OSA's Digital Library

Applied Optics

Applied Optics

APPLICATIONS-CENTERED RESEARCH IN OPTICS

  • Vol. 36, Iss. 32 — Nov. 10, 1997
  • pp: 8322–8328

General Image-Quality Equation: GIQE

Jon C. Leachtenauer, William Malila, John Irvine, Linda Colburn, and Nanette Salvaggio  »View Author Affiliations


Applied Optics, Vol. 36, Issue 32, pp. 8322-8328 (1997)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/AO.36.008322


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (289 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

A regression-based model was developed relating aerial image quality, expressed in terms of the National Imagery Interpretability Rating Scale (NIIRS), to fundamental image attributes. The General Image-Quality Equation (GIQE) treats three main attributes: scale, expressed as the ground-sampled distance; sharpness, measured from the system modulation transfer function; and the signal-to-noise ratio. The GIQE can be applied to any visible sensor and predicts NIIRS ratings with a standard error of 0.3 NIIRS. The image attributes treated by the GIQE are influenced by system design and operation parameters. The GIQE allows system designers and operators to perform trade-offs for the optimization of image quality.

© 1997 Optical Society of America

History
Original Manuscript: February 4, 1997
Revised Manuscript: May 7, 1997
Published: November 10, 1997

Citation
Jon C. Leachtenauer, William Malila, John Irvine, Linda Colburn, and Nanette Salvaggio, "General Image-Quality Equation: GIQE," Appl. Opt. 36, 8322-8328 (1997)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/ao/abstract.cfm?URI=ao-36-32-8322


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. L. A. Maver, C. D. Erdman, K. Riehl, “Imagery interpretability rating scales,” in Digest of Technical Papers: International Symposium of the Society for Information Display (Society for Information Display, Santa Ana, Calif., 1995), Vol. 26, pp. 117–120.
  2. IRARS Committee, General Image Quality Equation: Users Guide, Version 3.0, High Altitude Endurance Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Tier II+ distribution (IRARS Committee, Washington, D.C., 1994).
  3. J. C. Leachtenauer, “National Imagery Interpretability Rating Scales: overview and product description,” in ASPRS/ASCM Annual Convention and Exhibition Technical Papers: Remote Sensing and Photogrammetry (American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing and American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, Baltimore, Md., 1996), Vol. 1, pp. 262–272.
  4. H. L. Snyder, “Visual search and image quality,” (Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 1976).
  5. N. H. Nill, B. H. Bouzas, “Objective image quality measure derived from digital image power spectra,” Opt. Eng. 31, 813–825 (1992). [CrossRef]
  6. U.S. Department of the ArmyU.S. Department of the NavyU.S. Department of the Air Force, Photo Interpretation Handbook, TM30-45/NAVAER 10-35-610/AFM 200-50 (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1954).
  7. C. C. Bennett, S. H. Winterstein, J. D. Taylor, R. E. Kent, “A study of image quality and speeded intrinsic target recognition,” (IBM Federal Systems Division, Oswego, N.Y., 1963).
  8. Applied Psychology Corporation, “Performance of photographic interpreters as a function of time and image characteristics,” (Rome Air Development Center, Rome, N.Y., 1963).
  9. R. A. Erickson, J. C. Hemingway, “Image identification on television,” (Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, Calif., 1970).
  10. H. C. Borrough, R. F. Fallis, T. H. Warnock, J. H. Britt, “Quantitative determination of image quality,” (Boeing Aerospace Company, Kent, Wash., 1967).
  11. H. L. Task, “An evaluation and comparison of several measures of image quality for television displays,” (Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 1979).
  12. R. A. Schindler, “Optical power spectrum analysis of processed imagery,” (Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 1979).
  13. F. A. Rossell, R. H. Willson, “Recent psychophysical experiments and the display signal-to-noise ratio concept,” in Perception of Displayed Information, L. M. Biberman, ed. (Plenum, New York, 1973). [CrossRef]
  14. R. J. Beaton, R. W. Monty, H. L. Snyder, “An evaluation of system quality metrics for hard-copy and soft-copy displays of digital imagery,” in Applications of Digital Image Processing VI, A. G. Tescher, ed., Proc. SPIE432, 320–328 (1983).
  15. R. E. Simmons, D. W. Cheeseman, Physique (eoi) User’s Guide, Version 3.10 (Eastman Kodak, Rochester, N.Y., 1991).
  16. For example, log10X = log2X/3.32.
  17. J. C. Leachtenauer, N. L. Salvaggio, “NIIRS prediction, use of the Briggs target,” in ASPRS/ASCM Annual Convention and Exhibition Technical Papers: Remote Sensing and Photogrammetry, (American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing and American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, Baltimore, Md., 1996), Vol. 1, pp. 282–291.
  18. The term λ(f-number)/P is the ratio of the wavelength times the f-number to the pixel pitch. A ratio of greater than 1 denotes oversampling relative to the cutoff frequency.

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited