Skip to main content

Image Quality Evaluation of Various Pan-Sharpening Techniques Using Landsat-8 Imagery

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Machine Intelligence and Data Science Applications (MIDAS 2022)

Part of the book series: Algorithms for Intelligent Systems ((AIS))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

A widely used image processing technique called Pan-sharpening (PS) can be used for fusing the spectral details from a Multispectral (MS) image with a high spectral and low spatial resolution (such as Landsat multi-band image) with the spatial details of High Resolution (HR) Panchromatic (PAN) image (such as Landsat PAN band), for generating high spectral and spatial resolution MS images. Due to the increasing availability of different sensors, PS using single-source or multi-source satellites is gaining more attention among Remote Sensing (RS) researchers. Pan-sharpening techniques mostly vary in how well they integrate spectral and spatial details into the fused image, and hence their efficiency also varies. This study evaluated the efficiency of eight different PS techniques using Landsat-8 imagery which will help in choosing the best PS technique based on their accuracies for particular applications. These techniques include the High Pass filter Additive (HPFA), Hue-Saturation-Value (HSV) transform, Gram-Schmidt (GS), Intensity Hue Saturation (IHS), Smoothing Filter based Intensity Modulation (SFIM), Principal Component Analysis (PCA), Simple Mean (SM), and Brovey Transform (BT). The image quality of these PS techniques is assessed using ten different metrics such as Erreur Relative Globale Adimensionnelle de Synthèse (ERGAS), Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), bias, Difference in Variance (DIV), Pearson’s correlation coefficient (PCC), Universal Image Quality Index (Q), Change in Mean Contrast (CMC), Relative Average Spectral Error (RASE), Change in Mean Luminance (CML), and Mean Squared Error (MSE). The spatial improvement was verified qualitatively and quantitatively. From the whole pan-sharpened (fused) images, urban characteristics including streets, buildings, water bodies, and the stadium could be easily recognized. Qualitative analysis revealed that the GS and SFIM techniques generated the best pan-sharpened images while poor results were obtained by the PCA technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ghamisi P, Rasti B, Yokoya N, Wang Q, Hofle B, Bruzzone L et al (2018) Multisource and multitemporal data fusion in remote sensing. http://arxiv.org/abs/1812.08287

  2. Govind NR, Rishikeshan CA, Ramesh H (2019) Comparison of different pan sharpening techniques using Landsat 8 imagery. In: 2019 IEEE 5th international conference for convergence in technology, I2CT 2019. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Campbell JB, Wynne RH (2011) Introduction to remote sensing, 5th ed. Google Books. [cited 2022 Sep 4]

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gilbertson JK, Kemp J, van Niekerk A (2017) Effect of pan-sharpening multi-temporal Landsat 8 imagery for crop type differentiation using different classification techniques. Comput Electron Agric 134:151–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shelestov A, Lavreniuk M, Kussul N, Novikov A, Skakun S (2017) Exploring google earth engine platform for big data processing: classification of multi-temporal satellite imagery for crop mapping. Front Earth Sci (Lausanne) 5:1–10. [cited 2022 Aug 1]

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gao Z, Ai J, Gao W, Shi R, Zhang C, Liu C (2016) Integrating pan-sharpening and classifier ensemble techniques to map an invasive plant (Spartina alterniflora) in an estuarine wetland using Landsat 8 imagery. 10:026001. https://doi.org/10.1117/1JRS10026001. [cited 2022 Sep 4]

  7. Raj A, Minz S (2021) A scalable unsupervised classification method using rough set for remote sensing imagery. Int J Softw Sci Comput Intell 13:65–88. [cited 2022 Dec 2]

    Google Scholar 

  8. Raj A, Minz S (2020) Spatial clustering using neighborhood for multispectral images. 14:038503. https://doi.org/10.1117/1JRS14038503. [cited 2022 Dec 2]

  9. Korhonen L, Hadi, Packalen P, Rautiainen M (2017) Comparison of Sentinel-2 and Landsat 8 in the estimation of boreal forest canopy cover and leaf area index. Remote Sens Environ 195:259–74

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang Y (2004) Understanding image fusion. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 70:657–661

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gangkofner UG, Pradhan PS, Holcomb DW (2007) Optimizing the high-pass filter addition technique for image fusion. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 73:1107–18

    Google Scholar 

  12. Trijayanto DP, Tjandrasa H (2019) Improving spectral quality of IHS-pansharpening result by integrating equalization process using SVE-DWT for satellite imagery data. In: 12th international conference on information & communication technology and system (ICTS). IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  13. Xu Q, Zhang Y, Li B (2014) Recent advances in pansharpening and key problems in applications 5:175–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/194798322014889227. [cited 2022 Nov 10]

  14. Pushparaj J, Hegde AV (2017) Comparison of various pan-sharpening methods using Quickbird-2 and Landsat-8 imagery. Arab J Geosci 10:1–17

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sarp G (2017) Spectral and spatial quality analysis of pan-sharpening algorithms: a case study in Istanbul 47:19–28. https://doi.org/10.5721/EuJRS20144702. [cited 2022 Nov 20]

  16. Du Q, Younan NH, King R, Shah VP (2007) On the performance evaluation of pan-sharpening techniques. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett 4:518–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Liu JG (2010) Smoothing filter-based intensity modulation: a spectral preserve image fusion technique for improving spatial details 21:3461–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/014311600750037499. [cited 2022 Nov 10]

  18. Alparone L, Aiazzi B, Baronti S, Garzelli A, Nencini F, Selva M (2008) Multispectral and panchromatic data fusion assessment without reference. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens. 74:193–200

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jalan S, Sokhi BS (2012) Comparison of different pan-sharpening methods for spectral characteristic preservation: multi-temporal CARTOSAT-1 and IRS-P6 LISS-IV imagery 33:5629–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/014311612012666811. [cited 2022 Nov 10]

  20. Panchal S, Thakker R (2015) Signal & image processing. Int J (SIPIJ) 6

    Google Scholar 

  21. Wang Z, Bovik AC (2002) A universal image quality index. IEEE Signal Process Lett 9:81–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Greetta Pinheiro .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Pinheiro, G., Minz, S. (2023). Image Quality Evaluation of Various Pan-Sharpening Techniques Using Landsat-8 Imagery. In: Ramdane-Cherif, A., Singh, T.P., Tomar, R., Choudhury, T., Um, JS. (eds) Machine Intelligence and Data Science Applications. MIDAS 2022. Algorithms for Intelligent Systems. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1620-7_31

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics