Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of Summerland Ledge, Florida, 2022

Metadata also available as - [Questions & Answers] - [Parseable text] - [XML]

Metadata:

Identification_Information:
Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Christine J. Kranenburg
Originator: Gerald A. Hatcher
Originator: Jonathan A. Warrick
Publication_Date: 20240502
Title:
Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of Summerland Ledge, Florida, 2022
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster digital data
Series_Information:
Series_Name: data release
Issue_Identification: DOI:10.5066/P149NXTA
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: St. Petersburg, FL
Publisher:
U.S. Geological Survey - St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.5066/P149NXTA
Larger_Work_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Christine J. Kranenburg
Originator: David G. Zawada
Originator: Gerald A. Hatcher
Originator: Jonathan A. Warrick
Originator: Kimberly K. Yates
Originator: Selena A. Johnson
Publication_Date: 20240426
Title:
Underwater Photogrammetry Products of Summerland Ledge, Florida From Images Acquired Using the SQUID-5 System in July 2022
Series_Information:
Series_Name: data release
Issue_Identification: DOI:10.5066/P149NXTA
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: St. Petersburg, FL
Publisher:
U.S. Geological Survey - St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.5066/P149NXTA
Description:
Abstract:
A digital elevation model (DEM) was created from underwater images collected at Summerland Ledge (SL), Florida, in July 2022 using the SfM (Structure-from-Motion) Quantitative Underwater Imaging Device with 5 cameras (SQUID-5) system. The underwater images were processed using SfM photogrammetry techniques into a classified two-class ('unclassified' and 'low noise') 3D point cloud. The DEM was created in Metashape (ver. 1.6.6) from the point cloud and includes points from both classes. The DEM covers a rectangular area of seafloor approximately 450x180 meters (m) (0.081 square kilometers [km]) in size and was saved as a Geographic Tagged Image File Format (GeoTIFF) raster at 1-centimeter (cm) resolution.
Purpose:
The underwater images and associated location data were collected to provide high-resolution elevation data and precisely co-registered, full-color orthoimage base maps for use in environmental assessment and monitoring of the coral reef and surrounding seafloor habitat. Additionally, the data were collected to evaluate their potential to improve U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientific efforts including seafloor elevation and stability modeling, and small-scale hydrodynamic flow modeling.
Supplemental_Information:
Each data collection is recorded in the USGS Coastal and Marine Hazards Resources Program (CMHRP) Coastal and Marine Geoscience Data System (CMGDS) field activity database and is assigned a Field Activity Number (FAN). Additional information about the field activities from which these data were derived is available online at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2022-314-FA
Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Range_of_Dates/Times:
Beginning_Date: 20220718
Ending_Date: 20220719
Currentness_Reference: ground condition
Status:
Progress: Complete
Maintenance_and_Update_Frequency: None planned
Spatial_Domain:
Bounding_Coordinates:
West_Bounding_Coordinate: -81.44786086
East_Bounding_Coordinate: -81.44153260
North_Bounding_Coordinate: 24.54175894
South_Bounding_Coordinate: 24.53903098
Keywords:
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: USGS Metadata Identifier
Theme_Keyword: USGS:b3530dbb-acab-46f3-bb56-9537d4484201
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: Marine Realms Information Bank (MRIB) keywords
Theme_Keyword: seabed
Theme_Keyword: coral reefs
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: Data Categories for Marine Planning
Theme_Keyword: Physical Habitats and Geomorphology
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: ISO 19115 Topic Category
Theme_Keyword: oceans
Theme_Keyword: elevation
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: USGS Thesaurus
Theme_Keyword: reef ecosystems
Theme_Keyword: geospatial datasets
Theme_Keyword: remote sensing
Theme_Keyword: visible light imaging
Theme_Keyword: structure from motion
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: None
Theme_Keyword: U.S. Geological Survey
Theme_Keyword: USGS
Theme_Keyword: Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program
Theme_Keyword: CMHRP
Theme_Keyword: Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center
Theme_Keyword: PCMSC
Theme_Keyword: St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Theme_Keyword: SPCMSC
Place:
Place_Keyword_Thesaurus: None
Place_Keyword: Summerland Ledge
Place_Keyword: State of Florida
Access_Constraints: None
Use_Constraints:
USGS-authored or produced data and information are in the public domain from the U.S. Government and are freely redistributable with proper metadata and source attribution. Please recognize and acknowledge the U.S. Geological Survey as the originator of the dataset and in products derived from these data. This information is not intended for navigation purposes.
