1992
DOI: 10.1016/0034-4257(92)90076-v
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of simplified procedures for retrieval of land surface reflectance factors from satellite sensor output

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
172
0
21

Year Published

2000
2000
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 372 publications
(197 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
4
172
0
21
Order By: Relevance
“…Methods and/or correction coefficients have been published for many radiometric correction techniques, including conversion to top-ofatmosphere reflectance (Chander and Markham 2003;Chander et al 2007), dark-object subtraction (Chavez 1988;Teillet and Fedosejevs 1995), measuring or estimating atmospheric aerosols to derive surface reflectance (Liang et al 2001;Thome 2001), applying radiative transfer functions (Moran et al 1992), empirical line calibration (Moran et al 2001), and haze removal (Richter 1996). More detailed reviews and summaries of radiometric image processing entailing terminology, sensor radiometric calibration, surface reflectance retrieval, image normalisation, and topographic corrections are available from Richards and Jia (1999), Liang et al (2001Liang et al ( , 2002, Peddle et al (2003), Schaepman-Strub et al (2006), and Vanonckelen et al (2013).…”
Section: What Sensors Are Available?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Methods and/or correction coefficients have been published for many radiometric correction techniques, including conversion to top-ofatmosphere reflectance (Chander and Markham 2003;Chander et al 2007), dark-object subtraction (Chavez 1988;Teillet and Fedosejevs 1995), measuring or estimating atmospheric aerosols to derive surface reflectance (Liang et al 2001;Thome 2001), applying radiative transfer functions (Moran et al 1992), empirical line calibration (Moran et al 2001), and haze removal (Richter 1996). More detailed reviews and summaries of radiometric image processing entailing terminology, sensor radiometric calibration, surface reflectance retrieval, image normalisation, and topographic corrections are available from Richards and Jia (1999), Liang et al (2001Liang et al ( , 2002, Peddle et al (2003), Schaepman-Strub et al (2006), and Vanonckelen et al (2013).…”
Section: What Sensors Are Available?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To overcome the lack of detailed in situ field data of atmospheric optical properties at the time of image acquisition, an image-based dark object subtraction (DOS) method was used (Chavez 1989(Chavez , 1996Moran et al 1992). This method is the simplest yet most widely used approach, suitable for areas with dense vegetation (Spanner et al 1990;Ekstrand 1994;Jakubauskas 1996;Huguenin et al 1997).…”
Section: Image Processing and Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies (Moran et al, 1992(Moran et al, , 1995Liang et al, 2002;González-Dugo and Mateos, 2008) have evaluated the accuracy of atmospheric correction algorithms by comparing the retrieved satellite reflectance with ground-based or aircraftbased radiometric measurements and vegetation indices obtained from various sensors. In this study, we compared VIs obtained from Landsat imagery (5 and 7) and a handheld radiometer (ASD-FieldSpec).…”
Section: Comparison Between Satellite-derived and Ground-derived Vegementioning
confidence: 99%