{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019205298013245033, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003973509933774834, 'mean_word_length': 5.656387665198238, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Art documentation quality in function of 3D scanning resolution and precision

Currently, a lot of different 3D scanning devices are used for 3D acquisition of art artifact surface shape and color. Each of them has different technical parameters starting from measurement principle (structured light, laser triangulation, interferometry, holography) and ending on parameters like measurement volume size, spatial resolution and precision of output data and color information. Some of the 3D scanners can grab additional information like surface normal vectors, BRDF distribution, multispectral color. In this paper, the problem of establishing of threshold for technical parameters of 3D scanning process as a function of required information about the object is discussed. Only two main technical parameters are under consideration, in order to cover as many different 3D scanning devices as possible - measurement sampling density (MSD - represented by number of points per square millimeter) and measurement uncertainty (MU - directly influencing final data accuracy). Also different materials and finishing techniques require different thresholds of MSD and MU parameters to collect similar documentation (for example documentation of object state for art conservation department) of different objects. In this paper we consider exemplary painting on canvas, wallpainting, graphics prints and stone samples to visualize what object features can be observed within different values of MSD and MU parameters.