[GRASS-dev] r.slope.aspect: one pixel less in the output at the border shrinks region extent in further calculations

[Helmut Kudrnovsky]

Dear Helena,

> I believe that any reasonable estimate is better than the current
> shrinking region (in r.flow we just 
> propagate the same values to the edges), but that does not seem to be the
> consensus. 

I agree with you that a reasonable estimate is better than the current
situation. 

I've opened an enhancement ticket for this
(http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/2526).

> you can use r.resamp.rst which computes slope and aspect and does not
> shrink the region. But you may 
> need to adjust the parameters to make sure it works well. 
[...]
> (you can compute the edge values e.g.in r.mapcalc). 

I'll have a look r.resamp.rst and r.mapcalc in the meantime.

> I am quite interested in the flat valley bottoms.

the authors [1] introduced a quite complex procedure to calculate an index
of valley bottom flatness, but it seems to be used especially in soil
science papers. I've used it a little bit for riverine landscape analysis.

in r.valley.bottom [1] DEM coarsening and smoothing as suggested by Gallant
& Dowling seems to work already; although a lot of code tweaking (especially
to choose/calculate thresholds independently of base DEM resolution, ...) is
still needed. 

testing and input is welcome.

[1]
"John C. Gallant and Trevor I. Dowling
A multiresolution index of valley bottom flatness for mapping depositional
areas.
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, VOL. 39, NO. 12, 1347, doi:10.1029/2002WR001426,
2003"

[2]
http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/browser/grass-addons/grass7/raster/r.valley.bottom/r.valley.bottom.py






-----
best regards
Helmut
--
View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/r-slope-aspect-one-pixel-less-in-the-output-at-the-border-shrinks-region-extent-in-further-calculatis-tp5179874p5179937.html
Sent from the Grass - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.