Digital Documentation in Narrow Burial Spaces Using a 360° Borescope Prototype

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Very interesting and well-presented paper with elements of innovation.

Just some minor suggestions:

1. Line 49 examined (not excavated)

2. Line 63 examination (not excavation)

3. Line 123 Further explanation for the constraint of space around is necessary here

4. Lines 202 and 227 standard (not traditional)

In the legend of Fig. 10 burial (not buried)

Finally, I would like to see a paragraph explaining the parameters of frame sampling from the videos

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewer for the useful comments and suggestions. They were all taken into consideration in the revised version of the manuscript. Here is athe list of the main changes: 

Line 49: “excavated” changed in “examined” 

Line 63: “excavation” changed in “examination” 

Line 123: added “, such as a burial vault;” 

Lines 202 and 227: “traditional” changed in “standard”; 

Legend of Fig. 10: “buried chamber” changed in “burial vault” 

A new paragraph about sampling frame rate was added in section 4.2 “considerations and discussion” 

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors, I have made a few comments along the paper - attached.

The paper is interesting overall, and the prototype presented has the capacity to bring aid to research assessment. 

I don't have much to add apart from the comments in the manuscript. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We would like to thank the reviewer for the useful comments and suggestions. They were all taken into consideration in the revised version of the manuscript. Here is athe list of the main changes: 

According to the reviewer’s comment, we change the title not to concentrate only on human remains. We agree that the method can be applied to a variety of applications, and we will probablyprobablyin future work. We also think that a reference to burial/narrow spaces should remain in the title because the paper was specifically developed for a special issue on this topic. In the end, we tried to find a compromise between the request of the reviewer and the scope of special issue. 

Lines 19-22: “The application is particularly relevant in those cases where the human remains need to be recorded before any possible intervention on the original context” changed with “The application is particularly relevant in those cases where exposed human remains need to be recorded before any possible intervention on the original context, such as an archaeological excavation or a forensic documentation” 

Line 25: “Physical Anthropology” changed in “Biological Anthropology” 

Line 26: Osteoarchaeology and Forensic Archaeology are interdisciplinary fields among all of the previously mentioned disciplines (Archaeology, Physical Anthropology, or Forensic Sciences) 

Line 39: “physical anatomy, archaeological/taphonomic processes” changed in “human and non-human osteology and taphonomic processes” 

Lines 44-45: “unlike Forensic cases in which contexts are usually heterogenous and exceptional” changed in “while Forensic cases are usually out of funerary contexts;” 

Lines 46-47: “without context, usually in a separate way like the case of lab specimens” changed in “for biological and pathological profiling” 

Lines 48-49: “An intermediate case is the removal of complex archaeological burials from the field and the surface they are upon (a coffin or consolidated soil), to be excavated later in the lab” changed in “An intermediate case is the 'block excavation', i.e. the removal of complex archaeological burials from the field and the surface they are upon to be examined later in the lab” 

Lines 52-58: it is not clear where the reviewer suggests to move these lines 

Lines 77-78: the two sentences were rephrased following the reviewer’s suggestion 

Line 92 and 94: “For what concerns ancient contexts usually discovered during archaeological excavations, the space around the body is often filled with sediment that percolated inside over the centuries “ changed in “In ancient contexts usually discovered during archaeological excavations the space around the body is often filled with sediment that filled up the empty space over the centuries” 

Lines 121-127: the reviewer’s comment appears to be just a comment and not a specific request of editing 

Line 337: “whose end is not visible.” changed in “and its real inner size is not clear.” 

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you taking time to address the comments.