The evaluation of photogrammetry-based DSM from low-cost UAV by LiDAR-based DSM

South-East European Forestry

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 117-125

  Gašparović, Mateo ^a   Seletković, Ante ^b   Berta, Alen ^c   Balenović, Ivan ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB   (Croatia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB   (Croatia)

^c Department of Natural Resources Management   (Croatia)

^d CROATIAN FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Croatia)

Author keywords

Digital surface model (DSM); Forest inventory; Light detection and ranging (LiDAR); Stereo photogrammetry; Structure from Motion (SfM); Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV); Vertical agreement assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 85045345521     PISSN: 18476481     EISSN: 18490891     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.15177/seefor.17-16     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. COLOMINA I, MOLINA P 2014 Unmanned aerial systems for photogrammetry and remote sensing: A review. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 92: 79-97. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2014.02.013
2. TANG L, SHAO G 2015 Drone remote sensing for forestry research and practices. J For Res 26 (4): 791-797. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-015-0088-y
3. TORRESAN C, BERTON A., CAROTENUTO F, DI GENNARO SF, GIOLI B, MATESE A, MIGLIETTA F, VAGNOLI, C, ZALDEI A, WALLACE L 2017 Forestry applications of UAVs in Europe: a review. Int J Remote Sens 38 (8-10): 2427-2447. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2016.1252477
4. NäSI R, HONKAVAARA E, LYYTIKäINEN-SAARENMAA P, BLOMQVIST M, LITKEY P, HAKALA T, VILJANEN N, KANTOLA T, TANHUANPää T, HOLOPAINEN M 2015 Using UAV-based photogrammetry and hyperspectral imaging for mapping bark beetle damage at tree-level. Remote Sens 7 (11): 15467-15493. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs71115467
5. SMIGAJ M, GAULTON R, BARR SL, SUáREZ JC 2015 UAVborne thermal imaging for forest health monitoring: detection of disease-induced canopy temperature increase. ISPRS -Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci XL-3/W3: 349-354. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/ isprsarchives-XL-3-W3-349-2015
6. DASH JP, WATT MS, PEARSE GD, HEAPHY M, DUNGEY HS 2017 Assessing very high resolution UAV imagery for monitoring forest health during a simulated disease outbreak. ISPRS J Photogramm 131: 1-14. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2017.07.007
7. PULITI S, ØRKA HO, GOBAKKEN T, NÆSSET E 2015 Inventory of Small Forest Areas Using an Unmanned Aerial System. Remote Sens 7 (8): 9632-9654. DOI: https://doi. org/10.3390/rs70809632
8. KACHAMBA DJ, ØRKA HO, GOBAKKEN T, EID T, MWASE W 2016 Biomass Estimation Using 3D Data from Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Imagery in a Tropical Woodland. Remote Sens 8 (11): 968. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8110968
9. GETZIN S, NUSKE RS, WIEGAND K 2014 Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) to Quantify Spatial Gap Patterns in Forests. Remote Sens 6 (8): 6988-7004. DOI: https://doi. org/10.3390/rs6086988
10. HöHLE J, HöHLE M 2009 Accuracy assessment of digital elevation models by means of robust statistical methods. ISPRS J Photogramm 64 (5): 398-406. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2009.02.003
11. GUERRA-HERNáNDEZ J, GONZáLEZ-FERREIRO E, SARMENTO A, SILVA J, NUNES A, CORREIA AC, FONTES L, TOMé M, DíAZ-VARELA R 2016 Using high resolution UAV imagery to estimate tree variables in Pinus pinea plantation in Portugal. Forest Syst 25 (2): eSC09. DOI: https://doi. org/10.5424/fs/2016252-08895
12. TUOMINEN S, BALAZS A, SAARI H, PöLöNEN I, SARKEALA J, VIITALA R 2015 Unmanned aerial system imagery and photogrammetric canopy height data in area-based estimation of forest variables. Silva Fenn 49 (5): 1348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.1348
13. WALLACE L, LUCIEER A, MALENOVSK Z, TURNER D, VOPENKA P 2016 Assessment of forest structure using two UAV techniques: A comparison of airborne laser scanning and structure from motion (SfM) point clouds. Forests 7 (3): 62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f7030062
14. HIRD JN, MONTAGHI A, MCDERMID GJ, KARIYEVA J, MOORMAN BJ, NIELSEN SE, MCINTOSH A 2017 Use of unmanned aerial vehicles for monitoring recovery of forest vegetation on petroleum well sites. Remote Sens 9 (5): 413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9050413
15. MLAMBO R, WOODHOUSE IH, GERARD F, ANDERSON K 2017 Structure from motion (SfM) photogrammetry with drone data: A low cost method for monitoring greenhouse gas emissions from forests in developing countries. Forests 8 (3): 68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f8030068
16. NEX F, REMONDINO F 2014 UAV for 3D mapping applications: A review. Appl Geomatics 6 (1): 1-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-013-0120-x
17. GAŠPAROVIC M, GAJSKI D 2016 The algorithm for the precise elimination of lens distortion influence on digital cameras. Geod List 70 (1): 25-38. URL: http://hrcak.srce. hr/file/231227 (1 August 2017)
