Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 772

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 110 of the 110 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Structure from motion photogrammetry in physical geography

Smith, M.W., Carrivick, J.L., Quincey, D.J.·2016·Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment

Abstract

Accurate, precise and rapid acquisition of topographic data is fundamental to many sub-disciplines of physical geography. Technological developments over the past few decades have made fully distributed data sets of centimetric resolution and accuracy commonplace, yet the emergence of Structure from Motion (SfM) with Multi-View Stereo (MVS) in recent years has revolutionised three-dimensional topographic surveys in physical geography by democratising data collection and processing. SfM-MVS originates from the fields of computer vision and photogrammetry, requires minimal expensive equipment or specialist expertise and, under certain conditions, can produce point clouds of comparable quality to existing survey methods (e.g. Terrestrial Laser Scanning). Consequently, applications of SfM-MVS in physical geography have multiplied rapidly. There are many practical options available to physical geographers when planning a SfM-MVS survey (e.g. platforms, cameras, software), yet, many SfM-MVS end-users are uncertain as to the errors associated with each choice and, perhaps most fundamentally, the processes actually taking place as part of the SfM-MVS workflow. This paper details the typical workflow applied by SfM-MVS software packages, reviews practical details of implementing SfM-MVS, combines existing validation studies to assess practically achievable data quality and reviews the range of applications of SfM-MVS in physical geography. The flexibility of the SfM-MVS approach complicates attempts to validate SfM-MVS robustly as each individual validation study will use a different approach (e.g. platform, camera, georeferencing method, etc.). We highlight the need for greater transparency in SfM-MVS processing and enhanced ability to adjust parameters that determine survey quality. Looking forwards, future prospects of SfM-MVS in physical geography are identified through discussion of more recent developments in the fields of image analysis and computer vision.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0309133315615805

Cites

110 of 110 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 110 references

Metadata

Authors
Smith, M. W., Carrivick, J. L., & Quincey, D. J.
Venue
Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment
Published
2015-11-26
Volume
40
Issue
2
Pages
247-275
ISSN
  • 0309-1333 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0296
OpenAlex
W2207055384
Cited by
772
References
110
FWCI
84.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Structure from motion photogrammetry in physical geography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0309133315615805
The paper
Smith, M. W., Carrivick, J. L., & Quincey, D. J. (2016). Structure from motion photogrammetry in physical geography. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133315615805

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.