2004 
  
ir of 
anner 
1ality 
were 
ntrol. 
some 
port. 
; and 
ht be 
jl. In 
rt of 
ould 
, for 
ality 
es of 
were 
ems. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
lt to 
10.5 
new 
L be 
two 
IS iS 
um. 
hose 
(1) Camera quality, since several of them are old generation 
cameras; 
(i) . Diapositive copy, and 
(iii) Scanner calibration. 
3.3 Digital Aerotriangulation 
To validate quality PQCS parameters from digital 
aerotriangulation processing three blocks of images from 
different projects were used. See Table 3. Blocks A and B are 
Brazilian projects. Altdorf project is a Suisse project. All 
projects were processed using the Digital System SOCET SET 
from BAE System and aerotriangulation software ORIMA, 
from Leica Geosystems. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Project | N° of | Scale Image Ground Total of points 
s images | Photos | Resolution Controls | [images] 
A 89 1:30.00 25 um 42 553 
0 
B 6 1:8.000 24 um 10 65 
Altdorf 8 1:4.700 25 um 8 125 
Table 3 
Table 4 presents results obtained from the aerotriangulation 
adjustment. From aerotriangulation for Block A, due to an 
image drift effect detected, some tie points were very difficult 
to be measured. That problem can create a low level of quality 
during vectorization process. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
PROIECT c0 EMQ after adjustment [m] 
lum] 1X Y Z 
A 20 1.32 1,22 0,41 
B 9.6 0,40 0,34 0,26 
Altdorf 6,2 0,28 0,32 0.12 
Table 4 
Quality of block A was not satisfactory since residual values 
were higher than 40um and also because of the drift effect. The 
result obtained for Block B was also below quality expectative 
since it was detected that some control points had accuracy 
worst than 5 centimeter and even after a hard work of refining 
no good adjustment accuracy could be obtained (8,5um or 0,3 
pixel). In such a block it was necessary to use additional 
parameters such as film stretching and lens deformation 
correction in order to obtain at least an acceptable result. The 
reason for that low profile result can be explained by bad image 
quality, bad film quality or bad negative reproduction. For the 
Altdofr block all results converged as expected. In that case, 
productivity and quality results are clearly better than blocks A 
and B. Existing pre-signalized control points and superior 
image quality can be the explanation for the best results 
obtained. Figure 4 shows image difference for Project B and 
Altdorf. 
799 
  
    
  
EON 
Figure 4 
4. CONCLUSIONS 
    
The benefit of applying the PQCS model are mainly the 
guarantee of quality and increasing level of productivity at short 
term and decreasing costs at medium term. By applying such a 
quality control procedure any company can assure high level of 
acceptation of its product and reduce risks of double working. 
All faults detected during practical tests indicate that no quality 
control was applied at any step of the production flow, mainly 
on the beginning of the project. 
S. BIBLIOGRAPHY 
Ackermann, R. J. & Eslami Rad, A., 1996. Quality Control 
Procedure for Photogrammetric Digital Mapping. In: 
International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 
Vol. XXXI. Part B4. pp. 1032-1040. 
ASPRS., 1995. Draft Standards for Aerial Photography. In: 
ASPRS Professional Practice Division Specification and 
Standards Committee. 
Baltavias, E. P., 1994. Test and Calibration Procedures for 
Image Scanners. In International Archives of Photogrammetry 
and Remote Sensing. 30(1). pp. 163-170. 
BMGSB, 2002. Base Mapping and Geomatic Services Branch. 
Specifications for Scanning Aerial Photographic Imagery. 
British Columbia, Ministry of Sustainable Resource 
Management. Victoria BC. 
CERCO, 2000. Handbook for implementing a QMS. In: NMA- 
VI. CERCO Work Group on Quality 18/08/2000. 
D+M'& S+T, 1996. Les Nouvelles Directives de la 
Détermination — Photogrammétrique des Points Fixes 
(Aerotriangulation) In: Directives de Points Fixes. Version 
Juliet 1996. 
Eslami Rad, A. (1995). Development of a Quality Control 
Procedure for Photogrammetric Digital Mapping. Thesis of 
Master of Science in Integrated Map and Geo-Information 
Production (IGP). International Institute for Aerospace and 
Earth Sciences (ITC). Enschede. Netherland. 
FDGC, 1999. Federal geographic Data Committee. Geospatial 
Positioning Accuracy Standards. Part 3: National Standard for