Dr. Max Fomitchev-Zamilov

So I talked to the technician, and yeah, sure enough, it was, you know, one of those things. It wasn't a genuine feature, it was an artifact. But, you know, because the... It was.

So I talked to the technician, and yeah, sure enough, it was, you know, one of those things. It wasn't a genuine feature, it was an artifact. But, you know, because the... It was.

But it was, you know, rather small, unimportant, so I quit focusing on it. But because the metrological standard was scan, I was sure, you know, the rest of the scans, you know, were good and solid. And the resolving ability of CAD scanner is at least, you know, 10 times better than optical, optical instrument.

But it was, you know, rather small, unimportant, so I quit focusing on it. But because the metrological standard was scan, I was sure, you know, the rest of the scans, you know, were good and solid. And the resolving ability of CAD scanner is at least, you know, 10 times better than optical, optical instrument.

But it was, you know, rather small, unimportant, so I quit focusing on it. But because the metrological standard was scan, I was sure, you know, the rest of the scans, you know, were good and solid. And the resolving ability of CAD scanner is at least, you know, 10 times better than optical, optical instrument.

And I'm not qualified to discuss pros and cons and limitations of optical scanning, but it's pretty clear. You see more with x-rays. and you see smaller features with x-rays. And you're seeing the inside.

And I'm not qualified to discuss pros and cons and limitations of optical scanning, but it's pretty clear. You see more with x-rays. and you see smaller features with x-rays. And you're seeing the inside.

And I'm not qualified to discuss pros and cons and limitations of optical scanning, but it's pretty clear. You see more with x-rays. and you see smaller features with x-rays. And you're seeing the inside.

That's supremely important. Because one of the things I've done in my analysis, I added the analysis of the inside, because we all agree it's far easier to work the outer surface. And you can fool maybe somebody, kind of like Olga Vdovina did by working on one of her vases meticulously. She achieved some remarkable precision. but she couldn't do the same for the inner surface.

That's supremely important. Because one of the things I've done in my analysis, I added the analysis of the inside, because we all agree it's far easier to work the outer surface. And you can fool maybe somebody, kind of like Olga Vdovina did by working on one of her vases meticulously. She achieved some remarkable precision. but she couldn't do the same for the inner surface.

That's supremely important. Because one of the things I've done in my analysis, I added the analysis of the inside, because we all agree it's far easier to work the outer surface. And you can fool maybe somebody, kind of like Olga Vdovina did by working on one of her vases meticulously. She achieved some remarkable precision. but she couldn't do the same for the inner surface.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yeah, and before I answer, I would say, in my mind, the biggest drawback of CAT scanner is not so much the cost. It's not portable. So you cannot take it somewhere. You have to send the artifact there. But what I've done, I've taken the STL file, which is a 3D model. And because all of these vases are round, I figured the easiest way to analyze them is to cut them like you would cut like sausage.

Yeah, and before I answer, I would say, in my mind, the biggest drawback of CAT scanner is not so much the cost. It's not portable. So you cannot take it somewhere. You have to send the artifact there. But what I've done, I've taken the STL file, which is a 3D model. And because all of these vases are round, I figured the easiest way to analyze them is to cut them like you would cut like sausage.

Yeah, and before I answer, I would say, in my mind, the biggest drawback of CAT scanner is not so much the cost. It's not portable. So you cannot take it somewhere. You have to send the artifact there. But what I've done, I've taken the STL file, which is a 3D model. And because all of these vases are round, I figured the easiest way to analyze them is to cut them like you would cut like sausage.

And produce this horizontal. If the vase is upright, you cut it. across and you produce this round slices. And it's the easiest thing on earth is to see how round those slices are and how concentric they are. Because, you know, I spent some time thinking about, you know, quality metric, you know, can you derive? Because that's, I think, where I really would like to start.

And produce this horizontal. If the vase is upright, you cut it. across and you produce this round slices. And it's the easiest thing on earth is to see how round those slices are and how concentric they are. Because, you know, I spent some time thinking about, you know, quality metric, you know, can you derive? Because that's, I think, where I really would like to start.

And produce this horizontal. If the vase is upright, you cut it. across and you produce this round slices. And it's the easiest thing on earth is to see how round those slices are and how concentric they are. Because, you know, I spent some time thinking about, you know, quality metric, you know, can you derive? Because that's, I think, where I really would like to start.