An estimate of the spectra of the barest state (i.e., least vegetation) observed from imagery of the Australian continent collected by the Landsat 5, 7, and 8 satellites over a period of more than 30 years (1983 – 2018). The bands include BLUE (0.452 - 0.512), GREEN (0.533 - 0.590), RED, (0.636 - 0.673) NIR (0.851 - 0.879), SWIR1 (1.566 - 1.651) and SWIR2 (2.107 - 2.294) wavelength regions. The approach is robust to outliers (such as cloud, shadows, saturation, corrupted pixels) and also maintains the relationship between all the spectral wavelengths in the spectra observed through time. The product reduces the influence of vegetation and allows for more direct mapping of soil and rock mineralogy. This product complements the Landsat-8 Barest Earth which is based on the same algorithm but just uses Landsat8 satellite imagery from 2013-2108. Landsat-8’s OLI sensor provides improved signal-to-noise radiometric (SNR) performance quantised over a 12-bit dynamic range compared to the 8-bit dynamic range of Landsat-5 and Landsat-7 data. However the Landsat 30+ Barest Earth has a greater capacity to find the barest ground due to the greater temporal depth. Reference: Exposed Soil and Mineral Map of the Australian Continent Revealing the Land at its Barest - Dale Roberts, John Wilford and Omar Ghattas Ghattas (2019). Nature Communications, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-13276-1. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-13276-1

<div>The recent federal funding of the <em>National Space Mission for Observation</em> is in no small part a recognition of the capability of the Australian EO community and central to this is the ability to mount effective national-scale field validation programs.</div><div><br></div><div>After many delays, Landsat 9 was launched on the 27th September 2021. Before being handed to the USGS for operational use, NASA had oversight of configuring and testing the new platform and navigating it into its final operational orbit.&nbsp;For a brief few days and a handful of overpasses globally, Landsat 9 was scheduled to fly ‘under’ its predecessor Landsat 8. &nbsp;This provided the global EO community a ‘once in a mission lifetime’ opportunity to collect field validation data from both sensors.</div><div><br></div><div>At short notice the USGS were advised on the timing and location of these orbital overpasses. &nbsp;For Australia, this meant that between the 11th and 17th&nbsp;of November we would see a single overpass with 100% sensor overlap and three others that featured only 10% overlap. Geoscience Australia (who have a longstanding partnership with the USGS on satellite Earth observation) put out a call to the Australian EO community for collaborators.</div><div><br></div><div>Despite this compressed timeline, COVID travel restrictions and widespread La Niña induced rain and flooding, teams from CSIRO, Queensland DES, Environment NSW, University of WA, Frontier SI and GA were able to capture high value ground and water validation data in each of the overpasses.</div><div><br></div><div>Going forward, the Australian EO community need to maintain and build on these skills and capabilities such that the community can meet the future demands of not only our existing international EO collaborations but the imminent arrival of Australian orbiting EO sensors. Abstract presented at Advancing Earth Observation Forum 2022 (https://www.eoa.org.au/event-calendar/2021/12/1/advancing-earth-observation-aeo-2021-22-forum)

<b>This record was retired 29/03/2022 with approval from S.Oliver as it has been superseded by eCat 132317 GA Landsat 8 OLI/TIRS Analysis Ready Data Collection 3</b> The PQ25 product facilitates interpretation and processing of Surface Reflectance (SR-N/NT), Fractional Cover 25 (FC25) and all derivative products. PQ25 is an assessment of each image pixel to determine if it is an unobscured, unsaturated observation of the Earth's surface and also whether the pixel is represented in each spectral band. The PQ product allows users to produce masks which can be used to exclude pixels which don't meet their quality criteria from analysis . The capacity to automatically exclude such pixels is essential for emerging multi-temporal analysis techniques that make use of every quality assured pixel within a time series of observations. Users can choose to process only land pixels, or only sea pixels depending on their analytical requirements, leading to enhanced computationally efficient.

