[GRASS-user] Topo to Raster

[Vaclav Petras]

These things are nice to hear, however I was trying to read about that in
r.hydrodem manual but it is just confusing in what is similar to what in
implementation or results and does not give any overview if you don't know
the referenced modules. This reminds me about the request here on the
mailing list to create some guidelines or tutorial about which water
modules should be used when.

Maybe, some pictures would be helpful. r.slope.aspect has the detailed
pictures with numbers, this is nice. Do we have date for in NC sample
dataset? What about adding some images to manual during Vienna community
sprint? This is the thing which can be done remotely by any GRASS user and
than just committed by some developer.

Vaclav

http://grass.osgeo.org/grass70/manuals/addons/r.hydrodem.html
http://grass.osgeo.org/grass70/manuals/r.slope.aspect.html


On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Mark Seibel <mseibel at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi.
>
>
>> > Using contour lines as input, I have found the r.surf.nnbathy module to
>> > perform very well.
>>
>> Previously, contour lines created by land surveying provided more
>> detail than available DEMs. Nowadays (since SRTM of 2001), DEMs
>> provide more detail than contour lines and contour lines are usually
>> derived from a DEM. Therefore creating a DEM from contour lines which
>> if in doubt have been created using a DEM is no longer recommended,
>> rather use any DEM instead.
>>
>>
> I certainly agree that contour lines are poor quality input data, however,
> for situations involving conceptual reclamation, contours are used to build
> the post-development DEM.  This still allows for (albeit generalized)
> conceptual modeling of the drainage areas for reclaimed streams and
> drainage areas, and allows for pre/post development analysis of drainage
> areas (as it is understood the contours are conceptual, not as-built).
> Nice to know that GRASS has modules that can cope with contour data, and
> still produce adequate and reliable results.
>
>
> Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> grass-user mailing list
> grass-user at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-user/attachments/20140304/d404daa4/attachment.html>