On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Frank Warmerdam <warmer...@pobox.com> wrote: > Folks, > > As I often seem to do, I exactly stated my point. I meant write:
Garr, once again missing a keyword. I meant to say "I exactly stated my point *wrong*." > "On the other hand, I am *not* denying the possibility that the RPC > DEM interpolation is always off by half a pixel in all cases." > > Sorry for that. > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Ivan Lucena > <ivan.luc...@princeton-ma.us> wrote: >> Hi Frank, >> >>> On the other hand, I am denying the possibility that the RPC DEM >>> interpolation is always off by half a pixel. I haven't actually >>> looked closely at that code lately and the RPC code is not so very well >>> tested and validated. >> >> That is exactly what I understood from Yehiyam on his first message. We all >> believe that GDAL transformation knows the input dataset pixel reference; >> and knows the GCPs pixel reference. What we are not sure, is if it is doing >> the right thing when reading from the auxiliary DEM dataset in terms of >> pixel reference. >> >> Regards, >> >> Ivan > > > > -- > ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- > I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com > light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam > and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