<b>This record was retired 29/03/2022 with approval from S.Oliver as it has been superseded by eCat 130853 GA Landsat 5 TM Analysis Ready Data Collection 3</b> Surface Reflectance (SR) is a suite of Earth Observation (EO) products from GA. The SR product suite provides standardised optical surface reflectance datasets using robust physical models to correct for variations in image radiance values due to atmospheric properties, and sun and sensor geometry. The resulting stack of surface reflectance grids are consistent over space and time which is instrumental in identifying and quantifying environmental change. SR is based on radiance data from the Landsat TM/ETM+ and OLI sensors.

This report describes the results of an extended national field spectroscopy campaign designed to validate the Landsat 8 and Sentinel 2 Analysis Ready Data (ARD) surface reflectance (SR) products generated by Digital Earth Australia. Field spectral data from 55 overpass coincident field campaigns have been processed to match the ARD surface reflectances. The results suggest the Landsat 8 SR is validated to within 10%, the Sentinel 2A SR is validated to within 6.5% and Sentinel 2B is validated to within 6.8% . Overall combined Sentinel 2A and 2B are validated within 6.6% and the SR for all three ARD products are validated to within 7.7%.

<b>This record was retired 29/03/2022 with approval from S.Oliver as it has been superseded by eCat 132310 GA Landsat 7 ETM+ Analysis Ready Data Collection 3</b> Surface Reflectance (SR) is a suite of Earth Observation (EO) products from GA. The SR product suite provides standardised optical surface reflectance datasets using robust physical models to correct for variations in image radiance values due to atmospheric properties, and sun and sensor geometry. The resulting stack of surface reflectance grids are consistent over space and time which is instrumental in identifying and quantifying environmental change. SR is based on radiance data from the Landsat TM/ETM+ and OLI sensors.

Many atmospheric correction schemes of radiance-based optical satellite data require the selection of normalized solar spectral irradiance models at the top of atmosphere (TOA). However, there is no scientific consensus in literature as to which available model is most suitable. This article examines five commonly used models applied to Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) TOA radiance and reflectance products to assess the accuracy and stability between models used to derive surface reflectance products. It is assumed that the calibration of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Landsat 8 OLI TOA reflectance and radiance products are accurate to currently claimed levels. The results show that the retrieved surface reflectance can exhibit significant variations when different solar irradiance models are used, especially in the OLI coastal blue band at 443 nm. From the five solar irradiance models, the Kurucz 2005 model showed the least bias compared with OLI TOA reflectance product and least variance in surface reflectance. Furthermore, improvement was obtained by adjusting the total solar irradiance (TSI) normalization, and additional validation was provided using observed in situ water leaving reflectance data. The results from this article are particularly relevant to aquatic applications and to satellite sensors that provide TOA radiance such as previous Landsat and other current and historical missions. <b>Citation:</b> F. Li, D. L. B. Jupp, S. Sagar and T. Schroeder, "The Impact of Choice of Solar Spectral Irradiance Model on Atmospheric Correction of Landsat 8 OLI Satellite Data," in IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 4094-4104, May 2021, doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2020.3011006.

<b>This record was retired 29/03/2022 with approval from S.Oliver as it has been superseded by eCat 145498 Geoscience Australia Landsat Fractional Cover Collection 3</b> The Fractional Cover (FC) algorithm was developed by the Joint Remote Sensing Research Program and is described in described in Scarth et al. (2010). It has been implemented by Geoscience Australia for every observation from Landsat Thematic Mapper (Landsat 5), Enhanced Thematic Mapper (Landsat 7) and Operational Land Imager (Landsat 8) acquired since 1987. It is calculated from surface reflectance (SR-N_25_2.0.0). FC_25 provides a 25m scale fractional cover representation of the proportions of green or photosynthetic vegetation, non-photosynthetic vegetation, and bare surface cover across the Australian continent. The fractions are retrieved by inverting multiple linear regression estimates and using synthetic endmembers in a constrained non-negative least squares unmixing model. For further information please see the articles below describing the method implemented which are free to read: - Scarth, P, Roder, A and Schmidt, M 2010, 'Tracking grazing pressure and climate interaction - the role of Landsat fractional cover in time series analysis', Proceedings of the 15th Australasian Remote Sensing and Photogrammetry Conference, Schmidt, M, Denham, R and Scarth, P 2010, 'Fractional ground cover monitoring of pastures and agricultural areas in Queensland', Proceedings of the 15th Australasian Remote Sensing and Photogrammetry Conference A summary of the algorithm developed by the Joint Remote Sensing Centre is also available from the AusCover website: http://data.auscover.org.au/xwiki/bin/view/Product+pages/Landsat+Fractional+Cover Fractional cover data can be used to identify large scale patterns and trends and inform evidence based decision making and policy on topics including wind and water erosion risk, soil carbon dynamics, land management practices and rangeland condition. This information could enable policy agencies, natural and agricultural land resource managers, and scientists to monitor land conditions over large areas over long time frames.