Point_of_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Organization_Primary:
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Person: SPCMSC Data Management Group
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 600 4th St South
City: St. Petersburg
State_or_Province: FL
Postal_Code: 33701
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 727-502-8000
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: gs-g-spcmsc_data_inquiries@usgs.gov
Browse_Graphic:
Browse_Graphic_File_Name: SL22_dem_webview1d_grey.jpg
Browse_Graphic_File_Description:
Graphic showing extent and topography of Summerland Ledge DEM in Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) file format. The image is available on the webpage for this data release.
Browse_Graphic_File_Type: JPEG
Data_Set_Credit:
Data collection was funded by the U.S. Geological Survey Pacific Coastal Marine Science Center and the U.S. Geological Survey Saint Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center. The authors would like to thank Dr. Jason Spadaro, Assistant Professor, Marine Science and Technology, College of the Florida Keys for installing calibration targets on the reef, Lisa Symons, Regional Response Coordinator, and the staff of the Eastern Region, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, NOAA Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, for coordination efforts.
Native_Data_Set_Environment:
Microsoft Windows 10; Agisoft Metashape Professional (version 1.6.6, build 11715)
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Gerald A. Hatcher
Originator: Jonathan A. Warrick
Originator: Christine J. Kranenburg
Originator: Andrew C. Ritchie
Publication_Date: 20230726
Title:
Accurate Maps of Reef-scale Bathymetry with Synchronized Underwater Cameras and GNSS
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Remote Sensing
Issue_Identification: 15(15), 3727
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15153727
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Gerald A. Hatcher
Originator: Jonathan A. Warrick
Originator: Andrew C. Ritchie
Originator: Evan T. Dailey
Originator: David G. Zawada
Originator: Christine Kranenburg
Originator: Kimberly K. Yates
Publication_Date: 20200626
Title:
Accurate Bathymetric Maps From Underwater Digital Imagery Without Ground Control
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Frontiers in Marine Science
Issue_Identification: Volume 7, Article 525
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00525
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Codruta O. Ancuti
Originator: Cosmin Ancuti
Originator: Christophe De Vleeschouwer
Originator: Philippe Bekaert
Publication_Date: 2017
Title: Color Balance and Fusion for Underwater Image Enhancement
Series_Information:
Series_Name: IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
Issue_Identification: Volume 27, Number 1
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2017.2759252
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Jin-Si R. Over
Originator: Andrew C. Ritchie
Originator: Christine J. Kranenburg
Originator: Jenna A. Brown
Originator: Daniel Buscombe
Originator: Tom Noble
Originator: Christopher R. Sherwood
Originator: Jonathan A. Warrick
Originator: Philippe A. Wernette
Publication_Date: 2021
Title:
Processing Coastal Imagery with Agisoft Metashape Professional Edition, Version 1.6--Structure from Motion Workflow Documentation
Series_Information:
Series_Name: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
Issue_Identification: 2021-1039
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20211039
Data_Quality_Information:
Attribute_Accuracy:
Attribute_Accuracy_Report:
The accuracy of the position data used for SfM data processing is based on the accuracy and precision of the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) equipment and camera timing. The post-processed GNSS navigation data produced a 10-hertz (Hz) vehicle trajectory with an estimated 2-sigma accuracy of 10 centimeters (cm) horizontal and 15 cm vertical. The horizontal and vertical accuracies of the surface models generated by SfM were assessed with positional error assessments of the cameras and found to be less than 3 cm in the horizontal dimensions and less than 1 cm in the vertical.
