<div dir="ltr">Andrew,<br><br>Sure, no problem. I sent you and Howard copies of the files in a separate email. They are as follows:<br><br>1. "clean_tile_18.las": the original file I created using PDAL to tile and convert from LAZ 1.4 to LAS 1.2)<br>2. "mcc_tile_18.las": the tile created by MCC-LIDAR after ground classification<br>3. "lasground_tile_18.laz": the tile created by LASTools lasground.exe from the LAS file, but recompressed by lasground<br><br>I also think I identified the problem. I thought the input 'mcc' tiles were in Missouri East State Plane coordinates, because I had projected some MCC inputs before, so I told PDAL to convert them from EPSG 26915 (Missouri East State Plane) to EPSG 32615 (UTM 15N):<br><br><span style="font-family:monospace,monospace"> "inputs":"merge_tiles",<br> "type":"filters.reprojection",<br> "tag":"reproject_tiles",<br> "in_srs":"EPSG:26915",<br> "out_srs":"EPSG:32615"</span><br><br>Apparently PDAL was smarter than me, because it recognized the inherent coordinate system and did NOT reproject the data. When I took out the reprojection stage and ran the pipeline again, it finished without errors. PDAL protected me from my own mistake, so maybe that was its way of detecting the discrepancy.<br><br>I hope that helps.<br><br>Regards,<br>Eric<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:54 PM Eric Robeck <<a href="mailto:erobeck@gmail.com">erobeck@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div>Sure, no problem. I've attached copies of my smallest tile here. They are as follows:<br><div><div><div><div><div><div><ul><li>"clean_tile_18.las": the original file I created using PDAL to tile and convert from LAZ 1.4 to LAS 1.2)</li><li>"mcc_tile_18.las": the tile created by MCC-LIDAR after ground classification<br></li><li>"lasground_tile_18.laz": the tile created by LASTools lasground.exe from the LAS file, but recompressed by lasground</li></ul></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>I also think I identified the problem. I thought the input 'mcc' tiles were in Missouri East State Plane coordinates, because I had projected some MCC inputs before, so I told PDAL to convert them from EPSG 26915 (Missouri East State Plane) to EPSG 32615 (UTM 15N):<br><br><span style="font-family:monospace,monospace"> "inputs":"merge_tiles",<br> "type":"filters.reprojection",<br> "tag":"reproject_tiles",<br> "in_srs":"EPSG:26915",<br> "out_srs":"EPSG:32615"</span><br><br></div>Apparently PDAL was smarter than me, because it recognized the inherent coordinate system and did NOT reproject the data. When I took out the reprojection stage and ran the pipeline again, it finished without errors. PDAL protected me from my own mistake, so maybe that was its way of detecting the discrepancy.<br></div><br></div>I hope that helps.<br><br></div>Regards,<br></div>Eric<br><br><br><div><div><div><div><div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:33 PM Andrew Bell <<a href="mailto:andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com" target="_blank">andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Any chance you could share a couple of your input files?</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Andrew Bell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com" target="_blank">andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I'm confused by the error you get. I'll run a test to see if I can figure out what might be going on.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><div><div class="m_5293132816406258267gmail-m_1765027687360668824h5"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:02 PM, Howard Butler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:howard@hobu.co" target="_blank">howard@hobu.co</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span><br>
> On May 3, 2018, at 10:49 AM, Eric Robeck <<a href="mailto:erobeck@gmail.com" target="_blank">erobeck@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> Howard,<br>
> <br>
> Yes, the parentheses crept in early while I tried to keep track of the various parameter combinations used for my bare earth simulations, but they caused headaches later on...<br>
> <br>
> As an update, I ran a slightly modified version of the same pipeline (sample tile geometries, different source files) and got no errors. This time the input files were in LAZ format and they were not reprojected. Another factor could be that the first set were generated by the old(ish) MCC-LIDAR application, and the latter by Isenburg's lasground.exe.<br>
<br>
</span>That fact pattern would seem to confirm my hunch. This srs stuff is definitely a topic we could improve.<br>
<br>
Howard<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
pdal mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:pdal@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">pdal@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pdal" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pdal</a></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div></div></div><span class="m_5293132816406258267gmail-m_1765027687360668824HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">-- <br><div class="m_5293132816406258267gmail-m_1765027687360668824m_-5376871670449596944gmail_signature">Andrew Bell<br><a href="mailto:andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com" target="_blank">andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com</a></div>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="m_5293132816406258267gmail-m_1765027687360668824gmail_signature">Andrew Bell<br><a href="mailto:andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com" target="_blank">andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com</a></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div>