Comparing remotely sensed Pictometry® Web-based height estimates with in situ clinometer and laser range finder height estimates

Abstract Heights of 30 light poles were measured with a telescopic height pole. Clinometer and laser range finder in situ estimated light pole height was compared to Pictometry® estimated light pole height using hyperspatial 4-in. (10.2-cm) multispectral imagery within a Web-based interface. Average percent agreement between light pole height and clinometer and laser range finder estimated that light pole height ranged from 3.97% to 3.79% for clinometer and laser range finder estimated light pole height, respectively. Average percent agreement between light pole height and Pictometry® estimated light pole height at image magnification factors of 100%, 125%, 150%, 200%, and 300% magnification ranged from 1.77% to 2.39%. Root-mean-square error (RMSE) between light pole height and clinometer and laser range finder estimated that light pole height ranged from 0.22 to 0.20 m for clinometer and laser range finder estimated light pole height, respectively. RMSE between light pole height and Pictometry® estimated light pole height ranged from 0.10 to 0.14 m. An analysis of variance between absolute errors of light pole height estimate by different techniques indicated that Pictometry® was significantly more accurate than both clinometer and laser range finder light pole height estimates.

[1]  R. Ehsani,et al.  Automated citrus tree counting from oblique or ortho images and tree height estimation from oblique images , 2009 .

[2]  John C. Rennie.  Comparison of Height-Measurement Techniques in a Dense Loblolly Pine Plantation , 1979 .

[3]  William A. Bechtold,et al.  Five instruments for measuring tree height: an evaluation , 1994 .

[4]  Nathan J. Heinert,et al.  Extending satellite remote sensing to local scales: land and water resource monitoring using high-resolution imagery , 2003 .

[5]  M. Keller,et al.  Estimating Canopy Structure in an Amazon Forest from Laser Range Finder and IKONOS Satellite Observations1 , 2002 .

[6]  P. Dennison,et al.  Assessing canopy mortality during a mountain pine beetle outbreak using GeoEye-1 high spatial resolution satellite data. , 2010 .

[7]  David M. Mountain,et al.  Evaluating the Viability of Pictometry Imagery for Creating Models of the Built Environment , 2008, ICCSA.

[8]  S. Reutebuch,et al.  A rigorous assessment of tree height measurements obtained using airborne lidar and conventional field methods , 2006 .

[9]  Juha Hyyppä,et al.  A comparative study of the use of laser scanner data and field measurements in the prediction of crown height in boreal forests , 2006 .

[10]  R. W. Rich,et al.  Interpretation of Aerial Photographs , 1962 .

[11]  Yandong Wang,et al.  PICTOMETRY ' S PROPRIETARY AIRBORNE DIGITAL IMAGING SYSTEM AND ITS APPLICATION IN 3 D CITY MODELLING , 2008 .

[12]  Joachim Höhle,et al.  Photogrammetric Measurements in Oblique Aerial Images , 2008 .

[13]  M. Kováts.  A large-scale aerial photographic technique for measuring tree heights on long-term forest installations : Practical paper , 1997 .

[14]  Amr H. Abd-Elrahman,et al.  A community-based urban forest inventory using online mapping services and consumer-grade digital images , 2010, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[15]  Frank W. Gerlach,et al.  IKONOS satellite, imagery, and products , 2003 .

[16]  M. Gerke,et al.  Automatic Structural Seismic Damage Assessment with Airborne Oblique Pictometry© Imagery , 2011 .

[17]  George Vosselman,et al.  AUTOMATIC DETECTION OF BUILDINGS WITH RECTANGULAR FLAT ROOFS FROM MULTI-VIEW OBLIQUE IMAGERY , 2010 .