[GRASS-user] r.neighbors vs r.resamp.filter

[Maris Nartiss]

If the computational region is set to match input map, r.neighbours
will produce output in the same resolution. r.resamp.* will work if
the computational region differs from the input map.
Do not use r.neighbours with a different computational region, as
GRASS internally is using nearest neighbour method for resampling –
the result might not be what you expect to have.

TL;DR:
for same resolution output – r.neighbours
for different resolution (e.g. count per km²) – r.resamp.*

Māris.

trešd., 2021. g. 3. nov., plkst. 15:26 — lietotājs Bernardo Santos via
grass-user (<grass-user at lists.osgeo.org>) rakstīja:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I am working with human infrastructure data (houses, trails, roads and railways, dams, etc) and I need to create maps of density (in space) of each type of infrastructure, for different spatial extents (i.e. considering different neighborhood sizes). So far I've been using r.neighbors to do this, but some colleagues and collaborators are using r.resamp.filter instead. I took a good look at each and made some tests to compare, but I am not sure what are the real differences between each. Has this been developed or discussed somewhere?
>
> My inputs are rasterized versions of points, lines, or polygon features.
>
> If it is better, I can bring a reprex here to discuss it more deeply.
>
> Best regards,
> Bernardo Niebuhr
> _______________________________________________
> grass-user mailing list
> grass-user at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user