Logical_Consistency_Report: All data fall within expected ranges.
Completeness_Report:
Gaps in the data coverage are coded with a NoData value of -32,767 in the DEM. Gaps primarily occur either because the line spacing briefly widened such that there was insuffient sidelap for reconstruction, or over sand patches which have moving sandwaves and / or lack texture, which is necessary for image correlation. The largest of these data voids is an approximately 240 square meter void in the south-western corner of the dataset. Additionally, small gaps may be present at vertical or concave surfaces due to the lack of visibility of these surfaces when viewed from above. These high-relief areas are common around the perimeter of reef spurs.
Positional_Accuracy:
Horizontal_Positional_Accuracy:
Horizontal_Positional_Accuracy_Report:
Previous SfM-based measurements of the field-based Sediment Elevation Table (SET) stations at USGS field sites in the Florida Keys were within 3 cm of the total uncertainty of the field-based GPS measurements. Additionally, the average horizontal scaling of the models was found to be between 0.016 percent and 0.024 percent of water depth (Hatcher and others, 2020). No independent assessment of horizontal accuracy was possible from the Summerland Ledge field site.
Vertical_Positional_Accuracy:
Vertical_Positional_Accuracy_Report:
Previous SfM-based measurements of the field-based Sediment Elevation Table (SET) stations at USGS field sites in the Florida Keys were within 3 cm of the total uncertainty of the field-based GPS measurements. The average vertical scaling of the models is between 0.016 percent and 0.024 percent of water depth (Hatcher and others, 2020). No independent assessment of vertical accuracy was possible from the Summerland Ledge field site.
Lineage:
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Christine J. Kranenburg
Originator: David G. Zawada
Originator: Gerald A. Hatcher
Originator: Jonathan A. Warrick
Originator: Kimberly K. Yates
Publication_Date: 20231222
Title:
Overlapping seabed images collected at Summerland Ledge coral reef, Florida, 2022
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster digital data
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: St. Petersburg, Florida
Publisher:
U.S. Geological Survey - St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.5066/P9M3NYWI
Online_Linkage:
Type_of_Source_Media: TIFF
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Range_of_Dates/Times:
Beginning_Date: 20220718
Ending_Date: 20220719
Source_Currentness_Reference: ground condition
Source_Citation_Abbreviation: raw images
Source_Contribution: Raw images to which SfM techniques were applied.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Christine J. Kranenburg
Originator: David G. Zawada
Originator: Gerald A. Hatcher
Originator: Jonathan A. Warrick
Originator: Kimberly K. Yates
Publication_Date: 20231222
Title:
GNSS locations of seabed images collected at Summerland Ledge coral reef, Florida, 2022
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: tabular digital data
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: St. Petersburg, Florida
Publisher:
U.S. Geological Survey - St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.5066/P9M3NYWI
Online_Linkage:
Type_of_Source_Media: comma-delimited text file
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Range_of_Dates/Times:
Beginning_Date: 20220718
Ending_Date: 20220719
Source_Currentness_Reference: ground condition
Source_Citation_Abbreviation: GNSS antenna positions
Source_Contribution:
Location data for the raw images to which SfM techniques were applied.
