Uav Photogrammetry for Cultural Heritage Preservation Modeling and Mapping Venetian Walls of Bergamo

Azzola, P.; Cardaci, Alessio; Roberti, Giulio Mirabella; Nannei, Virna Maria

doi:10.5194/isprs-archives-xlii-2-w9-45-2019

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To reduce the influence of the “human factor,” the same location (pixel coordinates) of georeferenced high contrast markers in the aerial 2D images was used across the four different software. The citations given alongside indicate other literature examples that have utilized these software in ecology research: 3DFlow Zephyr Aerial (little evidence of use in ecology, though widely used in urban environments, e.g., Vassena & Clerici, ; Peel, Luo, Cohn, & Fuentes, ; Azzola, Cardaci, Mirabella Roberti, & Nannei, ). Agisoft Photoscan (Cunliffe et al, ; Dandois et al, ; Hoffmann et al, ; Javernick, Brasington, & Caruso, ; Lucieer, Turner, King, & Robinson, ; Obanawa & Hayakawa, ). Pix4D (Magtalas, Aves, & Blanco, ; Ouédraogo, Degré, Debouche, & Lisein, ; Raeva, Filipova, & Filipov, ). MICMAC (Forsmoo et al, ; Lisein, Pierrot‐Deseilligny, Bonnet, & Lejeune, ; Ouédraogo et al, ; Tournadre, Pierrot‐Deseilligny, & Faure, ; Tournadre, Pierrot‐Deseilligny, & Faure, ). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structure from motion photogrammetry in ecology: Does the choice of software matter?

Forsmoo

Anderson

Macleod

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Image‐based modeling, and more precisely, Structure from Motion (SfM) and Multi‐View Stereo (MVS), is emerging as a flexible, self‐service, remote sensing tool for generating fine‐grained digital surface models (DSMs) in the Earth sciences and ecology. However, drone‐based SfM + MVS applications have developed at a rapid pace over the past decade and there are now many software options available for data processing. Consequently, understanding of reproducibility issues caused by variations in software choice and their influence on data quality is relatively poorly understood. This understanding is crucial for the development of SfM + MVS if it is to fulfill a role as a new quantitative remote sensing tool to inform management frameworks and species conservation schemes. To address this knowledge gap, a lightweight multirotor drone carrying a Ricoh GR II consumer‐grade camera was used to capture replicate, centimeter‐resolution image datasets of a temperate, intensively managed grassland ecosystem. These data allowed the exploration of method reproducibility and the impact of SfM + MVS software choice on derived vegetation canopy height measurement accuracy. The quality of DSM height measurements derived from four different, yet widely used SfM‐MVS software—Photoscan, Pix4D, 3DFlow Zephyr, and MICMAC, was compared with in situ data captured on the same day as image capture. We used both traditional agronomic techniques for measuring sward height, and a high accuracy and precision differential GPS survey to generate independent measurements of the underlying ground surface elevation. Using the same replicate image dataset (n = 3) as input, we demonstrate that there are 1.7, 2.0, and 2.5 cm differences in RMSE (excluding one outlier) between the outputs from different SfM + MVS software using High, Medium, and Low quality settings, respectively. Furthermore, we show that there can be a significant difference, although of small overall magnitude between replicate image datasets (n = 3) processed using the same SfM + MVS software, following the same workflow, with a variance in RMSE of up to 1.3, 1.5, and 2.7 cm (excluding one outlier) for “High,” “Medium,” and “Low” quality settings, respectively. We conclude that SfM + MVS software choice does matter, although the differences between products processed using “High” and “Medium” quality settings are of small overall magnitude.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structure from motion photogrammetry in ecology: Does the choice of software matter?

Forsmoo

Anderson

Macleod

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…UAS-based close-range photogrammetry is a proven stand-alone approach to 3D modeling of built heritage [323][324][325][326][327][328][329]. Nevertheless, it can also support ground means such as terrestrial LiDAR [330][331][332][333] and simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM)-based recording techniques [334,335].…”

Section: The Aerial Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Close-Range Sensing and Data Fusion for Built Heritage Inspection and Monitoring—A Review

Adamopoulos

Rinaudo

2021

Remote Sensing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Built cultural heritage is under constant threat due to environmental pressures, anthropogenic damages, and interventions. Understanding the preservation state of monuments and historical structures, and the factors that alter their architectural and structural characteristics through time, is crucial for ensuring their protection. Therefore, inspection and monitoring techniques are essential for heritage preservation, as they enable knowledge about the altering factors that put built cultural heritage at risk, by recording their immediate effects on monuments and historic structures. Nondestructive evaluations with close-range sensing techniques play a crucial role in monitoring. However, data recorded by different sensors are frequently processed separately, which hinders integrated use, visualization, and interpretation. This article’s aim is twofold: i) to present an overview of close-range sensing techniques frequently applied to evaluate built heritage conditions, and ii) to review the progress made regarding the fusion of multi-sensor data recorded by them. Particular emphasis is given to the integration of data from metric surveying and from recording techniques that are traditionally non-metric. The article attempts to shed light on the problems of the individual and integrated use of image-based modeling, laser scanning, thermography, multispectral imaging, ground penetrating radar, and ultrasonic testing, giving heritage practitioners a point of reference for the successful implementation of multidisciplinary approaches for built cultural heritage scientific investigations.

show abstract

“…More fundamentally, the process cannot digitize what cannot be measured with the used instrument -digital photography. This could be the case if an object is partially obstructed (e.g., by vegetation; Azzola et al, 2019), the needed perspective cannot be realized (e.g., capturing the inside of a handle; Tucci et al, 2012), or no suitable physical object is available. In such instances, researchers managed to utilize different technical solutions, such as the use of endoscopy or computer tomography (Fritsch et al, 2018).…”

Section: Technical Foundationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Photogrammetry and Photorealistic 3D Models in Education From a Psychological Perspective

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Until sufficient practical experience and documented examples are available, emerging technological methods to create educational content typically require in-depth knowledge from different fields in order to apply them in the most beneficial way. The method of creating photorealistic 3D models (PR3DMs) of real-world objects with the methods of photogrammetry is an example of such emerging technologies. This paper discusses the fundamental concepts of photogrammetry to provide an overview of the necessary basic knowledge for educators and researchers interested in the presentation of realistic virtual materials. Additionally, a deeper introduction to basic psychological processes while learning with photorealistic materials is presented. This provides deeper insights into potentials and issues, as well as an overview of the most crucial research gaps in learning with PR3DMs. Finally, current and future applications, as well as the potential for learning topics apart from factual knowledge, such as emotional or behavioral outcomes, are discussed.

show abstract

Uav Photogrammetry for Cultural Heritage Preservation Modeling and Mapping Venetian Walls of Bergamo

Cited by 15 publications

References 9 publications

Structure from motion photogrammetry in ecology: Does the choice of software matter?

Structure from motion photogrammetry in ecology: Does the choice of software matter?

Close-Range Sensing and Data Fusion for Built Heritage Inspection and Monitoring—A Review

A Review of Photogrammetry and Photorealistic 3D Models in Education From a Psychological Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About