Dataset is considered complete for the information presented, as described in the abstract. Users are advised to read the rest of the metadata record carefully for additional details.
Horizontal_Positional_Accuracy:
Horizontal_Positional_Accuracy_Report:
Horizontal accuracy was estimated by comparing SfM-derived ground control point (GCP) positions to PPK GPS measurements. Due to the time-intensive process of placing GCPs in the field, all available GCPs were used for registration and camera optimization in the SfM processing workflow during the creation of the final point clouds. To evaluate the horizontal positional accuracy of the point cloud after processing was completed, each GCPs was disabled one-at-a-time using a python script to create a 'temporary check point'. With a single GCP temporarily disabled, camera optimization was performed with all lens parameters fixed, and all other GCPs enabled. The residual errors of the check point relative to its GPS-measured position were recorded. After all temporary check point iterations were complete, the root-mean-square error (RMSE) and mean-absolute error (MAE) were calculated. The resulting horizontal RMSE was 0.043 meters (MAE 0.039 meters). The addition of the estimated horizontal GPS uncertainty (0.020 meters) in quadrature results in a total horizontal accuracy estimate of 0.047 meters for the point cloud. It should be noted that this error estimate is for areas of bare ground or low vegetation where GCPs were placed. Additional sources of error such as poor image-to-image point matching due to vegetation or uniform substrate texture (such as sand) resulting in poor surface reconstruction may cause localized errors in some portions of the point clouds to exceed this estimate.
Vertical_Positional_Accuracy:
Vertical_Positional_Accuracy_Report:
Vertical accuracy was estimated by comparing SfM-derived ground control point (GCP) positions to PPK GPS measurements. Due to the time-intensive process of placing GCPs in the field, all available GCPs were used for registration and camera optimization in the SfM processing workflow during the creation of the final point cloud. To evaluate the vertical positional accuracy of the point cloud after processing was completed, each GCPs was disabled one-at-a-time using a python script to create a 'temporary check point'. With a single GCP temporarily disabled, camera optimization was performed with all lens parameters fixed, and all other GCPs enabled. The residual errors of the check point relative to its GPS-measured position were recorded. After all temporary check point iterations were complete, the root-mean-square error (RMSE) and mean-absolute error (MAE) were calculated. The resulting vertical RMSE was 0.079 meters (MAE 0.058 meters). The addition of the estimated vertical GPS uncertainty (0.025 meters) in quadrature results in a total vertical accuracy estimate of 0.083 meters for the point cloud. It should be noted that this error estimate is for areas of bare ground or low vegetation where GCPs were placed. Additional sources of error such as poor image-to-image point matching due to vegetation or uniform substrate texture (such as sand) resulting in poor surface reconstruction may cause localized errors in some portions of the point clouds to exceed this estimate.
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Aerial imagery was collected using a Department of Interior-owned 3DR Solo quadcopter fitted with a Ricoh GR II digital camera featuring a global shutter. Flights using both a nadir camera orientation and an oblique camera orientation were conducted. For the nadir flights (F04, F05, F06, F07, and F08), the camera was mounted using a fixed mount on the bottom of the UAS and oriented in an approximately nadir orientation. The UAS was flown on pre-programmed autonomous flight lines at an approximate altitude of 70 meters above ground level (AGL), resulting in a nominal ground-sample-distance (GSD) of 1.8 centimeters per pixel. The flight lines were oriented roughly shore-parallel and were spaced to provide approximately 70 percent overlap between images from adjacent lines. For the oblique orientation flights (F03, F09, F10, and F11), the camera was mounted using a fixed mount on the bottom of the UAS and oriented facing forward with a downward tilt. The UAS was flown manually in a sideways-facing orientation with the camera pointed toward the bluff. Before each flight, the camera digital ISO, aperture, and shutter speed were manually set to adjust for ambient light conditions. Although these settings were changed between flights, they were not permitted to change during a flight; thus, the images from each flight were acquired with consistent camera settings.
Process_Date: 20190604
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Joshua Logan
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Position: Physical Scientist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing address
Address: 2885 Mission Street
City: Santa Cruz
State_or_Province: CA
Postal_Code: 95060
Country: US
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 831-460-7519
Contact_Facsimile_Telephone: 831-427-4748
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: jlogan@usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Ground control was established using ground control points (GCPs) consisting of small square tarps with black-and-white cross patterns and temporary chalk 'X' marks placed on the ground surface throughout the survey area. The GCP positions were measured using survey-grade GPS receivers operating in post-processed-kinematic (PPK) mode. The GPS receivers were placed on short fixed-height tripods and set to occupy each GCP for a minimum occupation time of one minute. The PPK corrections were referenced to a Continuously Operating Reference (CORS) GPS base station ('COUP') located approximately 7 kilometers from the study area operated by the Washington State Reference Network (WSRN).
Process_Date: 20190604
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Joshua Logan
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 2885 Mission Street
City: Santa Cruz
State_or_Province: CA
Postal_Code: 95060
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 831-460-7519
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: jlogan@usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
The image files were renamed using a custom python script. The file names were formed using the following pattern Fx-YYYYMMDDThhmmssZ_Ryz.*, where:
- Fx = Flight number
- YYYYMMDDThhmmssZ = date and time in the ISO 8601 standard, where 'T' separates the date from the time, and 'Z' denotes UTC ('Zulu') time.
