Optimising Amber Processing Using 3D Scanning: New Perspectives in Cultural Heritage
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper suggests how utilizing 3D modeling in gemstones craftmanship and presents the amber as a significant case study. In my opinion there is a comment on the general applicability of the proposed methodology for gemstone different from amber that is required, and the abstract should be revised to properly match the paper content.
I appreciated the general introduction dealing with the problem of traditional crafting of either crystalline or amorphous materials. Then the paper considers the amorphous amber as the case study, without any comment on the validity of the proposed approach in case of crystalline gemstones. While the scanning procedure is the same and the mesh surface reconstruction as well, possible differences related to an eventual crystalline structure may affect the choice of the "simplified diamond-shaped model (truncated hexagonal asymmetric bipyramid) was developed for the stone-amber" (line 211-212) and weaken the general validity of the proposed approach. In my opinion, this point should be commented. Moreover, especially in case of a very minor influence of the crystalline structure on the simplified model choice, the point should be recalled in the conclusions.
The abstract claims that "The developed algorithm takes into account purity classes and material inclusions, which can increase or decrease the value of the amber block" (line 21-21). This is not possible in the reported study since before the scanning "the surface of amber was dulled using talc to avoid additional calculations related to the phenomenon of refraction" (line 153), so the presence of inclusions cannot be reproduced/simulated.
The "authors' proprietary method" is mentioned in the end of the abstract (line 25) but it is not recalled in the conclusions, neither it corresponds with a reference to a respective patent.
Although the reported references are all relevant to the topic, almost one third of them are in languages different from English (most in Polish) so they are difficult to be used by international readers. References in English should be supplied, only a few motivated exceptions can be present.
As a minor remark, labels in fig.s 9-12 are in Polish, they should be translated.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1:
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for taking the time to review our paper. We appreciate your valuable feedback and suggestions, which we will address accordingly.
Applicability of the Methodology: We acknowledge your concern regarding the general applicability of our proposed methodology for gemstones other than amber. While our paper focuses on amorphous amber we agree that it's important to discuss the potential applicability to crystalline gemstones in the broader context. We will revise the abstract and paper to address this aspect and provide a more comprehensive view of the methodology's scope.
Handling of Inclusions: You are correct in pointing out the limitation concerning the handling of inclusions due to the dulled surface of amber in our study. We will clarify this in the paper and emphasize that the methodology should be considered in cases where inclusions do not significantly impact the material's properties.
Proprietary Method: We will ensure that the mention of the "authors' proprietary method" is either substantiated with a reference to the appropriate patent or clarified if it refers to a specific technique or algorithm developed for this research.
References: We understand the importance of accessible references. We will replace non-English references with English equivalents where available making the paper more reader-friendly for an international audience.
Figure Labels: We will translate the labels in figures 9-12 to ensure clarity for all readers.
We genuinely appreciate your feedback which will help us improve the quality and clarity of our paper. If you have any additional suggestions or concerns please feel free to let us know.
The rationale behind the incorporation of amber into our research is underpinned by its status as a vital cultural heritage of Poland. Amber serves as a fundamental material for jewelry production by the collaborating companies and enjoys global recognition as a distinct Polish product. It is imperative to note that amber diverges from crystalline structures as it predominantly comprises resin, resulting in polymerization rather than crystallization. Within amber inclusions can be dichotomized into two distinct categories: the first being favorable inclusions, encompassing items such as insects, plant matter, and water droplets, which appreciably augment the value of amber. Conversely the second category comprises unfavorable inclusions, including sand, impurities and fractures leading to a depreciation in the overall value of the amber specimen.
Thank you for your review.
Sylwester Korga , Krzysztof Dziedzic, Stanisław Skulimowski and Sebastian Gnapowski
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe title of the paper refers to Cultural heritage, however there is quite little written about it, there are barely any references to amber as CH, its protection and why using 3D scanning might protect it. I suggest to either rename the paper or to add references and a proper state of the art regarding jewelry and amber as CH.
