banner
Project Team Funding Research Excavation Publications Experimentation Interactivity Outreach
4
Archaeological Vision at Çatalhöyük: Shelters, Sun and Funny Looking Glasses
Preliminary Results

Preliminary results met common sense expectations - members performed best when the viewing conditions were optimal. Optimal viewing conditions vary from person to person, but all members benefited from the reduced glare, UV and ambient light exposure provided by the glasses, in many cases significantly. Even when the member reported that seeing 'seemed' better without the glasses - these particular pairs were quite dark and strongly tinted - they still performed better optically while wearing them, almost without exception.

The BACH tent appears to be the least pleasant visual area. Members consistently performed worse than when tested in the North tent and as a group did not perform as well as other members who were tested under exposed, bright sun conditions. This is a result of the shelter, not the members' abilities, for many of the BACH members were tested outdoors and/or with the glasses and performed as well as anyone on site. BACH team members consistently reported that it was 'clearer' and 'more comfortable' in the North shelter than in the BACH tent. I attribute this both to the material of the tent (white plastic vs. muslin that breaks up the ambient glare) and the open side flaps that place a bright glare spot in the peripheral vision of people working in the tent.

In the TP area, members generally performed well with the glasses and when tested in the North shelter and did worse under bright, exposed sun conditions. All members reported (not surprisingly) that it was more comfortable to work under the North shelter than under the direct sun. Near the end of the season, a temporary shelter was constructed over the TP area. All members of the TP team reported that it was easier to see under the temporary shelter, yet in spite of this they consistently performed worse when tested under the shelter than under exposed conditions. As with the BACH tent, the side glare seems to be the culprit.

In the South area, members were tested under direct sun, with glasses and in mixed lighting - overcast conditions. As with the TP area, members performed best with the glasses and the worst under flat, overcast conditions. Some members had strong preferences of one pair of glasses over the other, reporting a distinct favorite but not always for purely 'visual' reasons. One member found that the amber glasses made her feel even 'hotter' than normal, while another found the same pair made her feel more 'happy'. Both members performed better with them than without them. We will have to wait until next season to test members inside the new South area shelter, scheduled for completion by the end of this year.

This season, the flotation area was covered with a blue plastic tarp. In the past, the flotation area has been covered with a green plastic tarp, white cloth tarp or not at all. Members of the flotation team were tested under the tarp, under direct sun and with the glasses. All members performed best with the glasses under full sun than under the shelter. All members also performed better under full sun than under the shelter, but none would prefer to work without it.


South Area: Cloudy day, images taken less than 30 seconds apart.


The sorting area for heavy residue is located on the porch in the veranda, under shelter from the permanent awning. Sorting is a highly focused, repetitive task where performance is improved with experience. In the past, members of the sorting team performed would wear magnifying glass head gear to aid in viewing the small seeds and charcoal bits but with practice, all choose to forego this tool and prefer their naked eyes. As a group, the sorting team (women) had outstanding contrast sensitivity when tested in the work area. There is quite a lot of glare that comes off of the gravel floor of the compound and when the sorting area was shrouded from this glare, the members performed exceptionally better on the test. I will need to re-test them next year with a more refined chart with a higher threshold.

continued

Questions or comments? e-mail us: mashley@uclink.berkeley.edu
Last Modified: 30 October, 2002 14:49