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
IMAGERY COLOR CORRECTION Because of the strong color modifications caused by light adsorption and scattering in underwater imaging, a color correction process was conducted on the raw images. The color correction was a twofold process. First, images were corrected for the high adsorption (and low color values) in the red band using the color balancing techniques of Ancuti and others (2017). For this, the red channel was modified using the color compensation equations of Ancuti and others (2017, see equation 4 on page 383) that use both image-wide and pixel-by-pixel comparisons of red brightness with respect to green brightness. After compensation, the images were white balanced using the "greyworld" assumption that is summarized in Ancuti and others (2017). Combined, these techniques ensured that each color band histogram was centered on similar values and had similar spread of values. The remaining techniques of Ancuti and others (2017), which include sharpening techniques and a multi-product fusion, were not employed. The resulting images utilized only about a quarter to a half of the complete 0-255 dynamic range of the three-color bands. Thus, the brightness values of each band were stretched linearly over the complete range while allowing the brightest and darkest 0.05 percent of the original image pixels (that is, 2506 of the 5.013 million pixels) to be excluded from the histogram stretch. This final element was included to ensure that light or dark spots in the images, which often occurred from water column particles or image noise, did not exert undo control on the final brightness values. Color-corrected images were output with the same file names and file types as the originals to make replacement within the SfM photogrammetry project easy. As a courtesy, the script used to implement this procedure is provided as a supplemental support file (OrthoImage_Color_Correction_Procedure.m), included with this data release.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: raw images
Process_Date: 20221205
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: color-corrected images
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Jonathan A. Warrick
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Position: Research Geologist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: Physical and Mailing
Address: 2885 Mission St.
City: Santa Cruz
State_or_Province: CA
Postal_Code: 95060
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 831-460-7569
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: jwarrick@usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
SfM PHOTOGRAMMETRY Digital imagery and position data recorded by the SQUID-5 system were processed using SfM photogrammetry techniques that generally follow the workflow outlined by Hatcher and others (2020 and 2023). These techniques are detailed here and include specific references to parameter settings and processing workflow. The primary software used for SfM processing was Agisoft Metashape Professional, version 1.6.6, build 11715, which will be referred to as "Metashape" in the discussion herein. First, the raw images collected during the three mission days were added to a new project in Metashape. Raw images were used over the color-corrected images, owing to their larger dynamic range, which generally resulted in more SfM tie points. The images from each camera were assigned a unique camera calibration group in the Camera Calibration settings. Within the Camera Calibration settings, the camera parameters were also entered as 0.00345 x 0.00345 millimeter (mm) pixel sizes for all camera sensors, 8 mm focal length for the central camera (CAM13), and 6 mm focal lengths for the remaining cameras (CAM01, CAM39, CAM75, CAM82). These different focal lengths represented different lenses chosen for each camera. Additionally, the cameras required offsets to transform the GNSS positions to each camera's entrance pupil (that is, optical center). Initial measurements of these offsets were obtained using a separate SfM technique, outlined in Hatcher and others (2020), which found the offsets to be: Camera X(m) Y(m) Z(m) CAM01 -0.320 -0.205 0.823 CAM13 0.033 0.036 0.739 CAM39 0.170 -0.280 0.838 CAM75 0.047 0.396 0.698 CAM82 -0.110 -0.690 0.675 Where X and Y are the camera sensor parallel offsets, and Z is the sensor normal offset. The accuracy settings were chosen to be 0.01 m for CAM13 and 0.025 m for the other 4 cameras. Lastly, these offsets were allowed to be adjusted using the "Adjust GPS/INS offset" option, because slight camera shifts may occur with each rebuild and use of the SQUID-5 system. The SQUID-5 GNSS