There is no proper state of the art where shows similar projects undertaken to replicate gems.
Also, authors suggest in the abstract that the proposed methodology will be implemented in jewelry workshops, but later there is no reflectance of this aspect.
Finally, authors claim that the solution will strengthen Intangible CH, how so? Have they actually worked with any craftsmen? In the same line, authors appoint some benefits of using their methods but those have not been tested. I suggest to either confirm it or at least to based those claims on similar research.
Minor editing of English required
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2:
Dear Reviewer,
We appreciate your valuable feedback and we will take your suggestions into account to enhance the paper. Here are our responses to your points:
References and Amber as Cultural Heritage: We understand your concerns about the references and the need for a more comprehensive discussion regarding amber as cultural heritage. We will revise the paper to include more references and discuss the significance of amber as cultural heritage and how 3D scanning can contribute to its preservation.
State of the Art and Similar Projects: We agree that a proper state of the art section should include similar projects related to replicating gems. We will enhance this section to provide a broader overview of related research.
Implementation in Jewelry Workshops: We will make sure to include a section in the paper that discusses the practical implementation of the proposed methodology in jewelry workshops as mentioned in the abstract.
Strengthening Intangible Cultural Heritage and Benefits: We will elaborate on how the proposed solution can strengthen intangible cultural heritage and provide a more detailed explanation of the benefits it offers. We will also clarify whether the methodology has been tested and base our claims on similar research when needed.
Your feedback is crucial and we appreciate your time and assistance in improving the quality of the paper. If you have any further suggestions or questions please feel free to let us know.
At present the enterprise known as Golden Amber is actively procuring essential machinery and conducting comprehensive training sessions for its workforce with the objective of deploying our proprietary technology at an industrial scale to facilitate the manufacturing of amber-based jewelry products. This strategic initiative underscores the commitment to optimizing the efficiency and quality of amber jewelry production while adhering to rigorous standards of industrial practice and technological advancement. The incorporation of advanced machinery and specialized training programs is geared toward enhancing the manufacturing processes associated with amber jewelry thereby contributing to its growth as a significant segment within the jewelry industry. This endeavor aligns with the broader industry trend of embracing innovative technologies to bolster the craftsmanship, efficiency and competitive edge of amber jewelry production on an industrial scale.
We also cooperate with companies such as:
- https://www.skupbursztynu.com/
- http://amberlublin.pl/
Thank you for your review.
Sylwester Korga , Krzysztof Dziedzic, Stanisław Skulimowski and Sebastian Gnapowski
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI appreciate the authors comments and their efforts in addressing some of the issues I raised. Nonetheless, there are no clear reference to amber as CH beyond the Amber Route without any bibliographical reference
There is still no clear state of the art.
Finally, authors claim that the solution will strengthen Intangible CH, how so? Have they actually worked with any craftsmen? In the same line, authors appoint some benefits of using their methods but those have not been tested.
Minor editing such as doesn't, in academic English should be does not. Please review.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your questions and suggestions regarding our article. We have written responses to your questions in bullet points and have revised the article according to your recommendations. The responses can be found in the Word file. Thank you.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI would like to thank the authors for their improvements. My only concern is that the solutions regarding Intangible CH, seem to be taken out from Chat GTP as per the structure of the sentnces, I would recommend to rephrase them and expand them with scientific references.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your time and your work.We have made further changes to our article.We replaced the text that contained general information with more detailed information.The third paragraph in the Introduction chapter has been changed.The fourth and fifth paragraphs in this chapter have been deleted.In the same chapter, the seventh and eighth paragraphs were changed.After changing the text, we had to correct the literature references.
After making the corrections, we submitted the article for re-translation. The article has been checked by a professional translator who translates for the Applied Sciences journal. We followed all the recommendations given to us by the translator. We hope that now our article will meet the magazine's standards.
We send greetings from the Lublin University of Technology in Poland.
Sylwester Korga, Krzysztof Dziedzic, Stanisław Skulimowski, Sebastian Gnapowski
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