An atmospheric correction algorithm for medium-resolution satellite data over general water surfaces (open/coastal, estuarine and inland waters) has been assessed in Australian coastal waters. In situ measurements at four match-up sites were used with 21 Landsat 8 images acquired between 2014 and 2017. Three aerosol sources (AERONET, MODIS ocean aerosol and climatology) were used to test the impact of the selection of aerosol optical depth (AOD) and Ångström coefficient on the retrieved accuracy. The initial results showed that the satellite-derived water-leaving reflectance can have good agreement with the in situ measurements, provided that the sun glint is handled effectively. Although the AERONET aerosol data performed best, the contemporary satellite-derived aerosol information from MODIS or an aerosol climatology could also be as effective, and should be assessed with further in situ measurements. Two sun glint correction strategies were assessed for their ability to remove the glint bias. The most successful one used the average of two shortwave infrared (SWIR) bands to represent sun glint and subtracted it from each band. Using this sun glint correction method, the mean all-band error of the retrieved water-leaving reflectance at the Lucinda Jetty Coastal Observatory (LJCO) in north east Australia was close to 4% and unbiased over 14 acquisitions. A persistent bias in the other strategy was likely due to the sky radiance being non-uniform for the selected images. In regard to future options for an operational sun glint correction, the simple method may be sufficient for clear skies until a physically based method has been established. <b>Citation:</b> Li, F.; Jupp, D.L.B.; Schroeder, T.; Sagar, S.; Sixsmith, J.; Dorji, P. Assessing an Atmospheric Correction Algorithm for Time Series of Satellite-BasedWater-Leaving Reflectance Using Match-Up Sites in Australian CoastalWaters. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 1927. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13101927

<b>This record was retired 15/09/2022 with approval from S.Oliver as it has been superseded by eCat 146091 DEA Water Observations Statistics (Landsat)</b> In previous versions of WOfS, the basic water classifications, statistical summaries and confidence products were contained within one product with several datasets. As of version 2.1.5, WOfS is split into three products: Water Observation Feature Layers (WO_25_2.1.5), Summary Statistics (WO-STATS_25_2.1.5), and Filtered Summary Statistics (WO-FILT-STATS_25_2.1.5). This product is Water Observations from Space - Filtered Statistics (WO-FILT-STATS), consisting of a Confidence layer that compares the WO-STATS water summary to other national water datasets, and the Filtered Water Summary which uses the Confidence to mask areas of the WO-STATS water summary where Confidence is low. The Filtered Water Summary provides the long term understanding of the recurrence of water in the landscape, with much of the noise due to misclassification filtered out. WO-FILT-STATS consists of the following datasets: Confidence: the degree of agreement between water shown in the Water Summary and other national datasets. The Confidence layer provides understanding of whether the water shown in the Water Summary agrees with where water should exist in the landscape, such as due to sloping land or whether water has been detected in a location by other means. Filtered Water Summary: A simplified version of the Water Summary, showing the frequency of water observations where the Confidence is above a cutoff level. This layer gives a noise-reduced view of surface water across Australia. Even though confidence filtering is applied to the Filtered Water Summary, some cloud and shadow, and sensor noise does persist.