18. GAŠPAROVIC M, GAJSKI D 2016 Two-step camera calibration method developed for micro UAV'S. ISPRS -Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci XLI-B1: 829-833. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XLI-B1-829-2016
19. CHIKHRADZE N 2015 Close Range Photogrammetry in the Survey of the Coastal Area Geoecological Conditions (on the Example of Portugal). Earth Sci 4 (5): 35. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.11648/j.earth.s.2015040501.17
20. VANDER JAGT B, LUCIEER A, WALLACE L, TURNER D, DURAND M 2015 Snow Depth Retrieval with UAS Using Photogrammetric Techniques. Geosci 5 (3): 264-285. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences5030264
21. FAZELI H, SAMADZADEGAN F, DADRASJAVAN F 2016 Evaluating the potential of RTK-UAV for automatic point cloud generation in 3D rapid mapping. ISPRS -Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci XLI-B6: 221-226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XLI-B6-221-2016
22. GAŠPAROVIC M, JURJEVIC L 2017 Gimbal Influence on the Stability of Exterior Orientation Parameters of UAV Acquired Images. Sensors 17 (2): 401. DOI: https://doi. org/10.3390/s17020401
23. BALTSAVIAS E, GRUEN A, EISENBEISS H, ZHANG L, WASERL T 2008 High-quality image matching and automated generation of 3D tree models. Int J Remote Sens 29 (5): 1243 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160701736513
24. ST-ONGE B, VéGA C, FOURNIER RA, HU Y 2008 Mapping canopy height using a combination of digital stereophotogrammetry and lidar. Int J Remote Sens 29 (11): 3343-DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160701469040
25. BALENOVIC I, MARJANOVIC H, VULETIC D, PALADINIC E, OSTROGOVIC SEVER MZ, INDIR K 2016 Quality assessment of high density digital surface model over different land cover classes. Period Biol 117 (4): 1-12. DOI: https://doi. org/10.18054/pb.2015.117.4.3452
26. REHAK M 2017 Integrated Sensor Orientation on Micro Aerial Vehicles. Phd Thesis, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland, 227 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5075/epfl-thesis-7530
27. NI W, LIU J, ZHANG Z, SUN G, YANG A 2015 Evaluation of UAV-based forest inventory system compared with LiDAR data. IGARSS 2015: 3874-3877. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1109/IGARSS.2015.7326670
28. VEPAKOMMA U, CORMIER D 2015 Inventorying the forest: Laser scanning vs close range photogrammetry on a UAV. In 14th conference in a series focusing on Lidar Applications for assessing and Managing Forest Ecosystems-SilviLaser, France, La Grande Motte, 28-30 September 2015. The French Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (SFPT), Paris, France, pp 68-70. URL: https://silvilaser2015.teledetection.fr/files/Proceedings_ Silvilaser_22_09_2015_2.pdf (21 August 2017)
29. THIEL C, SCHMULLIUS C 2017 Comparison of UAV photograph-based and airborne lidar-based point clouds over forest from a forestry application perspective. Int J Remote Sens 38 (8-10): 2411-2426. DOI: https://doi.org/10 .1080/01431161.2016.1225181
30. SHAPIRO SS, WILK MB 1965 An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52 (3-4): 591-DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591
31. SHAPIRO SS, WILK MB, CHEN HJ 1968 A comparative study of various tests for normality. J Am Stat Assoc 63 (324): 1343-1372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1968 .10480932
32. HILL T, LEWICKI P 2007 STATISTICS: Methods and Applications. StatSoft, Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA, 800 p
33. R CORE TEAM 2017 R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL: https://www.R-project. org/ (3 September 2017)
34. BLUE MARBLE GEOGRAPHICS 2017 Global Mapper 19. URL: http://www.bluemarblegeo.com/products/globalmapper. php (4 September 2017)
35. QGIS DEVELOPMENT TEAM 2017 QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation. URL: http://qgis.osgeo.org (14 September 2017)
36. HöHLE J, PEDERSEN CØ, BAYER T, FREDERIKSEN P 2010 The photogrammetric derivation of digital terrain models in built-up areas. Photogrammetric Journal of Finland 22 (1): 33-45
37. NURMINEN K, KARJALAINEN M, YU X, HYYPPä J, HONKAVAARA E 2013 Performance of dense digital surface models based on image matching in the estimation of plotlevel forest variables. ISPRS J Photogramm 83: 104-115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2013.06.005
38. HOBI ML, GINZLER C 2012 Accuracy Assessment of Digital Surface Models Based on WorldView-2 and ADS80 Stereo Remote Sensing Data. Sensors 12 (5): 6347-6368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/s120506347
39. WHITE JC, STEPPER C, TOMPALSKI P, COOPS NC, WULDER MA 2015 Comparing ALS and Image-Based Point Cloud Metrics and Modelled Forest Inventory Attributes in a Complex Coastal Forest Environment. Forests 6 (10): 3704-DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/f6103704
40. VALBUENA R, MAURO F, ARJONILLA FJ, MANZANERA JA 2011 Comparing airborne laser scanning-imagery fusion methods based on geometric accuracy in forested areas. Remote Sens Environ 115 (8): 1942-1954. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.03.017
41. SIMIC MILAS A, AREND K, MAYER C, SIMONSON MA, MACKEY S 2017 Different Colors of Shadows: Classification of UAV images. Int J Remote Sens 38 (8-10): 3084-3100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2016.1274449