Image classification assigns every pixel (or object) in an image to a category — water, forest, cropland, built-up — turning imagery into land-cover maps. Methods range from classic supervised and unsupervised statistics through object-based image analysis to modern deep learning. Whatever the algorithm, the discipline is constant: good training data in, rigorous accuracy assessment out.
Supervised and unsupervised approaches
Supervised classification learns from analyst-labelled training samples: the algorithm — maximum likelihood historically, random forests and gradient boosting today — learns each class’s spectral signature and applies it image-wide. Its quality is bounded by the training data’s quality and representativeness.
Unsupervised classification clusters pixels by spectral similarity without labels, leaving the analyst to interpret clusters afterwards. It is a fast reconnaissance tool and a check on assumptions, less often the final product.
Objects, time series and deep learning
Object-based image analysis (OBIA) first segments imagery into meaningful regions, then classifies them using spectra plus shape, texture and context — essential at high resolution, where single pixels of a roof or tree mean little alone. Time-series classification adds phenology: crops that look identical in one image separate cleanly by their seasonal curves.
Deep learning — semantic segmentation networks in particular — now leads for extracting buildings, roads and complex classes from high-resolution imagery, at the price of far larger training-data appetites.
Accuracy assessment: the non-negotiable step
A classification without accuracy assessment is an illustration, not a measurement. Standard practice reserves independent reference samples, builds a confusion matrix, and reports overall accuracy plus per-class user’s and producer’s accuracy — revealing exactly which classes are trustworthy and which confuse.
Serious programmes design the sample statistically (stratified, sized for target confidence) and document it, so area estimates carry defensible error bounds — the difference between a map and evidence.