, O., and M. Crosetto. 2008. “Deformation
Measurement Using Terrestrial Laser Scanning Data and
Least Squares 3D Surface Matching.” ISPRS Journal of
Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 63 (1): 142–154.
Moropoulou, A., K. C. Labropoulos, E. T. Delegou, M. Karoglou,
and A. Bakolas. 2013. “Non-destructive Techniques as a
Tool for the Protection of Built Cultural Heritage”.
Construction and Building Materials 48: 1222–1239.
Nielsen, A. A., K. Conradsen, and J. J. Simpson. 1998.
“Multivariate Alteration Detection (MAD) and MAF
Postprocessing in Multispectral, Bitemporal Image Data:
New Approaches to Change Detection Studies.” Remote
Sensing of Environment 64 (1): 1–19.
Nielsen, A.A., Hecheltjen, A., Thonfeld, F., Canty, M. J., 2010.
“Automatic change detection in RapidEye data using the
combined MAD and kernel MAF methods”. Proceedings of
Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS 2010),
3078–3081.
Nocerino, E., F. Menna, and F. Remondino. 2014. “Accuracy of
Typical Photogrammetric Networks in Cultural Heritage 3D
Modelling Projects”. The International Archives of
Photogrammetry Remote Sensing Spatial Information
Science XL (5): 465–472.
Nori, W., H. M. Sulieman, and I. Niemeyer. 2009. “Detection of
land cover changes in El Rawashda Forest, Sudan: A sys-
tematic comparison”. Proceedings of Geoscience and
Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS 2009), Vol. 1, pp.
I-88–I-91.
Olsen, M. J., E. Johnstone, N. Driscoll, S. A. Ashford, and F.
Kuester. 2009. “Terrestrial Laser Scanning of Extended
Cliff Sections in Dynamic Environments: Parameter
Analysis.” Journal of Surveying Engineering 135 (4): 161–169.
OTB – Orfeo ToolBox. [Accessed 16 June 2018] https://www.
orfeo-toolbox.org/.
Papageorgiou, A. 1987. “Missirikou Stavrou ekklesia”. In
Megale Kypriake Encyclopedia, vol. 10. Nicosia.
Parker A. 1955. The Destructive Effect of air Pollution on
Materials, 3–15. London: National Smoke Abatement
Society
Peteler, F., E. Gattet, P. Bromblet, O. Guillon, J. M. Vallet, and
L. De Luca. 2015. “Analyzing the Evolution of Deterioration
Patterns: A First Step of an Image-Based Approach for
Comparing Multitemporal Data Sets.” Proceedings of
2015 Digital Heritage, doi:10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2015.
7419465.
Radke, R. J., S. Andra, O. Al-Kofahi, and B. Roysam. 2005.
“Image Change Detection Algorithms: A Systematic
Survey.” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 14 (3):
294–307.
Remondino, F., M. G. Spera, E. Nocerino, F. Menna, and F. Nex.
2014. “State of the art in High Density Image Matching.”
The Photogrammetric Record 29 (146): 144–166. doi:10.
1111/phor.12063.
Risbøl, O., C. Briese, M. Doneus, and A. Nesbakken. 2015.
““Monitoring Cultural Heritage by Comparing DEMs
Derived From Historical Aerial Photographs and Airborne
Laser Scanning.” Journal of Cultural Heritage 16 (2): 202–
209.
Singh, A. 1989. “Digital Change Detection Techniques Using
Remotely-Sensed Data.” International Journal of Remote
Sensing 10 (6): 989–1003.
Solomidou-Ieronymidou, M., A. D’Andrea, N. Bakirtzis, G.
Iannone. 2010. “3D Documentation in Architectural
History: A case study of the 16th c. Church of Stavros tou
Missirikou in Nicosia, Cyprus”. Fusion of Cultures Abstracts
of the XXXVIII Conference on Computer Applications and
Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, edited by Fco. Javier
Melero, Pedro Cano & Jorge Revelles, 301–304.
Tapete, D., F. Cigna, D. Donoghue, P. Graham. 2015. “Mapping
Changes and Damages in Areas of Conflict: From Archive
C-Band SAR Data to New HR X-Band Imagery, Towards
the Sentinels”. Proceedings of Conference: Fringe 2015:
Advances in the Science and Applications of SAR
Interferometry and Sentinel-1 InSAR Workshop.
Teijgeler, R. 2006. “Preserving cultural heritage in times of
conflict”. In Preservation management for libraries, archives
and museums, edited by G. E. Gorman and Sydney
J. Shep, 133–165. London: Facet Publishing.
Watt J., J. Tidblad, V. Kucera, R. Hamilton. 2009. The Effects of
Air Pollution on Cultural Heritage. New York: Springer.
William, R. 2012. “DEMS of Difference.” Geomorphological
Techniques 2 (3.2).
Zanchetta, A., and G. Bitelli. 2017. ““A Combined Change
Detection Procedure to Study Desertification Using
Opensource Tools.” Open Geospatial Data, Software and
Standards 2 (1): 10.