antenna positions were then imported into the project and matched with each image by time. The coordinates were converted in Metashape to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83 [2011]) Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 17 North (17N) projected coordinate system, and altitudes were converted to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) orthometric heights (in meters). Prior to aligning the images, the Metashape reference settings were assigned. The coordinate system was "NAD83(2011) / UTM zone 17N". The camera accuracy was set to 0.10 m in the horizontal and 0.15 m in vertical dimensions, following an examination of the source GNSS data. Tie point accuracy was set at 1.0 pixels. The remaining reference settings were not relevant, because there were no camera orientation measurements, marker points, or scale bars in the SfM project. The data were then aligned in Metashape using the "Align Photos" workflow tool. Settings for the alignment included "High" accuracy, Generic preselection turned OFF and "Reference" preselection turned "ON" and using the "Source" information. This last setting allowed the camera position information to assist with the alignment process. Additionally, the key point limit was set to 50,000 and the tie point limit was assigned a value of zero, which allows for the generation of the maximum number of points for each image. Lastly, neither the "Guided image matching" nor the "Adaptive camera model fitting" options were used. This process resulted in over 41 million tie points. The total positional errors for the cameras were reported to be 0.015 m, 0.016 m, and 0.008 m in the east, north and altitude directions, respectively. Thus, the total positional error was 0.023 m. To improve upon the camera calibration parameters and computed camera positions, an optimization process was conducted that was consistent with the techniques of Hatcher and others (2020), which are based on the general principles provided in Over and others (2021). First, a duplicate of the aligned data was created in case the optimization process eliminated too much data using the "Duplicate Chunk" tool. Within the new chunk, the least valid tie points were removed using the "Gradual Selection" tools. As noted in Hatcher and others (2020), these tools are used less aggressively for the underwater imagery of SQUID-5 than commonly used for aerial imagery owing to the differences in image quality. First, all points with a "Reconstruction Uncertainty" greater than 20 were selected and deleted. Then, all points with a "Projection Accuracy" greater than 8 were selected and deleted. The camera parameters were then recalibrated with the "Optimize Cameras" tool. Throughout this process the only camera parameters that were adjusted were f, k1, k2, k3, cx, cy, p1, and p2. Once the camera parameters were adjusted, all points with "Reprojection Errors" greater than 0.4 were deleted, and the "Optimize Cameras" tool was used one final time. This optimization process resulted in slightly under 14.6 million tie points, a reduction of roughly 65 percent of the original tie points. The camera positional errors were reported to be 0.006 m, 0.006 m, and 0.005 m in the east, north and altitude directions, respectively, and the total positional error was 0.010 m. The final computed arm offsets were found to be: Camera X(m) Y(m) Z(m) CAM01 -0.316 -0.206 0.854 CAM13 0.015 -0.141 0.773 CAM39 0.154 -0.272 0.867 CAM75 0.044 0.398 0.722 CAM82 -0.111 -0.692 0.709 Following the alignment and optimization of the SQUID-5 data, mapped SfM products were generated in Metashape. For these steps, the original raw images were replaced with color-corrected images. This replacement was conducted by resetting each image path from the raw image to the color-corrected image. First, a three-dimensional dense point cloud was generated using the "Build Dense Cloud" workflow tool. This was run with the "High" quality setting and the "Mild" depth filtering, and the tool was set to calculate both point colors and confidence. The resulting dense cloud was over 2.4 billion points over the 0.085 square kilometer survey area, or roughly 28,000 points per square meter (2.8 points per square centimeter). The dense points were classified by thresholding Metashape-computed confidence values, which are equivalent to the number of image depth maps that were integrated to make each point. Values of one were assigned "low noise", and values of two and greater were assigned "unclassified". The final Dense cloud was partitioned into blocks (also referred to as tiles) measuring 150 meters on a side and exported with point colors and classification as a LAZ file type.
