Archaeology as a discipline has always faced an ironic challenge. In order to improve our understanding of the past, it is nearly always necessary to destroy the source of knowledge as material remains left by past people are removed from their context. Archaeologists have long understood the responsibility this paradox confers on them-the imperative to record in great detail that which they demolish through excavation so that others may reinterpret their results (Wheeler 1954). The duty of documentation for the purpose of preserving dovetails with efforts toward recording for the excavators' own interpretation of the evidence uncovered. Traditionally, this process has occurred in notebooks through detailed descriptions of archaeological contexts, along with photographic and hand-drawn depictions of excavation. These methods, while tried-and-true, suffer from collection biases, omissions, and an inability to record in three dimensions. In a perfect world, archaeologists would be able to record the conditions of excavation in such a way that future researchers would be able to experience the site exactly as it appeared as it was excavated. Exclusively two-dimensional descriptions of the three-dimensional world falls short of this ideal, especially in a field of study that relies so fundamentally on interpretation of spatial relationships, both horizontal and vertical. Omissions in recording caused by collection biases are equally unacceptable. As archaeologists today bemoan the poor recording standards of 100 years ago, we can assume that the archaeologists of the future will find fault with our work today in a similar way. Traditional methods no longer appropriately fulfill the archaeologist's responsibility for extensive documentation with all practical and available means. How then can we remedy this issue and strive for a more comprehensive documentation program in which datasets more closely reflect conditions in the field during excavation? 3D recording may provide an answer to this critical question, while also providing a mechanism to upgrade traditional techniques.

The development of three-dimensional documentation technologies such as LiDAR and Structure from Motion (essentially digital photogrammetry) has led to a recording revolution, as these methods are increasingly applied to field archaeology. 3D methods have the potential to become an integral part of the archaeological toolkit, as they have the capability to produce spatially-referenced outputs, such as orthophotos and digital elevation models (DEMs), with greater efficiency than traditional methods. The combination of Structure from Motion and low-altitude aerial photography can facilitate the production of these GIS outputs, which can then be used for digitization or as basemaps. These methods allow for accurate and precise recording with a relative minimum of field time. As the existing body of 3D data increases in size, museums have the unique opportunity to be able to take advantage of these datasets to update their exhibits and display archaeological context and the process of excavation through visualizations of 3D models. The spread of 3D documentation and recording in archaeology may provide a unique opportunity for collaboration between these two professions, and allow for archaeology to improve its public outreach. The methodology presented here is based on field research in Jordan.

Digital media and learning initiatives for virtual collaborative environments are contributing to the definition of new (sub-)disciplines in archaeological and heritage sciences. New nomenclature and terminology is emerging such as cyber archaeology, cyber archaeometry, virtual worlds and augmented and immersive realities; and all of them are related to museums and cultural heritage—tangible, intangible or natural (Forte 2010; Liritziset al. 2015).