International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol XXXV, Part B2. Istanbul 2004 
Department of Transportation (ODOT). The Range is centered 
at latitude 39? 56' 25" N. and longitude 83? 31' 28" W. Figure 
I. displays the Madison Range. 
The targets are painted on existing asphalt roads and are 
centered on magnetic PK nails. Targets are 2.4 meters in 
diameter with a 0.80 meter flat white center. The targets were 
designed to provide optimum images for automatic pointing 
and recording of image coordinates for film-based cameras 
flying at about 1200 meters above the field. Figure 2. shows 
the ODOT personnel as they prepare a standard target on the 
Madison Range. 
In order to image sufficient targets on a single photo, when 
using conventional digital cameras, targets were densely 
distributed in the vicinity of the intersections of US40, Potee 
Road, and Markley Road. In the vicinity of the intersection, 
targets were separated by 10 meters. As targets radiated from 
this intersection, the intervals were sequentially increased by 
the cube root of 2. In this way, relatively narrow field cameras, 
flying at low altitudes, can acquire sufficient target images for 
calibration purposes. The target distribution for use by low- 
flying or narrow field camera systems is shown in Figure 3. 
  
Figure 1. The Madison Test and Calibration Range 
= 
N 
n2 
  
Figure 2. ODOT Personnel Preparing a Target 
3.2.2 Resection Comparisons to GPS Exposure Station In 
order to demonstrate the improvements offered by an in situ 
approach to camera calibration when compared to a 
conventional laboratory calibration, two single photo resection 
computations were computed using first the results from a 
laboratory calibration and then computed from results of an in 
situ calibration. The exposure station coordinates for each case 
were compared to the station coordinates derived from GPS. 
The concept is indicated in Figure 4. 
  
  
Figure 3. High Density Range for Digital Cameras 
Internati 
  
Figure 4 
3.2.3 Flight 
-Port Airer 
The standa 
Patenavia li 
Figure 5.) 
  
  
Figure 5. 
Port; Pilot 
The comp 
resections 
compared ft 
presented ir 
from those 
differences 
error, an 
appropriate 
interesting 
same horizc