- Ry = RA or RB to distinguish camera 'RicohA' from 'RicohB'
- z = original image name assigned by camera during acquisition
- * = file extension (JPG or DNG)
The approximate image acquisition coordinates were added to the image metadata (EXIF) ('geotagged') using the image timestamp and the telemetry logs from the UAS onboard single-frequency 1-Hz autonomous GPS. The geotagging process was done using a custom Python script which processes the GPS data from the UAS telemetry log and calls the command-line 'exiftool' software. To improve timestamp accuracy, the image acquisition times were adjusted to true ('corrected') UTC time by comparing the image timestamps with several images taken of a smartphone app ('Emerald Time') showing accurate time from Network Time Protocol (NTP) servers. For this survey, + 00:00:02 (2 seconds) were added to the image timestamp to synchronize with corrected UTC time. The positions stored in the EXIF are in geographic coordinates referenced to the WGS84(G1150) coordinate reference system (EPSG:7660), with elevation in meters relative to the WGS84 ellipsoid.
Additional information was added to the EXIF using the command-line 'exiftool' software with the following command:
exiftool ^
-P ^
-Copyright="Public Domain. Please credit U.S. Geological Survey." ^
-CopyrightNotice="Public Domain. Please credit U.S. Geological Survey." ^
-ImageDescription="Low-altitude aerial image of the intertidal zone on the west side of Whidbey Island, Washington, USA, from USGS survey 2019-623-FA." ^
-Caption-Abstract="Intertidal zone on the west side of Whidbey Island, Washington, USA, from USGS survey 2019-623-FA." ^
-Caption="Aerial image of the intertidal zone on the west side of Whidbey Island, Washington, USA, from USGS survey 2019-623-FA." ^
-sep ", " ^
-keywords="Marine Nearshore Intertidal, Whidbey Island, Strait of Juan de Fuca, Rosario Strait, Washington, 2019-623-FA, Unmanned Aircraft System, UAS, drone, aerial imagery, U.S. Geological Survey, USGS, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center" ^
-comment="Low-altitude aerial image from USGS Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) survey 2019-623-FA." ^
-Credit="U.S. Geological Survey" ^
-Contact="pcmsc_data@usgs.gov" ^
-Artist="U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center" ^
Process_Date: 2019
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Joshua Logan
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 2885 Mission Street
City: Santa Cruz
State_or_Province: CA
Postal_Code: 95060
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 831-460-7519
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: jlogan@usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Structure-from-motion (SfM) processing techniques were used to create the point clouds in the Agisoft Photoscan/Metashape software package using the following workflow:
1. Initial image alignment was performed with the following parameters - Accuracy: 'high'; Pair selection: 'reference', 'generic'; Key point limit: 0 (unlimited); Tie point limit: 0 (unlimited).
2. Sparse point cloud error reduction was performed using an iterative gradual selection and camera optimization process with the following parameters: Reconstruction Uncertainty: 10; Projection Accuracy: 3. Lens calibration parameters f, cx, cy, k1, k2, k3, p1, and p2 were included in the optimization. Additional sparse points obviously above or below the true surface were manually deleted after the last error reduction iteration.
3. Ground control points (GCPs) were automatically detected using the 'Cross (non-coded)' option. False matches were manually removed, and all markers were visually checked and manually placed or adjusted if needed. Markers were manually placed for GCPs that consisted of chalk 'X' marks.
4. Additional sparse point cloud error reduction was performed using an iterative gradual selection and camera optimization process with the following parameters: Reconstruction Error: 0.3. Lens calibration parameters f, cx, cy, k1, k2, k3, p1, and p2 were initially included in the optimization, but additional parameters k4, b1, b2, p3, and p4 were included once Reconstruction Error was reduced below 1 pixel. Additional sparse points obviously above or below the true surface were manually deleted after the last error reduction iteration, and a final optimization was performed.
5. A dense point cloud was created using the 'high' accuracy setting, with 'aggressive' depth filtering.
6. A Digital Surface Model (DSM) with a native resolution of 3.6 centimeters per pixel was created using all points in the dense point cloud, and was exported to a GeoTIFF format with a 4-centimeter pixel resolution.
7. An RGB orthomosaic with a native resolution of 1.8 centimeters per pixel was created using the main DSM as the orthorectification surface, and was exported to a GeoTIFF format with a 2-centimeter pixel resolution.
8. An exterior boundary was digitized using the orthomosaic as a reference and was used as a clipping mask to exclude areas of water, obvious edge artifacts, and large areas of interpolation.
9. The point clouds were exported in LAZ format.
10. LAStools 'lasclip' was used to set the classification of all points falling within the horizontal bounds of the water clipping mask shapefile as Class 9 ('water').
Process_Date: 2019
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Joshua Logan
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Position: Physical Scientist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing address
Address: 2885 Mission Street
City: Santa Cruz
State_or_Province: CA
Postal_Code: 95060
Country: US
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 831-460-7519
Contact_Facsimile_Telephone: 831-427-4748
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: jlogan@usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Performed minor edits to the metadata to correct typos. No data were changed
Process_Date: 20211013
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Organization_Primary:
Contact_Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
Contact_Person: Susan A. Cochran
Contact_Position: Geologist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: Mailing and Physical
Address: 2885 Mission Street
City: Santa Cruz
State_or_Province: CA
Postal_Code: 95060
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 831-460-7545
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: scochran@usgs.gov