[GRASS-user] integration of sample.c algorithms into r.resample

[Michael Barton]

I've been following this thread and am looking forward to using the new
module.

Here's my suggestion on the names.

The new module should inherit the name of r.resample because that is what it
does. Indeed it uses interpolation methods to accomplish this resampling,
but r.interpolate (to me) suggests something that creates a raster surface
from a set of points.

The old module could be renamed to indicate that it resamples using the same
algorithm used in the on-the-fly resampling of g.region in the display. Here
are several suggestions.

r.resample.region
r.dresample
r.gresample
r.region.resample
r.gregion.resample

I suspect that this older module will eventually become unused if the new
module works well. But Glynn makes a good point why we should keep it around
for now.

Michael
__________________________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics and Complexity
Arizona State University

phone: 480-965-6213
fax: 480-965-7671
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton


> From: Dylan Beaudette <dylan.beaudette at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: <dylan.beaudette at gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:03:38 -0700
> To: Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>
> Cc: <grassuser at grass.itc.it>
> Subject: Re: [GRASS-user] integration of sample.c algorithms into r.resample
> 
> On Wednesday 16 August 2006 17:28, Glynn Clements wrote:
>> Dylan Beaudette wrote:
>>> I have summarized three test cases here:
>>> http://169.237.35.250/~dylan/temp/raster_sampling/
>>> 
>>> 1. input raster extent > current region, resampling from 30m to 10m [ok]
>>> 2. input raster extent < current region, resampling from 30m to 10m [not
>>> ok] 3. input raster extent == current region, resampling from 30m to 10m
>>> [ok]
>>> 
>>> Note that for example 2, the summary from r.info suggests that there is
>>> something wrong with indexing / overflowing :
>>> !!!
>>> min = -0.000000  max = 1356171748364289065433195553253
>>> 
>>> 
>>> possibly something to do with dealing with NULL values, and extending the
>>> region???
>> 
>> Yes. I was only considering the bounds of the source map. I've updated
>> it to set the source region to cover the destination region, plus
>> neighbours.
>> 
>> I've attached an updated version.
> 
> Great! I can confirm that it works as expected. Thanks Glynn for all of the
> hard work. Now we just have to decide what to call it, considering previous
> conversation of course.
> 
> cheers,
> 
> -- 
> Dylan Beaudette
> Soils and Biogeochemistry Graduate Group
> University of California at Davis
> 530.754.7341
> 
>