Photogrammetric methods for generating three‐dimensional (3D) models are becoming increasingly widespread in the fields of archaeology and biological anthropology. In particular, the study of the variability of skull morphology (generated by the ancestry of the individual or by the application of certain cultural practices) using 3D models is becoming increasingly common. This paper analyzes the workflow used to create these models and applies a comparison of the distances of the meshes to facilitate the estimation of this morphological variability. To carry out this comparison, two alternatives are proposed: one that would include a pre‐scaling of the models and one without scaling. The work cycle has demonstrated the ability to generate high‐quality 3D models of human crania, as well as the possibility of comparing two models (one used as a reference and the other as the main object of study) to evaluate the metric differences between them, highlighting the differences through a color gradient. Thanks to the comparison of the meshes and their visualization in a new 3D model, the evaluation of the morphological differences in the skull and their precise localization on the surface of the crania can be done easily. The R script is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request to facilitate replication of the analytical procedure. The study aims to demonstrate the potential of comparative analysis of 3D models, specifically in the field of artificial cranial modification, as well as the variability of human cranial morphology. The methodology used is applicable to a wide range of issues in skeletal remains, analyzing pathological conditions or phenotypical variability, as well as in the study of other archaeological materials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moreno et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: