Archaeology is the investigation of material trails of past human actions, thus excavation is a process of guided destruction. Therefore, from the outset, archaeologists discern the potential of photography to permanently document scientific work and to spread investigated ideas. Photography has been fundamental to archaeology since at least the late 19th-century and it is still guideline implies of essential information gathering. Archaeological photography is the visual record of earthbound or submerged cultural landscapes and related destinations, highlights, and antiques. The archaeologist takes pictures of the pre-excavated site, connections between the location and encompassing landscape, site lineament and standing structures, relics, the affiliation between antiques, trench stratigraphy and excavation layers, field survey finds, and the final site uncovered and cleaned. The archaeological photographer also must document fieldwork and site, while team members using equipment to demonstrate archaeological strategies for publications and lectures. All these have to be accomplished in a remote field situation with no more equipment than the photographer can carry. It is critical that archaeologists make the best conceivable picture chronicle for future generations. The archaeologist as photographer knows what artefact detail or location perspectives ought to be recorded for descendants. Archaeologists are required to develop great skills in photography as commercial photographers would seldom be employed for this sort of photo documentation. The resulting images ought to be correctly exposed and focused, suitably lit, and free of distortion with attention paid to accurate colour representation. To indicate the correct size it is essential to have a contrasting metric scale, a human figure, or the insertion of a hand. Photographic knowledge, as well as scales, and additional data must not compete with the subject for consideration. Archiving relics for the historical centre, exhibitions, or lectures may require a few interpretative approaches.In recent years digital photography has almost completely supplanted film-based photography in numerous contexts and started to be utilised as a recording tool in archaeology. Digital photography proposes the potential to speed up the documentation of imperilled sites due to advancement, climate, and war. Digital imaging has various clear central focuses: the pictures are acquired immediately. This authorises technical aspects, for example, exposure and focus to be checked on the spot so failed photographs can be re-shot and there is an ability to depict a numerous number of images using one memory stick, thus there will not be any issues in finding a sequence from the beginning till the end of the excavation in a remote region: something which not anymore be cogitable after the delay inflicted by film processing. Less obviously, though, it can also allow immediate access to data that can offer a guide to direct an excavation. For an archaeological site, recording aims JPEGs format are satisfactory, but the goal to keep the camera in a high-resolution setting, thus pictures are not less than 1.5Mb. If a photographer takes higher resolution pictures that are over 3Mb, therefore it is significant to save lower resolution photographs that can be used for site reports, presentations and therefore to avoid utilising large files that employ a tremendous amount of computer storage. Digital photography likewise breaks up boundaries amongst media and between individuals, between the photographer and objects that are depicted. For instance, taking pictures of a complex site from a neighbouring hillside will give a comprehensive view, whereas there will be little detail, thus the opportunity to preview images on the camera’s liquid crystal display (LCD) allows: the immediate feedback accessible, thus unwanted images can be deleted corrections are allowed as well as the possibility to modify images, basically teaching the photographer how to take needed photographs. Furthermore, for a long time, a photogrammetry was employed. It involves taking a series of images at regular spacing as well as intervals that are afterwards spliced together. Digital photography allowed this process to be much more widely accessible and its associated processing software. Photogrammetry is feasible with a larger lens that focal length varies between 70mm and 90mm. Another advantage of digital photography in photographing remote sites is inexpensive imaging with digital photography that offers rapid documentation of things that is necessary during the excavations. The shots are taken quickly, put into a sequence by pictures of the tags. Since the images are dated to the minute, automatically, in the form of the file creation time, and given a sequence number by the camera, it is possible to reallocate the objects with their labels if they should lose their order.However, there are also drawbacks in using totally digital approach. One of these disadvantages is “total cost of ownership” that implies that the cost of professional quality cameras might be extremely high, but it is sometimes contended that digital advanced running costs are way lower, due to no such expenses on film and processing of it in the darkroom, and only those photographs deemed necessary can be printed. Nonetheless, in practice, a great site or aerial archive should contain at least imprint sized versions of all the pictures taken and, on this premises, digital costs can actually be higher than film. Moreover, digital imaging can produce apparent noise and processing artefacts which might accidentally falsify data or be misinterpreted as archaeological data by the unwary. In fairness, negative faults can be similarly misleading, but they do, at least, tend to be relatively large and highly localised and are thus easier to spot and discount. There are other issues that despite of the fact not mandatory intrinsic to digital photography increase inquiries over the suitability of hardware. Firstly, most digital single-lens reflex cameras’ (DSLR) are based on the latest generation of autofocus film cameras that are not especially great for archaeological work. Fast reacting autofocus have been a godsend to sports photographers, but for archaeologists autofocus is just one more thing