Next Article in Journal
On-Orbit Camera Misalignment Estimation Framework and Its Application to Earth Observation Satellite
Previous Article in Journal
Assessing MODIS GPP in Non-Forested Biomes in Water Limited Areas Using EC Tower Data

Geometric Quality Analysis of AVHRR Orthoimages

Department of Geomatics Engineering, Hacettepe University, Ankara 06800, Turkey
Department of Geography, University of Bern, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland
ETH Zurich, Institute of Geodesy and Photogrammetry, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
The work has been done while she was at ETH Zurich.
Academic Editors: Richard Müller and Prasad S. Thenkabail
Remote Sens. 2015, 7(3), 3293-3319;
Received: 15 September 2014 / Revised: 6 March 2015 / Accepted: 9 March 2015 / Published: 23 March 2015
The geometric accuracy of 2008 AVHRR orthoimages from Metop-A, NOAA-17 and NOAA-18 satellites over Switzerland have been investigated here. The methods employed in the study are fully automated, with an accuracy of 0.1–0.2 pixels, however, blunders do occur and this requests a careful blunder detection approach. The investigations include analysis of relative, absolute and band-to-band registration (BBR) accuracy. Regarding relative accuracy, thousands of points are matched between Metop-A, NOAA-17 and NOAA-18 images of the same day. The accuracy is quite high with mean shifts between 0.2 and 0.4 pixels. Systematic stripes have been observed when NOAA-18 images are involved in matching. In spite of many efforts to find the source of this error, no explanation could be found. In addition, large shifts up to 2.9 pixels on some days between September and December 2008 were observed. Regarding absolute accuracy, digitized lakes as reference polygons have been used and a subpixel lake matching method has been applied. The mean shifts generally fulfilled EUMETSAT and GCOS specifications, although some partial results exceed them, especially for Metop-A. Regarding BBR accuracy, six multispectral bands have been compared, also with point matching. The EUMETSAT specification is 0.1 km, however, this specification refers to original images, not orthoimages. Taking also into account the matching errors of 0.1 km, the EUMETSAT specifications are in principle fulfilled in all cases except matching of Metop-A and NOAA-17 Band-2 images with Bands 4 and 5. The overall work showed that although, in general, accuracies are high and fulfill specifications, errors exceeding the specifications can occur and vary depending on the satellite used, time and location. Such errors influence subsequent geometric or thematic processing; thus, an automated and permanent quality control of such images should be executed. View Full-Text
Keywords: AVHRR; geometry; relative accuracy; absolute accuracy; orthoimage; band-to-band registration accuracy; image processing AVHRR; geometry; relative accuracy; absolute accuracy; orthoimage; band-to-band registration accuracy; image processing
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

MDPI and ACS Style

Aksakal, S.K.; Neuhaus, C.; Baltsavias, E.; Schindler, K. Geometric Quality Analysis of AVHRR Orthoimages. Remote Sens. 2015, 7, 3293-3319.

AMA Style

Aksakal SK, Neuhaus C, Baltsavias E, Schindler K. Geometric Quality Analysis of AVHRR Orthoimages. Remote Sensing. 2015; 7(3):3293-3319.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Aksakal, Sultan Kocaman, Christoph Neuhaus, Emmanuel Baltsavias, and Konrad Schindler. 2015. "Geometric Quality Analysis of AVHRR Orthoimages" Remote Sensing 7, no. 3: 3293-3319.

Find Other Styles

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Only visits after 24 November 2015 are recorded.
Back to TopTop