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: raw images
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: color-corrected images
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: GNSS antenna positions
Process_Date: 20230102
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: point cloud
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Christine J. Kranenburg
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Position: Cartographer
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: Physical and Mailing
Address: 600 4th Street South
City: St. Petersburg
State_or_Province: FL
Postal_Code: 33701
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 727-502-8000
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: ckranenburg@usgs.gov
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
GENERATION OF DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL (DEM) A digital elevation model (DEM), which is a x,y raster of elevation values, was generated from the point cloud using the Metashape "Build DEM" workflow tool using a geographic projection, dense cloud source data, interpolation disabled, and the recommended output resolution of 0.00766 meters. The DEM was resampled to a 1-cm resolution pixel size during export and converted to a Cloud Optimized GeoTIFF (COG) format using the Geospatial Data Abstraction Library (GDAL). For more information on COGs see the USGS website: https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-are-cloud-optimized-geotiffs-cogs
Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: point cloud
Process_Date: 20230102
Source_Produced_Citation_Abbreviation: DEM
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Christine J. Kranenburg
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Position: Cartographer
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: Physical and Mailing
Address: 600 4th Street South
City: St. Petersburg
State_or_Province: FL
Postal_Code: 33701
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 727-502-8000
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: ckranenburg@usgs.gov
Spatial_Data_Organization_Information:
Direct_Spatial_Reference_Method: Raster
Raster_Object_Information:
Raster_Object_Type: Pixel
Spatial_Reference_Information:
Horizontal_Coordinate_System_Definition:
Planar:
Grid_Coordinate_System:
Grid_Coordinate_System_Name: Universal Transverse Mercator
Universal_Transverse_Mercator:
UTM_Zone_Number: 17N
Transverse_Mercator:
Scale_Factor_at_Central_Meridian: 0.9996
Longitude_of_Central_Meridian: -81
Latitude_of_Projection_Origin: 0.0
False_Easting: 500000.0
False_Northing: 0.0
Planar_Coordinate_Information:
Planar_Coordinate_Encoding_Method: coordinate pair
Coordinate_Representation:
Abscissa_Resolution: 0.01
Ordinate_Resolution: 0.01
Planar_Distance_Units: Meters
Geodetic_Model:
Horizontal_Datum_Name: North American Datum of 1983 (2011)
Ellipsoid_Name: GRS 1980
Semi-major_Axis: 6378137.000000
Denominator_of_Flattening_Ratio: 298.257222101
Vertical_Coordinate_System_Definition:
Altitude_System_Definition:
Altitude_Datum_Name: North American Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD88)
Altitude_Resolution: 0.001
Altitude_Distance_Units: meters
Altitude_Encoding_Method: Attribute values
Entity_and_Attribute_Information:
Overview_Description:
Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:
The DEM is presented as a 32-bit floating point GeoTIFF where pixels represent elevation in meters relative to NAVD88 (GEOID 12B) and the no-data value is -32767. The horizontal projection is NAD83(2011) UTM Zone 17N. The DEM GeoTIFF is available in 1-cm resolution for the entire surveyed area.
Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation: U.S. Geological Survey
Distribution_Information:
Distributor:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Organization_Primary:
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: Mailing and Physical
Address: 600 4th St. South
City: St. Petersburg
State_or_Province: FL
Postal_Code: 33701
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 727-502-8000
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: gs-g-spcmsc_data_inquiries@usgs.gov
Resource_Description: SQUID5_SL_2022_DEM_cog.tif
Distribution_Liability:
Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data on any other system or for general or scientific purposes, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
Standard_Order_Process:
Digital_Form:
Digital_Transfer_Information:
Format_Name: TIFF
Format_Information_Content:
TIFF images can be opened directly with any TIFF-compatible image viewer.
File_Decompression_Technique: Adobe Deflate
Transfer_Size: 2486
Digital_Transfer_Option:
Online_Option:
Computer_Contact_Information:
Network_Address:
Network_Resource_Name: https://doi.org/10.5066/P149NXTA
Access_Instructions:
The DEM GeoTIFF file can be downloaded by going to the Network_Resource_Name link and scrolling down to the Location-Elevation Data section.
Fees: None
Metadata_Reference_Information:
Metadata_Date: 20240809
Metadata_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Organization_Primary:
Contact_Organization:
U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
Contact_Person: SPCMSC Data Management Group
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 600 4th St. South
City: St. Petersburg
State_or_Province: FL
Postal_Code: 33701
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 727-502-8000
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: gs-g-spcmsc_data_inquiries@usgs.gov
Metadata_Standard_Name: Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
Metadata_Standard_Version: FGDC-STD-001-1998

This page is <https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/catalog/spcmsc/SQUID5_SL_2022_DEM_metadata.html>
Generated by mp version 2.9.51 on Tue Aug 13 14:14:14 2024