Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 588

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Image-based surface reconstruction in geomorphometry – merits, limits and developments

Open access
Eltner, Anette, Kaiser, Andreas, Castillo, Carlos, Rock, Gilles, Neugirg, Fabian, Abellán, Antonio·2016·Earth Surface Dynamics

Abstract

Abstract. Photogrammetry and geosciences have been closely linked since the late 19th century due to the acquisition of high-quality 3-D data sets of the environment, but it has so far been restricted to a limited range of remote sensing specialists because of the considerable cost of metric systems for the acquisition and treatment of airborne imagery. Today, a wide range of commercial and open-source software tools enable the generation of 3-D and 4-D models of complex geomorphological features by geoscientists and other non-experts users. In addition, very recent rapid developments in unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technology allow for the flexible generation of high-quality aerial surveying and ortho-photography at a relatively low cost.The increasing computing capabilities during the last decade, together with the development of high-performance digital sensors and the important software innovations developed by computer-based vision and visual perception research fields, have extended the rigorous processing of stereoscopic image data to a 3-D point cloud generation from a series of non-calibrated images. Structure-from-motion (SfM) workflows are based upon algorithms for efficient and automatic orientation of large image sets without further data acquisition information, examples including robust feature detectors like the scale-invariant feature transform for 2-D imagery. Nevertheless, the importance of carrying out well-established fieldwork strategies, using proper camera settings, ground control points and ground truth for understanding the different sources of errors, still needs to be adapted in the common scientific practice.This review intends not only to summarise the current state of the art on using SfM workflows in geomorphometry but also to give an overview of terms and fields of application. Furthermore, this article aims to quantify already achieved accuracies and used scales, using different strategies in order to evaluate possible stagnations of current developments and to identify key future challenges. It is our belief that some lessons learned from former articles, scientific reports and book chapters concerning the identification of common errors or "bad practices" and some other valuable information may help in guiding the future use of SfM photogrammetry in geosciences.

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 · 10.5194/esurf-4-359-2016

Cites

7 of 7 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 7 references

Cited by

See all 588

Metadata

Authors
Eltner, A., Kaiser, A., Castillo, C., Rock, G., Neugirg, F., & Abellán, A.
Venue
Earth Surface Dynamics
Published
2016-05-19
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
359-389
ISSN
  • 2196-6311 (ISSN-L)
  • 2196-632X
OpenAlex
W2401529287
Cited by
588
References
7
FWCI
91.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Image-based surface reconstruction in geomorphometry – merits, limits and developments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/esurf-4-359-2016
The paper
Eltner, A., Kaiser, A., Castillo, C., Rock, G., Neugirg, F., & Abellán, A. (2016). Image-based surface reconstruction in geomorphometry – merits, limits and developments. Earth Surface Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-4-359-2016

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.