Search for a command to run...
UAV-SfM photogrammetry is widely used in remote sensing and geoscience communities. Scholars have tried to optimize UAV-SfM for terrain modeling based on analysis of error statistics like root mean squared error (RMSE), mean error (ME), and standard deviation (STD). However, the errors of terrain modeling tend to be spatially distributed. Although the error statistic can represent the magnitude of errors, revealing spatial structures of errors is still challenging. The “best practice” of UAV-SfM is lacking in research communities from the perspective of spatial structure of errors. Thus, this study designed various UAV-SfM photogrammetric scenarios and investigated the effects of image collection strategies and GCPs on terrain modeling. The error maps of different photogrammetric scenarios were calculated and quantitatively analyzed by ME, STD, and Moran’s I. The results show that: (1) A high camera inclination (20–40°) enhances UAV-SfM photogrammetry. This not only decreases the magnitude of errors, but also mitigates its spatial correlation (Moran’s I). Supplementing convergent images is valuable for reducing errors in a nadir camera block, but it is unnecessary when the image block is with a high camera angle. (2) Flying height increases the magnitude of errors (ME and STD) but does not affect the spatial structure (Moran’s I). By contrast, the camera angle is more important than the flying height for improving the spatial structure of errors. (3) A small number of GCPs rapidly reduce the magnitude of errors (ME and STD), and a further increase in GCPs has a marginal effect. However, the structure of errors (Moran’s I) can be further improved with increasing GCPs. (4) With the same number, the distribution of GCPs is critical for UAV-SfM photogrammetry. The edge distribution should be first considered, followed by the even distribution. The research findings contribute to understanding how different image collection scenarios and GCPs can influence subsequent terrain modeling accuracy, precision, and spatial structure of errors. The latter (spatial structure of errors) should be routinely assessed in evaluations of the quality of UAV-SfM photogrammetry.