[GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2055: r.in.gdal lacks flag "-r Limit import to the current region"

[GRASS GIS]

#2055: r.in.gdal lacks flag "-r Limit import to the current region"
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  neteler      |       Owner:  grass-dev@…              
     Type:  enhancement  |      Status:  new                      
 Priority:  normal       |   Milestone:  7.0.0                    
Component:  Raster       |     Version:  svn-trunk                
 Keywords:  r.in.gdal    |    Platform:  Unspecified              
      Cpu:  Unspecified  |  
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment(by neteler):

 Replying to [comment:3 mmetz]:
 > Replying to [comment:2 neteler]:
 > > Replying to [comment:1 mmetz]:
 > > ...
 > > > Limiting the import to the current region followed by resampling
 would thus eat away rows and columns at the region's borders.

 I don't understand why resampling is involved. Keep pixels as-is within
 the
 "MASK", i.e. current region, if -r is used.

 > > > What would be the advantage of r.in.gdal -r?
 > >
 > > That would exactly be my use case. Example: I need a tiny area from
 the huge
 > > Black Marble map or the gmted2010 DEM (files in GB range). Getting it
 in at
 > > original resolution but cut to my area would be very useful as
 optional flag.
 >
 > Why would it be useful, even though it would introduce resampling
 artefacts?

 Artifacts I would only expect at the border cells in the worst case and
 they
 could be imported even completely (these pixels) leading to a tiny
 extension
 to the current region.

 > Why not use r.external?

 wxNIZ and other modules failed. Secondly there is always the risk that the
 original is deleted. Finally, why keep a big file when I only need to use
 a tiny fraction of it in GRASS... (think disk space on laptops).

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/2055#comment:5>
GRASS GIS <http://grass.osgeo.org>