Minimizing Seam Lines in UAV Multispectral Image Mosaics Utilizing Irradiance, Vignette, and BRDF

• Published in: Remote sensing (Basel, Switzerland) Switzerland), 2025-01, Vol.17 (1), p.151
• Main Authors: Ahn, Hoyong, Kim, Chansol, Lim, Seungchan, Jin, Cheonggil, Kim, Jinsu, Choi, Chuluong
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 2072-4292; 2072-4292
• DOI: 10.3390/rs17010151

Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) imaging provides the ability to obtain high-resolution images at a lower cost than satellite imagery and aerial photography. However, multiple UAV images need to be mosaicked to obtain images of large areas, and the resulting UAV multispectral image mosaics typically contain seam lines. To address this problem, we applied irradiance, vignette, and bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) filters and performed field work using a DJI Mavic 3 Multispectral (M3M) camera to collect data. We installed a calibrated reference tarp (CRT) in the center of the collection area and conducted three types of flights (BRDF, vignette, and validation) to measure the irradiance, radiance, and reflectance—which are essential for irradiance correction—using a custom reflectance box (ROX). A vignette filter was generated from the vignette parameter, and the anisotropy factor (ANIF) was calculated by measuring the radiance at the nadir, following which the BRDF model parameters were calculated. The calibration approaches were divided into the following categories: a vignette-only process, which solely applied vignette and irradiance corrections, and the full process, which included irradiance, vignette, and BRDF. The accuracy was verified through a validation flight. The radiance uncertainty at the seam line ranged from 3.00 to 5.26% in the 80% lap mode when using nine images around the CRT, and from 4.06 to 6.93% in the 50% lap mode when using all images with the CRT. The term ‘lap’ in ‘lap mode’ refers to both overlap and sidelap. The images that were subjected to the vignette-only process had a radiance difference of 4.48–6.98%, while that of the full process images was 1.44–2.40%, indicating that the seam lines were difficult to find with the naked eye and that the process was successful.