[Gdal-dev] Re: [GRASSLIST:6144] r.proj and gdawarp give differernt
results
Frank Warmerdam
fwarmerdam at gmail.com
Mon Mar 14 13:25:24 EST 2005
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:39:54 +0100, Maciek Sieczka <werchowyna at epf.pl> wrote:
> 6. both gdalwarp and r.proj product have the *same* number of columns,
> rows and res but the extent and apperance are still somewhat different:
Maciek,
I think this is a very significant issue. The difference in
georeferencing seems
to be only a small portion of a pixel, but this can frequently be significant.
To test I tried tracking back one pixel that was different in the two
warpers. I
tracked back the center of a pixel from the GDAL warp output:
Output Location
---------------
Value: 82
Pixel/Line = 39.5, 138.5
Georef = 337548.161466, 277562.731833
Input Location
--------------
cs2cs -f '%.6f' +init=epsg:2180 +to +init=epsg:32633
Georef: 622113.023072 5578151.357107
Pixel/Line: 36.054, 136.782
Value: 82
So, in this case the GDAL result seems to be proper, but the
difference in georeferencing between the r.proj and gdalwarp
output images is approximately 1.28 meters or approximately
0.08882 pixels which would account for the sampling coming
from the neighbouring pixel (which we see in the r.proj result).
I have not traced any other pixels. My suggestion is that you
do what you need to do to get exactly the same georeferencing
in both output products and then compare the results. If there is
still a difference then try tracking back some pixels to see why
they differ (well - at least which is correct).
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
More information about the Gdal-dev
mailing list