to go wrong with delicate equipment under extreme weather or field conditions. For instance, during excavations, depth of field is more significant than any particular point of focus, since there is a need for entire features or trenches to be rendered sharp. It is called “hyperfocal” focusing is crucial, with the aperture and depth of field scale being used together to produce the desired result. Sadly, few autofocus lenses have depth of field scales, which means that, although some control is possible, it is largely a matter of guesswork, and precision is hard to obtain. Likewise, autofocus can be a major problem in the air as it has an irritating tendency to lock onto to any part of the aircraft that comes into shot, leaving the ground as a distant blur. There are also times when critical point focusing is vital in situations where autofocus might not be reliable in its target selection: particularly in macro and finds photography. Yet, although many autofocus cameras do allow manual focusing, few have the precision viewfinder aids (split prism rangefinders etc) needed to exploit this facility properly. Furthermore, digital and autofocus film cameras are completely battery dependent, whereas many older film cameras only need power for their light meters. This can be a major issue on remote sites and digital cameras suffer particularly badly because most run on rechargeable batteries with only enough power for a few hours use. This may be more economical under normal circumstances, but it leaves them totally dependant on ready access to the mains.Archaeological excavations are destructive; so the data extracted from the excavations must be recorded permanently and accessible. Archaeological archives are the vital parts of the archaeological resource, and it may be possible to re-interrogate and re-think the old information held in the archives. Therefore, further investigations could be completed using archives, in addition, people could be taught using them. There are two important components forming archaeological archives: a documentary archive that consists of all records made during the archaeological project – physical copy and in digital format, including written records, drawings, and photographs (negatives, prints, transparencies, and X-rays) reports, publication projects, published works, photographs, and drawings. The digital material consists of all material that was originally released in digital format (including text, data, drawings, 3D models, photographs and video), and also generated from the digested material. The digital archive consists of all data, such as CAD, databases, archiving archives, survey data, GIS, images, satellite images, spreadsheets, etc. D. Short-term storage media include CDs, data patches or ash dryings, DVD, discs with copyright protection and hard disks. They should only be utilised to represent digital material for long-term archiving. Long-term storage should be on permanent servers, which are regularly renovated. The creation of a digital archive must be fully documented using information such as the software used, operating systems, equipment types, dates, personnel, field descriptions and the meaning of any codes.Data should be created with constant standardised terminology, content, and formatting. They must comply with existing standards and guidelines on how data should be structured, stored and presented. During the whole project, a person should regularly create backup copies. The archive must be converted and digitised with copies of archives stored in safe digital, antimagnetic base of archives and definitely preserved from viruses. When photographs are brought on the computer, it is vital to make a backup copy on the external memory stick.Following downloading inventory process should be completed, which means numerically linking each photo of the data to the notes. The photographer might wish to crop certain photos and straighten other. Later this photos may be included in the written report, Yet they will need to undergo the resizing process, decreasing the size of the digital version. Digital photos of 280 KB fit this purpose the best. There is no need for making a site description long. Actually, shorter summaries could potentially have more sense and accessible understanding, then deeply detailed explanations. In most cases for summary only two – four sentences, are needed which bring together key points about sites. Nonetheless, it is possible later on provide a deeper description of certain buildings, constructions or other architectural features. In case there already is a basic report upon the architectural site, the deeper explained and analysed report will be more relevant. Any description presented, should thus, target to put the site briefly into its landscape context, purify and bring together the information captured in its visual records, back up with the historical information, in case there is such, and capture and additional data that may not have been recorded yet. Naming the site is the first and vital information photographer need to present, National Grid Reference, enhanced by a short description of findings. The simple locational information will give others the ability to find the site on a map. The archaeologist can then make up his mind upon the amount of written information and data, the photographer will provide. Some might say that it’s the basis that digital photography is invaluable for archeology, it may be considered to be the only or one of the most significant ways of photographic recording. However, taking into the account the state of technological development, there are robust arguments why it doesn’t seem to be such and is not particularly prone to appear such in the short-term. The revolution took place in archaeology since the end of the twentieth century triggered by the development of digital imaging and further innovation in technology will lead to innovative usages in the field and lab. Yet, nowadays archeologists still rely on the past glass negatives with prints, those that still survived. For archeologists, whatever level technology has achieved, the real challenge is to preserve an archive, which will be able to last forever, presenting our cultural heritage that is equal to or wins the battle of time against the photographic standards of the past.