Encyclopedia of Coastal Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Charles W. Finkl, Christopher Makowski


  • E. Robert ThielerEmail author
  • Cheryl J. Hapke
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48657-4_244-2

Photogrammetry can be defined simply as the science of making reliable measurements from photographs. Unlike a map, however, a photograph contains a number of distortions that require correction before accurate measurements can be made. A number of photogrammetric techniques can be employed to remove these distortions and obtain useful measurements. In coastal studies, photogrammetric techniques are commonly employed to establish the positions of historical and modern features-of-interest (e.g., shorelines (defined as the high-water line or wet-dry boundary), cliff edges, dune positions, etc.). Historically, the focus of study has been overwhelmingly on the use of vertical aerial photography to derive accurate shoreline positions, although photogrammetric applications using ground-based photography, videography and integration with other types of remotely sensed data (e.g., lidar) are becoming widespread. Most often, a time series of feature positions is compiled for the purpose of...

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


  1. Ackerman F (1996) Techniques and strategies for DEM generation. In: Greve C (ed) Digital photogrammetry: an addendum to the manual of photogrammetry. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, pp 135–141Google Scholar
  2. American Society of Photogrammetry (1980) Manual of photogrammetry, 4th edn. American Society of Photogrammetry, Falls ChurchGoogle Scholar
  3. Anders FJ, Byrnes MR (1991) Accuracy of shoreline change rates as determined from maps and aerial photographs. Shore and Beach 59(1):17–26Google Scholar
  4. Brown DG, Arbogast AF (1999) Digital photogrammetric change analysis as applied to active coastal dunes in Michigan. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 65:467–474Google Scholar
  5. Clow JB, Leatherman SP (1984) Metric mapping: an automated technique of shoreline mapping. In: Proceedings, 44th American Congress on surveying and mapping. American Society of Photogrammetry, Falls Church, pp 309–318Google Scholar
  6. Crowell M, Leatherman SP, Buckley MK (1991) Historical shoreline change: error analysis and mapping accuracy. J Coast Res 7:839–852Google Scholar
  7. Dolan R, Hayden B, Heywood J (1978) A new photogrammetric method for determining shoreline erosion. Coast Eng 2:21–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dolan R, Hayden BP, May P, May S (1980) The reliability of shoreline change measurements from aerial photographs. Shore and Beach 48(4):22–29Google Scholar
  9. Falkner E (1995) Aerial mapping methods and applications. Lewis Publishers, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  10. Hapke C, Richmond B (2000) Monitoring beach morphology changes using small-format aerial photography and digital softcopy photogrammetry. Environ Geosci 7:32–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hapke C, Willis C, D’Iorio M (2000) Going digital: error evaluation of media and scanner types for aerial photographic analyses in coastal change studies. In: Proceedings of the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association annual meeting, Aug 6–10, Kaanapali, MauiGoogle Scholar
  12. Leatherman SP (1983) Shoreline mapping: a comparison of techniques. Shore Beach 51:28–33Google Scholar
  13. Lucas JR, Lapine LA (1996) Airborne GPS. In: Greve C (ed) Digital photogrammetry: an addendum to the manual of photogrammetry. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, pp 39–41Google Scholar
  14. Moore LJ (2000) Shoreline mapping techniques. J Coast Res 16:111–124Google Scholar
  15. Smith GL, Zarillo GA (1990) Calculating long-term shoreline recession rates using aerial photographic and beach profiling techniques. J Coast Res 6(1):111–120Google Scholar
  16. Stafford DB, Langfelder J (1971) Air photo survey of coastal erosion. Photogramm Eng 37:565–575Google Scholar
  17. Thieler ER, Danforth WW (1994a) Historical shoreline mapping (I): improving techniques and reducing positioning errors. J Coast Res 10:549–563Google Scholar
  18. Thieler ER, Danforth WW (1994b) Historical shoreline mapping (II): application of the digital shoreline mapping and analysis systems (DSMS/DSAS) to shoreline change mapping in Puerto Rico. J Coast Res 10:600–620Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Coastal and Marine Geology ProgramUS Geological SurveyWoods HoleUSA
  2. 2.USGS, Pacific Science CenterSanta CruzUSA