Ania, 
as you can see from the following messages, your host cannot be
reached by my mailer. If you want mail addressed directly to you
instead of via the grass user list, please mention a full Internet
address that I can write to. 

Martijn

Forwarded message:
> From martijn Mon Dec 20 09:35:29 1993
> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 09:35:28 +0100
> From: MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
> Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown
> Message-Id: <9312200835.AA13590@scanner.frw.uva.nl>
> To: martijn
> 
>   --- The transcript of the session follows ---
> 550 plearn.bitnet.tcp... 550 Host unknown
> 550 AOLDAK@PLEARN.bitnet... Host unknown
> 
>   --- The unsent message follows ---
> Received: by scanner.frw.uva.nl (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
>           id AA05909; Mon, 20 Dec 1993 09:35:28 +0100
> From: martijn
> Message-Id: <9312200835.AA05909@scanner.frw.uva.nl>
> Subject: Re: Is the Grass ver 4.1 suitable for...
> To: AOLDAK@PLEARN.bitnet (Ania Oldak)
> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 09:35:27 +0100 (NFT)
> In-Reply-To: <9312151946.AA14618@scanner.frw.uva.nl> from "Ania Oldak" at Dec 15, 93 08:48:42 pm
> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
> Content-Type: text
> Content-Length: 2018      
> 
> > Please do correct me if I'm wrong, but I gather
> > that GRASS has a modular architecture, so in order to run particular
> > part of it one is not forced to try to get it all? 
> 
> I'm not sure about this, but I don't think Grass is modular.
>  
> > [and here lies the next catch since we do not have an
> > easy access to any postscript printer].
> 
> I have heard of a program called ps2hpgl which converts your PostScript
> output to HPGL language. Perhaps you can use it. But I don't know
> where to get it... One other possibility would be to make PPM output
> in Grass, which you can convert to a lot of other formats using the
> PBMplus package available from the same address as Grass. That way you
> may be able to print output.
>  
> > You'll ask perhaps at this point WHY to get through all this hassle in
> > such circumstances, right? Well, what is the choice really? I do have
> > these ten air photos which I'd like very much to put together using
> > geometrical correction and all this. While I can probably do this using
> > Idrisi on any PC I'll loose a lot in terms of resolution which as it
> > happens is my REAL objective - to have it right, and to have it at 150
> > dpi!!!  Hope you did not get thorouhly bored at this point 8-((? I'd
> > really appreciate any more advices you can have on this all. 
> 
> One advice at this stage - I found that the quality of the georeferencing
> (and therefore of the mosaicking) of the photo's depends on 1) the scanning
> resolution, 2) the quality of the coordinates used for georeferencing.
> Ad 1) Although I scanned my photos with 100 dpc I ended up with pixels some
> 3 - 3,5 meters across. Much too large to do accurate georeferncing.
> Ad 2) I got my georeferncing coordinates off a topographic map 1:10,000. So
> my coordinates have a precision of only ca. 2,5 - 5 meters.
> If you add both mistakes together, you get an awfully large mistake.
> 
> > 
> > Best wishes and a lot of smiles
> > from Ania
> > 
> 
> Merry Christmas all the same,
> Martijn
> 
> PS. Where are you from? Your email address doesn't tell me anything...
> 


